10–2–02 Wednesday Vol. 67 No. 191 Oct. 2, 2002 Pages 61761–61974

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:35 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\02OCWS.LOC 02OCWS

1 II Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002

The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general (Toll-Free) applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published FEDERAL AGENCIES by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Subscriptions: Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ fedreg. What’s NEW! The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication Federal Register Table of Contents via e-mail established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Subscribe to FEDREGTOC, to receive the Federal Register Table of the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. Contents in your e-mail every day. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases If you get the HTML version, you can click directly to any document on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. in the issue. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the To subscribe, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select: authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register Online mailing list archives as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each FEDREGTOC-L day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text Join or leave the list and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. Then follow the instructions. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512–1661 with a computer and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log in as guest with no password. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $699, or $764 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $264. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $10.00 for each issue, or $10.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 67 FR 12345.

.

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:35 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\02OCWS.LOC 02OCWS

2 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 191

Wednesday, October 2, 2002

Agricultural Marketing Service Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61853 RULES Beef promotion and research, 61762–61767 Energy Department Agriculture Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission See Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES See Food Safety and Inspection Service Meetings: See Forest Service Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee, See Natural Resources Conservation Service 61853–61854

Arts and Humanities, National Foundation Environmental Protection Agency See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities RULES Broadcasting Board of Governors Air quality implementation plans; approval and NOTICES promulgation; various States; air quality planning Meetings; Sunshine Act, 61848–61849 purposes; designation of areas: Louisiana, 61786–61802 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Air quality implementation plans; approval and NOTICES promulgation; various States: Grant and cooperative agreement awards: California, 61784–61786 Association of Immunization Managers, 61889 Superfund programs: National oil and hazardous substances contingency Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services plan— RULES National priorities list update, 61802–61805 Medicare and medicaid: PROPOSED RULES Hospital participation conditions; patients’ rights; Superfund program: regulatory flexibility analysis clarification, 61805– National oil and hazardous substances contingency 61808 plan— Hospitals, long-term care facilities, and home health National priorities list update, 61844–61845 agencies; immunization standards; participation NOTICES conditions, 61808–61814 Agency information collection activities: State Children’s Health Insurance Programs: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61878– Allotments and grants to States— 61881 Prenatal care and other health services for unborn children; eligibility, 61955–61974 Federal Aviation Administration Children and Families Administration RULES NOTICES Airworthiness directives: Agency information collection activities: Bell, 61771–61773 Proposed collection; comment request, 61889–61891 Eurocopter France, 61770–61771 PROPOSED RULES Commerce Department Airworthiness directives: See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Eurocopter France, 61843–61844 See International Trade Administration Marathon Power Technologies Co.; withdrawn, 61842– See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 61843 Airworthiness standards: Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements Transport category airplanes— NOTICES Cotton, wool, and man-made textiles: Trim systems and protective breathing equipment, Bangladesh, 61851 61836–61842 NOTICES Thailand, 61851–61852 Advisory circulars; availability, etc.: Comptroller of the Currency Transport category airplanes— NOTICES Powerplant and auxiliary power unit installations; Agency information collection activities: continued airworthiness assessments, 61947–61948 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61953– Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 61948– 61954 61949 Meetings: Education Department Aviation Weather Technology Transfer Board; new NOTICES weather products; user input, 61949–61950 Agency information collection activities: Technical standard orders: Proposed collection; comment request, 61852–61853 Universal Access Transceiver Equipment, 61950

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:36 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\02OCCN.SGM 02OCCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Contents

Federal Communications Commission Federal Maritime Commission RULES NOTICES Common carrier services: Agreements filed, etc., 61883–61884 Satellite communications— Ocean transportation intermediary licenses: Mobile and and portable earth stations in 1610-1660.5 Air/Sea Forwarding Specialists, Inc., et al., 61884 MHz band; emissions limits, 61814–61816 Intermar et al., 61884–61885 Television broadcasting: Penasa Logistics (USA), Inc., et al., 61885 Digital television— Conversion rules and policies; petition denied, 61816– Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 61818 RULES PROPOSED RULES Motor carrier safety regulations: Radio stations; table of assignments: Technical amendments, 61818–61824 Oregon; correction, 61845 NOTICES Federal Reserve System Common carrier services: RULES Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service— Truth in lending (Regulation Z): Schools and libraries universal service support Disclosure requirements; staff commentary, 61769 mechanism; revised forms 486 and 479 and NOTICES accompanying instructions; certification changes, Agency information collection activities: 61881 Proposed collection; comment request, 61885–61886 In-region interLATA services— Banks and bank holding companies: Verizon New England Inc. et al.; application to provide Change in bank control, 61886–61887 service in New Hampshire and Delaware, 61881– Meetings: 61883 Consumer Advisory Council, 61887 Federal Transit Administration Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation NOTICES NOTICES Transfer of federally assisted land or facility: Agency information collection activities: Honolulu, HI; former bus terminus facility transfer to Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61953– Honolulu Department of Facility Maintenance, 61954 61950–61951

Federal Election Commission Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 61883 Endangered and threatened species: Critical habitat designations— Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Plant species from Maui and Kahoolawe, HI; economic NOTICES analysis, 61845–61846 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Food and Drug Administration Goat Lake Hydroelectric Inc., 61861 RULES Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 61861–61862 Food additives: Environmental statements; notice of intent: Secondary direct food additives— Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County, WA, Peroxyacetic acid, etc., 61783–61784 61862 Food for human consumption: Hydroelectric applications, 61862–61877 Food labeling— Meetings: Soluble dietary fiber and coronary heart disease; health Standard market design; data and software standards, claims, 61773–61783 61877–61878 NOTICES Preliminary permits surrender: Agency information collection activities: Western Land Investments, Inc., 61861 Proposed collection; comment request, 61891–61892 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Algonquin Gas Transmission Co., 61854 FDA Modernization Act of 1997— Algonquin LNG, Inc., 61854 Recognized Standards List modifications (Recognition Canyon Creek Compression Co., 61855 List Number: 007), 61892–61910 Eastern Shore Natural Gas Co., 61855 Pharmaceutical excipients, development; nonclinical East Tennessee Natural Gas Co., 61855 studies, 61910–61911 Egan Hub Partners, L.P., 61855–61856 El Dorado Irrigation District, 61856 Food Safety and Inspection Service Enbridge Pipelines (KPC), 61856–61857 RULES Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C., 61857 Meat and poultry inspection: Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, 61857 Federal Meat Inspection and Poultry Products Inspection Overthrust Pipeline Co., 61857–61858 Acts; State designations— SFPP, L.P., 61858–61859 Maine; termination, 61767–61769 Sithe New England Holdings, LLC et al., 61859 NOTICES Southwestern Power Administration, 61859–61860 Meetings: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP, 61860 Codex Alimentarius Commission— TransColorado Gas Transmission Co., 61860–61861 Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Wyoming Interstate Co., Ltd., 61861 Systems Codex Committee, 61847–61848

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:36 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\02OCCN.SGM 02OCCN Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Contents V

Foreign-Trade Zones Board International Trade Commission NOTICES NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: New York Information disseminated by Federal agencies; quality, Bulova Corp., watch and clock products and parts objectivity, utility, and integrity guidelines, 61922 warehousing and distribution facilities, 61849 Justice Department See Immigration and Naturalization Service Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Meetings: Proposed collection; comment request, 61922–61923 Land Between the Lakes Advisory Board, 61848 Labor Department Government Ethics Office See Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration RULES Executive Branch regulations: Land Management Bureau Financial disclosure and standards of ethical conduct; NOTICES technical amendments, 61761–61762 Alaska Native claims selection: Far West, Inc., 61918 Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Health and Human Services Department California, 61918–61919 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Withdrawal and reservation of lands: See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Nevada, 61919 See Children and Families Administration Utah, 61920 See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health Minerals Management Service NOTICES NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund Program; petitions Gulf of Mexico OCS— augmentation and fund termination date, 61887– Oil and gas operations, 61920–61922 61888 Scientific misconduct findings; administrative actions: National Archives and Records Administration Muenchen, Heather J., Ph.D., 61888–61889 NOTICES Agency records schedules; availability, 61925–61927 Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61915– Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: 61917 Information disseminated by Federal agencies; quality, Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: objectivity, utility, and integrity guidelines, 61927 Facilities to assist homeless— Excess and surplus Federal property, 61917 National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Immigration and Naturalization Service Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61911– NOTICES 61913 Agency information collection activities: Meetings: Proposed collection; comment request, 61923–61924 National Cancer Institute, 61913 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61924– National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 61925 61915 National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, Indian Affairs Bureau 61913–61915 NOTICES National Institute on Drug Abuse, 61914 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Cordova, AK; Shepard Point Oil Spill Response Facility National Labor Relations Board and Access Road; construction, 61917–61918 NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Information disseminated by Federal agencies; quality, Interior Department objectivity, utility, and integrity guidelines, 61927– See Fish and Wildlife Service 61928 See Indian Affairs Bureau See Land Management Bureau National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Minerals Management Service RULES Fishery, conservation and management: International Trade Administration Alaska; fisheries of Exclusive Economic Zone— NOTICES Atka mackerel, 61827–61828 Antidumping and countervailing duties: Pacific cod, 61826–61827 Administrative review requests, 61849–61850 Pollock, 61826

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:36 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\02OCCN.SGM 02OCCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Contents

West Coast States and Western Pacific fisheries— NOTICES Pacific Coast groundfish, 61824–61826 Disaster loan areas: NOTICES Indiana, 61946 Meetings: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 61850 Special Counsel Office Permits: NOTICES Marine mammals, 61850–61851 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Information disseminated by Federal agencies; quality, Natural Resources Conservation Service objectivity, utility, and integrity guidelines, 61946– NOTICES 61947 Conservation Practices National Handbook: Conservation practice standards, new or revised; Surface Transportation Board comment request, 61848 NOTICES Railroad operation, acquisition, construction, etc.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Monongahela Connecting Railroad Co., 61952 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Textile Agreements Implementation Committee Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61928 See Committee for the Implementation of Textile Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Agreements Arizona Public Service Co., 61928–61929 BWX Technologies, Inc., 61929–61931 Thrift Supervision Office Meetings: NOTICES License renewal continuing guidance development; Agency information collection activities: workshop, 61931–61932 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61953– Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: 61954 Louisiana Energy Services gas centrifuge uranium enrichment facility, Hartsville, TN; white papers; Transportation Department comment request, 61932–61933 See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration See Federal Transit Administration NOTICES See Research and Special Programs Administration Meetings: See Surface Transportation Board Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans Advisory Council, 61925 Treasury Department See Comptroller of the Currency Public Health Service See Thrift Supervision Office See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES See Food and Drug Administration Agency information collection activities: See National Institutes of Health Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61952– 61953 Railroad Retirement Board NOTICES Veterans Employment and Training Service Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 61933 Meetings: Veterans Employment and Training Advisory Committee, Research and Special Programs Administration 61954 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 61951–61952 Separate Parts In This Issue Securities and Exchange Commission Part II NOTICES Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Investment Company Act of 1940: Medicare & Medicaid Services, 61955–61974 Deregistration applications— ABN AMRO Funds et al., 61933–61934 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 61934–61940 Reader Aids Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc., 61940–61943 Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Options Clearing Corp., 61943–61944 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 61944–61946 and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Small Business Administration LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// PROPOSED RULES listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Small business size standards: archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Tour operators, 61829–61836 settings); then follow the instructions.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:36 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\02OCCN.SGM 02OCCN Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Contents VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

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

5 CFR 2634...... 61761 2635...... 61761 7 CFR 1260...... 61762 9 CFR 331...... 61767 381...... 61767 12 CFR 226...... 61769 13 CFR Proposed Rules: 121...... 61829 14 CFR 39 (2 documents) ...... 61770, 61771 Proposed Rules: 25...... 61836 39 (2 documents) ...... 61842, 61843 21 CFR 101...... 61773 173...... 61783 40 CFR 52 (2 documents) ...... 61784, 61786 81...... 61786 300...... 61802 Proposed Rules: 300...... 61844 42 CFR 457...... 61956 482 (2 documents) ...... 61805, 61808 483...... 61808 484...... 61808 47 CFR 25...... 61814 73...... 61816 Proposed Rules: 73...... 61845 49 CFR 350...... 61818 360...... 61818 365...... 61818 372...... 61818 382...... 61818 383...... 61818 386...... 61818 387...... 61818 388...... 61818 390...... 61818 391...... 61818 393...... 61818 50 CFR 600...... 61824 660...... 61824 679 (3 documents) ...... 61826, 61827 Proposed Rules: 17...... 61845

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:38 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCLS.LOC 02OCLS 61761

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 191

Wednesday, October 2, 2002

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER thresholds for gifts, reimbursements and Increased Dollar Ceiling for the contains regulatory documents having general travel expenses in the OGE executive Exception for Nonsponsor Gifts of Free applicability and legal effect, most of which branchwide regulation at 5 CFR Attendance at Widely Attended are keyed to and codified in the Code of 2634.304 (and as illustrated in the four Gatherings Federal Regulations, which is published under examples following paragraph (d) of that 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. In addition, OGE is increasing from section) for both the public and $260 to $285 the exception ceiling for The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by confidential financial disclosure nonsponsor gifts of free attendance at the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of systems under section 102(a)(2)(A) & (B) widely attended gatherings under the new books are listed in the first FEDERAL of the Ethics in Government Act as REGISTER issue of each week. standards of ethical conduct regulation, amended, 5 U.S.C. app. § 102(a)(2)(A) & as codified at 5 CFR 2635.204(g)(2) (and (B), as extended to the executive branch as illustrated in several examples OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS confidential reporting system by 5 CFR following paragraph (g)). This separate 2634.907(a)(3). The new reporting regulatory change is effective upon 5 CFR Parts 2634 and 2635 thresholds for gifts and travel publication in the Federal Register, on reimbursements being retroactively RINs 3209–AA00 and 3209–AA04 October 2, 2002. As OGE noted in the incorporated in OGE’s financial preambles to the proposed and final Technical Updating Amendments to disclosure regulation are ‘‘more than rules on such nonsponsor gifts, that Executive Branch Financial Disclosure $285’’ for the aggregation threshold for ceiling is based in part on the financial and Standards of Ethical Conduct reporting and ‘‘$114 or less’’ for the de disclosure gifts reporting threshold. See Regulations minimis exception for gifts and 60 FR 31416 (June 15, 1995) and 61 FR reimbursements which do not have to 42968 (August 20, 1996). The AGENCY: Office of Government Ethics be counted towards the aggregate nonsponsor gift ceiling was last raised (OGE). threshold (from the prior levels of more in the November 2000 OGE rulemaking ACTION: Final rule; technical than $260 aggregate and $104 or less de noted in the preceding paragraph above. amendments. minimis exception, respectively). Thus, it is reasonable now to again increase the nonsponsor gift ceiling to SUMMARY: The Office of Government These increases are brought about by match the further increase in the gifts/ Ethics is updating its executive branch a recent General Services travel reimbursements reporting regulation on financial disclosure to Administration (GSA) rulemaking thresholds. The other requirements for reflect the retroactive statutory increase raising ‘‘minimal value’’ under the acceptance of such nonsponsor gifts, of the reporting thresholds for gifts and Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, 5 including an agency interest travel reimbursements. In addition, OGE U.S.C. 7342, to ‘‘$285 or less’’ (from the determination and expected attendance is similarly raising the widely attended prior level of $260 or less) for the three- by more than 100 persons, remain gatherings nonsponsor gifts exception year period 2002–2004, since the Ethics unchanged. dollar ceiling under the executive Act and OGE regulatory gifts/travel branchwide standards of ethical reimbursements reporting thresholds are Matters of Regulatory Procedure conduct regulation. tied to any such increase in foreign gifts Administrative Procedure Act DATES: The amendments to 5 CFR minimal value over $250. See GSA’s 2634.304 are retroactively effective to rulemaking as published at 67 FR Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and (d), as January 1, 2002, and the amendments to 56495–56496 (September 4, 2002), Director of the Office of Government 5 CFR 2635.204 are effective October 2, revising retroactively to January 1, 2002 Ethics, I find good cause exists for 2002. the foreign gifts minimal value waiving the general notice of proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: definition as codified at 41 CFR 102– rulemaking, opportunity for public William E. Gressman, Senior Associate 42.10. comment and 30-day delay in General Counsel, Office of Government The Office of Government Ethics will effectiveness as to these technical Ethics, telephone: 202–208–8000, ext. continue to adjust the gifts and travel updates and the correction. The notice, 1110; TDD: 202–208–8025; FAX: 202– reimbursements reporting thresholds in comment and delayed effective date 208–8037. the future as needed in light of GSA’s provisions are being waived in part SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office redefinition of ‘‘minimal value’’ every because these technical amendments of Government Ethics is amending three years for foreign gifts purposes. concern matters of agency organization, pertinent sections of its executive See OGE’s previous retroactive practice and procedure. Further, it is in the public interest that correct and up- branchwide ethics regulations on adjustment of those reporting thresholds to-date information be contained in the financial disclosure and standards of as published at 65 FR 69655–69657 affected sections of OGE’s regulations as ethical conduct (the Standards), as (November 20, 2000) that was based on codified at 5 CFR parts 2634 and 2635, soon as possible. The increase in the GSA’s prior redefinition for the period in order to update them. reporting thresholds for gifts and 1999–2001. reimbursements is based on a statutory Increased Gifts and Travel Moreover, OGE is also clarifying a formula and also lessens the reporting Reimbursements Reporting Thresholds couple of cross-references in examples 2 burden somewhat, and thus the effective First, OGE is retroactively increasing, and 3 following paragraph (d) of date of that regulatory revision is being to January 1, 2002, the reporting § 2634.304. made retroactively effective to January

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61762 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

1, 2002, when the change became Approved: September 25, 2002. (g)(6) and adding in its place in each effective under the Ethics Act. Amy L. Comstock, instance the dollar amount ‘‘$285’’; and Director, Office of Government Ethics. b. Removing the dollar amount Executive Order 12866 ‘‘$520’’ in example 2 following For the reasons set forth in the In promulgating these technical paragraph (g)(6) and adding in its place preamble, the Office of Government the dollar amount ‘‘$570’’. amendments, OGE has adhered to the Ethics is amending 5 CFR parts 2634 regulatory philosophy and the and 2635 as follows: [FR Doc. 02–24961 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] applicable principles of regulation set BILLING CODE 6345–01–P forth in section 1 of Executive Order PART 2634—EXECUTIVE BRANCH 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, QUALIFIED These amendments have not been TRUSTS, AND CERTIFICATES OF DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE reviewed by the Office of Management DIVESTITURE and Budget under that Executive order, Agricultural Marketing Service 1. The authority citation for part 2634 since they are not deemed ‘‘significant’’ continues to read as follows: thereunder. 7 CFR Part 1260 Authority: 5 U.S.C. App. (Ethics in [No. LS–99–20] Executive Order 12988 Government Act of 1978); 26 U.S.C. 1043; Pub. L. 101–410, 104 Stat. 890, 28 U.S.C. As Director of the Office of 2461 note (Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Amendment to the Beef Promotion and Government Ethics, I have reviewed this Adjustment Act of 1990), as amended by Sec. Research Rules and Regulations final amendatory regulation in light of 31001, Pub. L. 104–134, 110 Stat. 1321 (Debt AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, section 3 of Executive Order 12988, Collection Improvement Act of 1996); E.O. USDA. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 Comp., p. Civil Justice Reform, and certify that it ACTION: Final rule. meets the applicable standards provided 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306. therein. SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 2. Section 2634.304 is amended by: Beef Promotion and Research Rules and Regulatory Flexibility Act a. Removing the dollar amount Regulations (Rules and Regulations) ‘‘$260’’ in paragraphs (a) and (b) and in As Director of the Office of established under the Beef Promotion example 1 following paragraph (d) and Government Ethics, I certify under the and Research Act of 1985 (Act) by adding in its place in each instance the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. providing producers the opportunity to dollar amount ‘‘$285’’; chapter 6) that this rulemaking will not voluntarily pay the $1-per-head b. Removing the dollar amount assessment to the Qualified State Beef have a significant economic impact on ‘‘$104’’ in paragraph (d) and in a substantial number of small entities. Council (QSBC) located in the examples 1 and 2 following paragraph producer’s State of residence prior to Paperwork Reduction Act (d) and adding in its place in each sale, subject to certain conditions. In instance the dollar amount ‘‘$114’’; addition, the chart which establishes the The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 c. Removing the dollar amount party responsible for collecting and U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply ‘‘$105’’ in example 1 following remitting assessments in brand because this amendatory rulemaking paragraph (d) and adding in its place the inspected States to the QSBC or the does not contain information collection dollar amount ‘‘$145’’; Cattlemen’s Beef Promotion and requirements that require the approval d. Removing the word ‘‘exception’’ Research Board (Board) is updated to of the Office of Management and and the regulatory citation reflect the changes the cattle industry Budget. ‘‘§ 2634.105(h)’’ in examples 2 and 3 has incurred since the inception of the following paragraph (d) and adding in program. Congressional Review Act their place in each instance, EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2002. respectively, the word ‘‘exclusion’’ and The Office of Government Ethics has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: determined that this amendatory the regulatory citation ‘‘§ 2634.105(h)(4)’’; and Kenneth R. Payne, Chief; Marketing rulemaking is a nonmajor rule under the Programs Branch, Room 2638–S; Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. e. Removing the dollar amount ‘‘$260’’ in examples 3 and 4 following Livestock and Seed Program; chapter 8) and has submitted a report Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), thereon to the United States Senate, paragraph (d) and adding in its place the dollar amount ‘‘$285’’. USDA; STOP 0251; 1400 Independence House of Representatives and General Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC 20250– Accounting Office in accordance with PART 2635—STANDARDS OF 0251; telephone 202/720–1115. that law. ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior List of Subjects OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH document in this proceeding: Proposed Rule—Beef Promotion and Research 5 CFR Part 2634 3. The authority citation for part 2635 Program: Amendment to Beef Promotion continues to read as follows: and Research Rules and Regulations Certificates of divestiture, Conflict of Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7301, 7351, 7353; 5 published October 19, 2001 (66 FR interests, Financial disclosure, U.S.C. App. (Ethics in Government Act of 53127), with a 60 day comment period. Government employees, Penalties, 1978); E.O. 12674, 54 FR 15159, 3 CFR, 1989 The comment period ended December Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping Comp., p. 215, as modified by E.O. 12731, 55 18, 2001. requirements, Trusts and trustees. FR 42547, 3 CFR, 1990 Comp., p. 306. Executive Order 12866 5 CFR Part 2635 4. Section 2635.204 is amended by: a. Removing the dollar amount The Office of Management and Budget Conflict of interests, Executive branch ‘‘$260’’ in paragraph (g)(2) and in (OMB) has waived the review process standards of ethical conduct, examples 1 and 2 (in the latter of which required by Executive Order 12866 for Government employees. it appears twice) following paragraph this action.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61763

Executive Order 12988 much as $500,000 will be redistributed Title: Certification of Producer among the QSBCs. Directed Payment of Assessments. This final rule has been reviewed The major cattle feeding States of OMB Number: 0581–0202 under Executive Order 12988, Civil Texas, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, and Expiration Date of Approval: March 1, Justice Reform. This rule is not intended Oklahoma could reasonably be expected 2005. to have a retroactive effect. Section 11 to account for up to 80 percent of the Type of Request: Approval of new of the Act provides that nothing in the $500,000 in reduced revenue to QSBCs information collection. Act may be construed to preempt or annually. These States collect an Abstract: The Act provides for a supersede any other program relating to average of $19 million annually and program of promotion, research, beef promotion organized and operated retain one-half that amount or $9.5 consumer information, and industry under the laws of the United States or million. Assuming that the revenue to information funded by assessments paid any State. There are no administrative each of these five States available for by beef producers each time cattle are proceedings that must be exhausted State directed programs was reduced by sold and by importers of cattle and beef prior to any judicial challenge of the an average of $80,000, it would products upon importation. provisions of this rule. represent about a 1 percent decrease in Assessments on imported cattle and Regulatory Flexibility Act the average revenue available for State beef products are collected by the U.S. directed programs in these States. Customs Service at the rate of $1 per Pursuant to requirements set forth in The remaining 40 QSBCs have annual head or the live animal equivalent of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 State budgets that average about beef and beef products. An assessment U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Administrator of $500,000. An estimated net increase in of $1 per head is due from the producer AMS has considered the economic annual income for these States, as a each time a producer sells cattle in the effect of this action on small entities and result of the advance payment of United States. The assessment is to be has determined that this rule will not assessments, could average up to collected by the purchaser or other have a significant economic impact on $10,000 per State representing a 2 ‘‘collecting person’’ as provided in the a substantial number of small business percent increase. rules and regulations published in the entities. The purpose of RFA is to fit Producers wishing to direct payment Federal Register on February 26, 1988 regulatory actions to the scale of of assessments to the QSBC in the (53 FR 5749). The producer assessments businesses subject to such actions in producers’ State of residence when are then remitted to QSBCs in 45 States order that small businesses will not be cattle are sent to another State for and to the Board in the remaining unduly burdened. feeding under retained ownership, States. QSBCs retain up to one-half of The Department of Agriculture’s would complete a form that would be the $1 assessment for use in State (Department) National Agricultural provided to affected parties including directed programs and forward the other Statistics Service estimates that in the QSBC, the feedlot, and the packer or half to the Board. Currently, QSBCs in calendar year 2000 the number of cattle the collecting person. the traditional cattle feeding States (e.g., Copies of the completed ‘‘Certification operations in the United States totaled Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, of Producer Directed Payment of Cattle approximately 1.1 million, including and Colorado) collect and retain Assessments’’ form shall be maintained feedlot operations. There are also 45 assessments on cattle sold that are on file by the producer, the QSBC, the QSBCs in the United States. In addition, owned by producers residing in other feedlot operator, and the purchaser of there are 11 States with brand States. This benefits QSBCs in the States the cattle for 3 years. inspectors. The majority of these that have large numbers of cattle in We estimate the average cost of the operations are considered small feedlots owned by producers residing in reporting burden per respondent would businesses under the criteria established other States. Some producers retain by the Small Business Administration. be $16 annually. We estimate the total average cost of ownership of cattle and transport them This final rule imposes no significant the recordkeeping burden per to one of the cattle feeding States. To burden on the industry as it merely recordkeeper would be $8 annually. provide producers with more flexibility gives producers the opportunity to The Administrator of AMS has and to provide the opportunity for a voluntarily pay the $1-per-head considered the economic effect of this more equitable distribution of assessment on cattle of their own action on small entities and has assessment funds to States based on production prior to sale and to remit the determined that this final rule will not cattle ownership, the final ‘‘Certification assessments to the QSBC located in the have a significant economic impact on of Producer Directed Payment of Cattle producers State of residence. a substantial number of small entities. Assessments’’ form would be made The impact on QSBCs will be a The proposed rule that was published available for use by producers who want redistribution of an estimated maximum in the Federal Register on October 19, the QSBC located in their States of of one-half million dollars of the $40 2001 (66 FR 53127), invited interested residence to receive assessment funds million currently retained annually in persons to submit comments to the rather than the QSBC in the State where total by the 45 QSBCs. The Department Department concerning potential effects. the cattle are fed. estimates that up to 6 million head or No comments were received regarding 1. Certification of Producer Directed 20 percent of the approximately 30 the RFA. Payment of Assessments. million head of steers and heifers Estimate of Burden: The public slaughtered annually are sold for Paperwork Reduction Act reporting burden for this collection of slaughter under retained ownership. In accordance with OMB regulations information is estimated to average .20 The Department also estimates that (5 CFR Part 1320) which implement the hour per response. assessments on up to one-sixth of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Respondents: Producers wishing to cattle (1 million head) will be paid in U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information direct payment of assessments to the advance to QSBCs. If the $1 assessment collection and recordkeeping QSBC in the producers’ State of were paid in advance to QSBCs on these requirements contained in this rule have residence when cattle are sent to cattle, the QSBCs’ 50 percent share of been approved by OMB under OMB another State for feeding under retained up to $1 million in assessments or as control number 0581–0202. ownership would use the form.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61764 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Estimated Number of Respondents: acquired ownership of cattle to facilitate FR 53127) for comment a proposed rule 1,000. the transfer of ownership of such cattle to amend the Rules and Regulations Estimated Number of Responses per from the seller to a third-party, (2) established under the Act. The proposed Respondent: 4. resold such cattle no later than 10 days rule provided the opportunity for a Estimated Total Annual Burden on from the date on which the person producer to pay the $1-per-head Respondents: 800 hours. acquired ownership, and (3) certified, as assessment to the QSBC located in the Total cost: $16,000. required by regulations prescribed by producer’s State of residence prior to 2. Maintenance of records: 3 years. the Board and approved by the sale, subject to certain conditions. Estimate of Burden: The public Secretary, that the requirements of this recordkeeping burden for keeping this provision have been satisfied.’’ The proposed rule was published document is estimated to average .10 When cattle are sold within 10 days with a request for comments to be hour per recordkeeper. of purchase by a person who is not a submitted by December 18, 2001. The Recordkeepers: Producers, QSBCs, producer under the above definition, the Department received comments from 47 feedlot operators, and purchasers. collecting person is not required to national and State beef and dairy cattle Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: collect the $1 assessment from the organizations, and brand inspectors, as 1,260. person (seller), if the seller provides the well as from cattle producers. Estimated Total Recordkeeping collecting person with a Statement of Comments from 44 commenters were Hours: 504 hours. Certification of Non-Producer Status on filed on time. Eleven commenters Estimated Total Cost: $10,080. a form approved by the Board and the supported the proposed rule while four The total average cost of the Secretary. The person claiming non- estimated annual reporting burden per commenters proposed modifications producer status must submit to the respondent would be: $16.00. and requested clarifications to it. collecting person a Statement of The total average cost of the Twenty-nine commenters opposed the Certification of Non-Producer Status ‘‘at recordkeeping burden per recordkeeper proposed rule. Three comments were the time of sale’’ in lieu of paying the would be: $8.00. submitted after the comment period assessment. ended. The late comments, however, In a similar fashion, this modification Background supported the rule as proposed. to the regulations to permit producer- The Act authorizes the establishment directed payment of assessments will The comments are discussed below, of a national beef promotion and result in the collecting person, at the together with a description of the research program. The final Order time of sale, collecting a document changes made by the Department in this establishing a beef promotion and certifying that the assessment had been final rule. In general, persons and research program was published in the paid in advance by the producer. organizations in States that may see an Federal Register on July 18, 1986, (51 The Department believes that this increase in assessments supported the FR 21632) and assessments began on producer-directed payment option will proposed rule, while persons and October 1, 1986. The program is be used by producers of a relatively organizations in the primary cattle administered by the Board which is small share of all cattle sold. This rule feeding States that may see a reduction composed of 110 domestic cattle will apply only to cattle of a producer’s in assessments did not support the producers and importers. The program own production transported to another is funded by a $1-per-head assessment proposed rule. State under retained ownership for Three commenters suggested on producer marketings of cattle in the feeding prior to sale as slaughter cattle. producers, QSBCs, the Board, the United States and an equivalent amount Utilizing this option would permit a feedlot operator, and the purchaser of on imported cattle, beef, and beef producer who retains ownership of the cattle should maintain copies of the products. In 45 States, QSBCs receive cattle to ensure that the QSBC located the $1-per-head of cattle assessment in the State where the producer resides Certification of Producers Direct remitted under the program and retain receives the $1 checkoff rather than the Payment of Cattle Assessments forms on up to half of the $1 for State-directed QSBC in the State in which the cattle file for 3 years rather than 2 years. The programs and remit the remainder to the are located when sold. This final rule standard procedure currently in place Board. The Board receives all import could increase checkoff revenue for for random compliance audits of assessments and all producer many QSBCs such as those located in remitters is 3 years. The Department assessments in the five States with the southeastern United States that believes that this comment has merit, relatively small cattle numbers that do currently do not receive revenue from and this change is reflected in not have QSBCs. In 2000, the 45 QSBCs cattle owned and sold by producers § 1260.311(f)(4) by removing 2 years and received a total of about $80 million in residing in the southeastern States who inserting 3 years. assessments. QSBCs retained about $40 use feedlots in States such as Texas, One commenter asserted that the million and remitted approximately $40 Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and QSBC which receives the additional million to the Board. Colorado to finish cattle before selling checkoff funds must be responsible for The domestic assessment, due each the cattle to packers. compliance. Currently, QSBCs are time cattle are sold by a producer, is Since States retain up to one-half of responsible for collecting and remitting collected by the buyer or ‘‘collecting the $1-per-head checkoff for use in State the assessment to the Board and person’’ and remitted to the Board or directed programs, providing producers QSBC. The term ‘‘producer’’ is defined ensuring that those persons subject to with the flexibility and the opportunity the assessment remit them. In States as follows: ‘‘any person who owns or to direct payment of the assessment to acquires ownership of cattle; provided, where there is no QSBC, the Board is their home State likely would increase responsible for compliance. however, that a person shall not be revenue in many States such as Florida, considered a producer within the Accordingly, the Department is not Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi with making any changes in response to this meaning of this subpart if (a) the limited feedlot capacity. person’s only share in the proceeds of comment. a sale of cattle or beef is a sales Comments The same commenter suggested that commission, handling fee, or other On October 19, 2001, the Department the term Board could be omitted from service fee; or (b) the person (1) published in the Federal Register (66 § 1260.311(f)(1), as only

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61765

the QSBC located in the State where the transported. Therefore, we are not checkoff has been received. The producer resides would apply. The making any changes to the rule in Department believes that any additional commenter noted that producers in the response to this comment. certification of producer payment by five States without a QSBC will be Three commenters stated that the QSBCs would be unnecessary and unable to use this option as their dollar regulations should address death loss on burdensome. As noted previously, the already is currently directed to the cattle that are prepaid in the State of Department believes that the current Board. The Department believes that Origin. The commenters suggested that certification is sufficient to ensure this comment has merit and therefore the proposal should specify that the compliance with the provisions of this the term Board is removed from producer will not be given a credit of final rule. Therefore, we are not making § 1260.311(f)(1) in this final rule. their dollar for cattle that have died any changes in response to this Five commenters stated that the before they are shipped to the ultimate comment. regulations must specify what ‘‘cattle of purchaser of the cattle. The Department One commenter stated that the a producer’s own production’’ are in believes that this comment has merit. assessments should be paid at the time order to ensure this includes only Because of the low mortality rates and of transport. Under § 1260.311(f)(1)(ii) of offspring from a producer’s own cow the costs associated with administrative the rule producers can pay the herd that have been continuously and matters involving investigation of assessment either before or at the time exclusively under his or her ownership, animal death and producer, QSBC and the cattle are transported. and are being sent to feedlots with the Board notification, the costs associated One commenter suggested that the intent of continuously owning the cattle with producer credits would be packer should retain a copy of the through the entire feeding phase. The substantial, far in excess of the $1-per- certificate, not the feedlot, because the Department believes that this comment head assessment paid by the producer. packer, as the purchaser, is responsible has merit and additional clarification Therefore, we are adding a new for collecting the checkoff for slaughter regarding the meaning of ‘‘cattle of a paragraph 5 to § 1260.311(f) of this final cattle. The commenter believes that this producer’s own production’’ is reflected rule to prohibit credits of assessments would provide a simple and streamlined in new § 1260.311(f)(iii) of this final for those cattle lost because of death. procedure for compliance and audit. rule. Three commenters asserted that many Section 1260.311(f)(4) requires that the Three commenters asserted that feedlots and retained ownership certification form be sent to all parties producers must list the number of their programs involve sorting and co- involved, including packers when they cow herds on the certificate as a method mingling of cattle from various owners act as purchasers. to cross check that the cattle transported into numerous different pens and lots One commenter suggested that the to the feedyard qualify as retained and then sold to the packer at different producer should be responsible for ownership cattle. The Department times. Consequently, if the assessment ensuring the paperwork accompanies believes that this additional requirement is prepaid, the documentation on those the cattle throughout the production would not have any impact on cattle could be confusing since they will process. Section 1260.311(f)(1)(i) compliance activities. The current not be processed in the same lot. The requires that the certification be compliance practices in the industry Department believes the feedlot should completed by the producer and sent to and the proposed certification process not be required to complete a new form. the feedlot operator. This certification are sufficient to ensure compliance with Feedlots may note on the existing form will accompany the cattle when they are the provisions of the Act, the Beef that the specific cattle marketed have sold. Promotion and Research Order (Order), been prepaid in order to facilitate their One commenter believes that the final and this final rule. own recordkeeping. Accordingly, we are regulation will create compliance Two commenters suggested that the not making any changes in response to problems and will be difficult to regulation should apply only to true this comment. correctly monitor and may cause double retained ownership cattle. Since cattle One commenter expressed concern assessments, incorrect assessments, or sold through auctions, dealer/order that some cattle may be placed on feed no assessments collected. The buyers, and country sales are not with the producer having the intention Department believes that because of the applicable, the commenters believe of retaining ownership through the anticipated small number of producers these references should be removed entire feeding cycle. However, during that will prepay the assessment, any from the table in § 1260.311(c). While the feeding cycle, the producer may compliance problems that may arise the table in § 1260.311(c) is being decide to sell a partial interest in the will be manageable. In addition, the rule updated as part of this final rule, it does cattle within the feedyard. The purpose provides that the required certification not directly apply to the producer of this rule is to provide producers the must accompany the cattle through the payment option of this final rule. It opportunity to voluntarily pay the $1- entire process, thereby minimizing any specifies the party responsible for per-head assessment to the QSBC on potential compliance problems. Further, collecting and remitting assessments in cattle transported to a feedyard under if the certification does not accompany designated States. Accordingly, the retained ownership. This rule does not the cattle, those cattle would be Department is not making any changes provide producers with an opportunity assessed the $1-per-head checkoff in in response to these comments. for a credit. If a producer transfers any accordance with the Act and the Order. Another commenter stated that interest in the cattle prior to their sale Twenty-eight commenters asserted assessments should be collected on to a purchaser, the cattle are no longer that the proposal would increase cattle sold within the first 30 days of covered under the provisions of this paperwork required to accompany cattle movement and the dollars returned to rule. Consequently, an additional transported to other States. The the State of Origin under the current assessment is due as a result of the new Department does not anticipate a rules. The Department believes that the owner transfer, even if the transfer of significant increase in administrative option provided for in this rule is ownership is only partial. costs and paperwork for those States flexible and cost effective for producers. Four commenters asserted that the primarily affected by this final rule Under § 1260.311(f)(1)(ii) of the rule QSBC receiving the checkoff should be because of the anticipated small number producers can pay the assessment either required to send a new verification form of producers who will prepay the before or at the time the cattle are to the feedlot to notify it that the assessment.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61766 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Twenty-seven commenters asserted with the Act and the Order. It is the One commenter asserted that the that the top five cattle producing States responsibility of the producer to ensure proposal would divert a significant would have to deal with this new that the certification form accompanies amount of funds away from promotion procedure more frequently than other the cattle when they are transported to into record and paperwork management. States. While the Department recognizes the feedlot. The Department does not expect that that the larger cattle producing States there will be a significant increase in Twenty-nine commenters asserted will likely be more affected, we believe workload or paperwork burden because that if out of State cattle arrive without that because of the anticipated small of the anticipated small number of the certification, brand inspectors will, number of producers who will prepay producers who will prepay the by law, collect the assessment. As the assessment, any additional burden assessment. previously noted, if the certification will be small. Additional Changes. We are making form does not accompany the cattle, the Twenty-nine commenters asserted nonsubstantiative changes to brand inspector will collect the that in the hosting State, livestock § 1260.311(f) for the purpose of clarity. assessment in accordance with the Act, markets, packing plants, feedlots, etc., In addition, the Board recommended the Order, and the Rules and will need to implement a new that the chart under § 1260.311(c) be Regulations. accounting procedure to exempt the corrected and updated to reflect the checkoff from this type of transaction. Twenty-one commenters asserted that current collection and remittance The Department believes that the if out of State cattle arrive without the procedures in States where brand certification form completed by the prepaid document, QSBCs will have inspectors are responsible for collecting producer should not require persons to increased workload due to processing and remitting assessment. Based upon implement a new accounting system the double assessments. The our review of the Board’s comment, we since the cattle will have already been Department does not anticipate a are making changes to the chart in this assessed. significant increase in workload or rule as follows: Twenty-nine commenters asserted paperwork burden because of the Add the State of Nevada and change that in the hosting State, double anticipated small number of producers collecting person (CP) to brand assessments may increase if cattle arrive who will prepay the assessment. If cattle inspector (B) in Idaho for transactions without the new certification. If the arrive without the required certification, which occur at auction markets and certification does not accompany the the cattle will be assessed in accordance slaughter/packer. The changes reflect cattle, those cattle would be assessed with the Act, the Order, and the Rules those additions and changes to the chart the $1-per-head checkoff in accordance and Regulations. under § 1260.311(c).

Sales through Sales to a Sales to a Sales to an Country States auction slaughter/ feedlot order buyer/ sales markets packer dealer

Nevada ...... BBBBB Idaho ...... BBBBB

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found PART 1260—BEEF PROMOTION AND producer shall give the producer a and determined that good cause exists RESEARCH receipt indicating payment of the for not postponing the effective date of assessment. 1. The authority citation of part 1260 this rule until 30 days after publication * * * * * in the Federal Register. An effective continues to read as follows: (c) In the States listed in the following date of October 1, 2002, will allow Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2901–2911. chart there exists a requirement that producers to take advantage of this 2. In § 1260.311, revise paragraphs (a) cattle be brand inspected by State action in time for fall cattle marketings. and (c) and add paragraph (f) to read as authorized inspectors prior to sale. In This rule permits producers who retain follows: addition, when cattle are sold in the ownership of cattle that are shipped to sales transactions listed below in those another State for feeding to pay the $1 § 1260.311 Collecting persons for States, these State authorized inspectors checkoff to the QSBC located in the purposes of collection of assessments. are authorized to, and shall, except as State where the producer resides rather * * * * * provided for in paragraph (f) of this than the QSBC in the State in which the (a) Except as provided in paragraphs section, collect assessments due as a cattle are located when sold. (b), (c), and (f) of this section, each result of the sale of cattle. In those person making payment to a producer List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1260 transactions in which inspectors are for cattle purchased in the United States responsible for collecting assessments, shall collect from the producer an Advertising, Agricultural research, the person paying the producer shall not Imports, Marketing agreements, Meat assessment at the rate of $1-per-head of cattle purchased and shall be be responsible for the collection and and meat products, Reporting and remittance of such assessments. The recordkeeping requirements. responsible for remitting assessments to the QSBC or the Board as provided in following chart identifies the party For the reasons set forth in the § 1260.312. The collecting person shall responsible for collecting and remitting preamble, 7 CFR part 1260 is amended collect the assessment at the time the assessments in these States: as follows: collecting person makes payment or any credit to the producer’s account for the cattle purchased. The person paying the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:28 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61767

Sales Sales to a Sales to State through slaughter/ Sales to a an order Country auction feedlot sales 1 market packer buyer/dealer

Arizona ...... CP CP CP B B California ...... CP CP B B-CP B Colorado ...... CP BBBB Idaho ...... BBBBB Montana ...... CP BBBB Nebraska ...... CP CP B-CP B-CP B-CP Nevada ...... BBBBB Oregon ...... CP B-CP B B B New Mexico ...... CP B-CP B-CP B-CP B-CP Utah ...... CP B-CP B B B Washington ...... CP CP B B-CP B Wyoming ...... CP BBBB Key: B—Brand inspector has responsibility to collect and remit assessments due. CP—The person paying the producer shall be the collecting person and has responsibility to collect and remit the assessments due. B-CP—Brand inspector has responsibility to collect; however, when there has not been a physical brand inspection the person paying the pro- ducer shall be the collecting person and has the responsibility to collect and remit assessments due. 1 For the purpose of this subpart, the term ‘‘country sales’’ shall include any sales not conducted at an auction or livestock market and which is not a sale to a slaughter/packer, feedlot, or order buyer or dealer.

* * * * * (iii) Producer’s address (street address (6) Producers shall not receive credit (f)(1) In lieu of each person making a or P.O. Box, city, State, and zip code). of the assessment required to be paid payment to a producer for cattle (iv) Signature of Producer. pursuant to paragraph (f)(1) of this purchased in the United States, (v) Producer’s State of residence. section for those cattle lost because of producers are provided the option in (vi) Number of cattle shipped to out of death. accordance with this paragraph (f) to State feedyard under retained Dated: September 26, 2002. ownership. remit the assessment to the QSBC in the A.J. Yates, State in which the producer resides. A (vii) Date cattle shipped. (viii) State where cattle will be on feed. Administrator, Agricultural Marketing producer who transports, prior to sale, Service. (ix) Name of feedyard. cattle of that producer’s own production [FR Doc. 02–24968 Filed 9–27–02; 3:57 pm] to another State, may elect to make a (x) Address of feedyard. BILLING CODE 3410–02–P directed payment of the $1-per-head (3) Cattle of a producer’s own assessment in advance to the QSBC in production shall be those cattle which the State in which the producer resides, meet all of the following requirements: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE provided that the producer fulfills the (i) The cattle shall be offspring of a following requirements: producer’s own cow herd; Food Safety and Inspection Service (i) Transports the cattle under (ii) The cattle shall have been retained ownership to a feedlot or continuously and exclusively under the 9 CFR Parts 331 and 381 producer’s ownership; and similar location, and the cattle remain at [Docket No. 02–028F] such location, prior to sale, for a period (iii) The cattle are transported to a not less than 30 days; and feedlot with such producer Termination of Designation of the State (ii) The producer, either before or at continuously owning the cattle through of Maine With Respect to the the time of transport, signs a the entire feeding phase. Inspection of Meat and Meat Food (4) For those cattle for which the Certification of Producer Directed Products and Poultry and Poultry Food assessment has been producer directed Payment of Cattle Assessments form Products indicating that the assessment has been and paid in advance pursuant to paid in advance, and remits the paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection assessment to the appropriate QSBC. A purchaser of the cattle shall not be Service, USDA. copy of the certification form indicating required to collect and remit the ACTION: Direct final rule and termination the payment of the assessment shall be assessment, but shall maintain on file a of designation. sent by the producer with the copy of the Certification of Producer Directed Payment of Cattle Assessments SUMMARY: This direct final rule amends assessment when remitted to the QSBC. the Federal meat and poultry products The producer also shall send a copy of form completed and signed by the producer who originally transported the inspection regulations by terminating the certification form to the feedlot the designation of the State of Maine operator at the time the cattle are cattle under retained ownership. (5) For those cattle for which the under Titles I, II, and IV of the Federal delivered. A copy of the certification Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) and under form also shall be given to the purchaser assessment has been producer directed and paid in advance pursuant to sections 1 through 4, 6 through 11, and of the cattle by the feedlot operator at 12 through 22 of the Poultry Products the time of sale. paragraph (f)(1) of this section, copies of the completed Certification of Producer Inspection Act (PPIA). (2) The certification form will include Directed Payment of Cattle Assessments DATES: This direct final rule will be the following information: form shall be maintained on file by the effective November 1, 2002 unless FSIS (i) Producer’s Name. producer, the QSBC or the Board, the receives written adverse comments (ii) Producer’s social security number or feedlot operator, and the purchaser of within the scope of this rulemaking or Tax I.D. number. the cattle for 3 years. written notice of intent to submit

VerDate Sep<04>2002 22:30 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61768 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

adverse comments within the scope of determines that any designated State to provide information regarding FSIS this rulemaking on or before October 23, has developed and will enforce State policies, procedures, regulations, 2002. If FSIS receives adverse meat and poultry products inspection Federal Register notices, FSIS public comments, a timely withdrawal will be requirements at least equal to those meetings, recalls, and any other types of published in the Federal Register imposed by the Federal Government information that could affect or would informing the public that the rule will under the FMIA and the PPIA with be of interest to our constituents/ not take effect. regard to intrastate operations and stakeholders. The constituent Listserv FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. transactions, the Secretary will consists of industry, trade, and farm William Leese, 202 418–8900, terminate the designation of such State. groups, consumer interest groups, allied [email protected]. The Secretary has determined that the health professionals, scientific State of Maine has developed, and will professionals, and other individuals that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: enforce, such a State meat and poultry have requested to be included. Through Background products inspection program in the Listserv and web page, FSIS is able accordance with the applicable Section 301(c) of the FMIA (21 U.S.C. to provide information to a much provisions of the FMIA and the PPIA. broader, more diverse audience. 661(c)) and section 5(c) of the PPIA (21 Establishments have the option to U.S.C. 454(c)) authorize the Secretary of For more information contact the apply for Federal or State inspection. Congressional and Public Affairs Office, Agriculture (Secretary) to designate a However, product produced under State State as one in which the provisions of at (202) 720–9113. To be added to the inspection is limited to distribution in free e-mail subscription service Titles I and IV of the FMIA and sections intrastate commerce. 1–4, 6–11, and 12–22 of the PPIA will (Listserv) go to the ‘‘Constituent apply to operations and transactions Executive Order 12866 Update’’ page on the FSIS web site at wholly within the State after the http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/update/ This final rule is issued in update.htm. Click on the ‘‘Subscribe to Secretary has determined that conformance with Executive Order requirements at least equal to those the Constituent Update Listserv’’ link, 12886 and has been determined not to then fill out and submit the form. imposed under the Acts have not been be a major rule. It will not result in an developed and effectively enforced by annual effect on the economy of $100 List of Subjects the State. million or more and will not adversely 9 CFR Part 331 At different times in the past, the affect the economy or any segment of Secretary designated the State of Maine the economy. Because this final rule is Meat inspection. under section 301(c) of the FMIA and not a significant rule under Executive 9 CFR Part 381 section 5(c) of the PPIA as a State in Order 12866, it has not undergone Poultry and poultry products. which the Federal Government is review by the Office of Management and responsible for providing meat and Budget. Accordingly, 9 CFR parts 331 and 381 poultry products inspection at eligible are amended as follows: establishments and for otherwise Effect on Small Entities enforcing the applicable provisions of The FSIS Administrator has PART 331—[AMENDED] the FMIA and the PPIA with regard to determined that this action will not 1. The authority citation for part 331 intrastate activities in the State. These have a significant economic impact on continues to read as follows: designations were undertaken by the a substantial number of small entities, Secretary when it was determined that Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601–695; 7 CFR 2.17, as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility 2.55. the State of Maine was not in a position Act (Pub. L. 96–354; 6 U.S.C. 601). As to enforce requirements that are at least stated above, the State of Maine is § 331.2 [Amended] equal to the requirements of FMIA and assuming a responsibility, previously 2. The table in § 331.2 is amended by PPIA enforced by the Federal limited to the Federal Government, of removing ‘‘Maine’’ from the ‘‘State’’ Government. administering a meat and poultry column and by removing the On January 2, 1971, the Federal products inspection program for corresponding date. Government assumed the responsibility intrastate operations and transactions. of administering the authorities § 331.6 [Amended] provided for under sections 11(b) and Additional Public Notification 3. The table in § 331.6 is amended by (c) of the PPIA (21 U.S.C. 460(b) and FSIS has considered the potential removing ‘‘Maine’’ from the ‘‘State’’ (c)). On May 12, 1980, the Federal civil rights impact of this final rule on column in three places and by removing Government assumed the responsibility minorities, women, and persons with the corresponding dates. of administering the authorities disabilities. Public involvement in all provided for under sections 202 and 203 segments of rulemaking and policy PART 381—[AMENDED] of the FMIA (21 U.S.C. 642 and 643). development is important. 4. The authority citation for part 381 The Director of Agriculture of the Consequently, in an effort to better continues to read as follows: State of Maine has advised FSIS that on ensure that minorities, women, and October 17, 2002, the State of Maine persons with disabilities are aware of Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138F; 7 U.S.C. 450; 21 U.S.C. 451–470; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. will publish regulations declaring that it this rulemaking, FSIS will announce it will administer a State meat and poultry and provide copies of this Federal § 381.221 [Amended] products inspection program that Register publication in the FSIS 5. The table in § 381.221 is amended includes requirements at least equal to Constituent Update. FSIS provides a by removing ‘‘Maine’’ from the ‘‘States’’ those imposed under the Federal meat weekly Constituent Update, which is column and by removing the and poultry products inspection communicated via Listserv, a free e-mail corresponding date. program. subscription service. In addition, the Section 301(c) of the FMIA and update is available on-line through the § 381.224 [Amended] section 5(c) of the PPIA provide that FSIS web page located at http:// 6. The table in § 381.224 is amended whenever the Secretary of Agriculture www.fsis.usda.gov. The update is used by removing ‘‘Maine’’ from the ‘‘State’’

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61769

column in three places and by removing creditors in applying the regulation to finds that notice and public comment the corresponding dates. specific transactions. on the change are unnecessary. Done in Washington, DC on September 25, In 1995, the Board published III. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 2002. amendments to Regulation Z Garry L. McKee, implementing HOEPA, contained in the The Board certifies that this Administrator. Riegle Community Development and amendment will not have a substantial [FR Doc. 02–24979 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, effect on regulated entities because the Pub. L. 103–325, 108 Stat. 2160 (60 FR only change is to raise the threshold for BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P 15463). These amendments are transactions requiring HOEPA contained in § 226.32 and 226.34 of the disclosures. regulation and impose substantive FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 226 limitations and additional disclosure 12 CFR Part 226 requirements on certain closed–end Advertising, Federal Reserve System, mortgage loans bearing rates or fees Mortgages, Reporting and recordkeeping [Regulation Z; Docket No. R–1130] above a certain percentage or amount. requirements, Truth in lending. As enacted, the statute requires Truth in Lending For the reasons set forth in the creditors to comply with the HOEPA preamble, the Board amends Regulation AGENCY: Board of Governors of the rules if the total points and fees payable Z, 12 CFR part 226, as set forth below: Federal Reserve System. by the consumer at or before loan ACTION: Final rule; staff commentary. consummation exceed the greater of PART 226—TRUTH IN LENDING $400 or 8 percent of the total loan (REGULATION Z) SUMMARY: The Board is publishing a amount. TILA and Regulation Z provide final rule amending the staff that the $400 figure shall be adjusted 1. The authority citation for part 226 commentary that interprets the annually on January 1 by the annual continues to read as follows: requirements of Regulation Z (Truth in percentage change in the Consumer Lending). The Board is required to Price Index (CPI) that was reported on Authority: 12 U.S.C. 3806; 15 U.S.C. 1604 and 1637(c)(5). adjust annually the dollar amount that the preceding June 1. (15 U.S.C. triggers requirements for certain 1602(aa)(3) and 12 CFR 226.32(a)(1)(ii)). 2. In Supplement I to part 226, under mortgages bearing fees above a certain The Board adjusted the $400 amount to § 226.32 Requirements for certain amount. The Home Ownership and $480 for the year 2002. closed–end home mortgages, under Equity Protection Act of 1994 (HOEPA) The Bureau of Labor Statistics Paragraph 32(a)(1)(ii), paragraph 2.viii is sets forth rules for home–secured loans publishes consumer–based indices added as follows: in which the total points and fees monthly, but does not ‘‘report’’ a CPI SUPPLEMENT I TO PART 226— payable by the consumer at or before change on June 1; adjustments are OFFICIAL STAFF INTERPRETATIONS loan consummation exceed the greater reported in the middle of each month. of $400 or 8 percent of the total loan The Board uses the CPI–U index, which * * * * * amount. In keeping with the statute, the is based on all urban consumers and Board has annually adjusted the $400 represents approximately 80 percent of Subpart E—Special Rules for Certain amount based on the annual percentage the U.S. population, as the index for Home Mortgage Transactions change reflected in the Consumer Price adjusting the $400 dollar figure. The * * * * * Index that is in effect on June 1. The adjustment to the CPI–U index reported adjusted dollar amount for 2003 is $488. by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on May § 226.32 Requirements for certain closed– DATES: Effective January 1, 2003. 15, 2002, was the CPI–U index ‘‘in end home mortgages. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: effect’’ on June 1, and reflects the 32(a) Coverage Minh–Duc T. Le, Staff Attorney, percentage increase from April 2001 to Division of Consumer and Community April 2002. The adjustment to the $400 * * * * * Affairs, Board of Governors of the figure below reflects a 1.64 percent Paragraph 32(a)(1)(ii) Federal Reserve System, at (202) 452– increase in the CPI–U index for this * * * * * 3667. For the users of period and is rounded to whole dollars Telecommunications Device for the Deaf for ease of compliance. 2. Annual adjustment of $400 amount. (‘‘TDD’’) only, contact (202) 263–4869. II. Adjustment and Commentary * * * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Revision viii. For 2003, $488, reflecting a 1.64 percent increase in the CPI–U from June I. Background For the reasons set forth in the 2001 to June 2002, rounded to the The Truth in Lending Act (TILA; 15 preamble, for purposes of determining nearest whole dollar. U.S.C. 1601 – 1666j) requires creditors whether a mortgage transaction is to disclose credit terms and the cost of covered by 12 CFR 226.32 (based on the * * * * * consumer credit as an annual total points and fees payable by the By order of the Board of Governors of percentage rate. The act requires consumer at or before loan the Federal Reserve System, acting additional disclosures for loans secured consummation), a loan is covered if the through the Director of the Division of by a consumer’s home, and permits points and fees exceed the greater of Consumer and Community Affairs consumers to cancel certain transactions $488 or 8 percent of the total loan under delegated authority, September that involve their principal dwelling. amount, effective January 1, 2003. 26, 2002. TILA is implemented by the Board’s Comment 32(a)(1)(ii)–2, which lists the Regulation Z (12 CFR part 226). The adjustments for each year, is amended Jennifer J. Johnson, Board’s official staff commentary (12 to reflect the dollar adjustment for 2003. Secretary of the Board. CFR part 226 (Supp. I)) interprets the Because the timing and method of the [FR Doc. 02–25037 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] regulation, and provides guidance to adjustment is set by statute, the Board BILLING CODE 6210–01–S

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:28 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61770 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION determine if the electrical resistance has or on the distribution of power and a value more than 1.5 milliohms. If the responsibilities among the various Federal Aviation Administration value of the electrical resistance is more levels of government. Therefore, it is than 1.5 milliohms, the proposal would determined that this final rule does not 14 CFR Part 39 prohibit refueling the tank. have federalism implications under [Docket No. 2000–SW–55–AD; Amendment The Direction Generale de L’Aviation Executive Order 13132. 39–12898; AD 2002–20–03] Civile (DGAC), the airworthiness For the reasons discussed above, I authority for France, notified the FAA certify that this action (1) is not a RIN 2120–AA64 that an unsafe condition may exist on ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under ECF Model AS332C, L, L1, and L2; Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter AS350B, BA, B1, B2, B3, and D; ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT France Model AS332C, L, L1, and L2; AS355E, F, F1, F2, and N; AS–365N2; Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 AS350B, BA, B1, B2, B3, and D; AS 365 N3; SA330F, G, and J; SA–360C; FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) AS355E, F, F1, F2, and N; AS–365N2; SA–365C, C1, and C2; SA.316B and C; will not have a significant economic AS 365 N3; SA330F, G, and J; SA– and SA.319B helicopters. The DGAC impact, positive or negative, on a 360C; SA–365C, C1, and C2; SA.316B advises of the absence on several tanks substantial number of small entities and C; and SA.319B Helicopters of an electric bond between the under the criteria of the Regulatory AGENCY: Federal Aviation electrostatic ground connector and its Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has Administration, DOT. support. During refueling of a tank, the been prepared for this action and it is ACTION: Final rule. inadequate electrical bonding could contained in the Rules Docket. A copy generate an electric arc between the of it may be obtained from the Rules SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a refueling nozzle of the tanker and the Docket at the location provided under new airworthiness directive (AD) for the tank and could cause the tank to the caption ADDRESSES. specified Eurocopter France (ECF) explode. model helicopters that requires a one- ECF has issued Telex No. 000112 List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 time measurement of the electrical dated June 6, 2000, which specifies a Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation resistance between the ferry fuel tank one-time measurement of the electrical safety, Safety. resistance between the tank electrostatic (tank) electrostatic ground connector Adoption of the Amendment and the tank filler neck before the next ground connector and the tank filler refueling of an installed tank or before neck to determine if the value is more Accordingly, pursuant to the the first fueling after installing a tank. If than 1.5 milliohms. If the value of the authority delegated to me by the the electrical resistance has a value electrical resistance of the electrical Administrator, the Federal Aviation more than 1.5 milliohms, this AD bonding is more than 1.5 milliohms, the Administration amends part 39 of the prohibits refueling the tank. This service telex specifies a secondary Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR amendment is prompted by reports of procedure for measuring the electrical part 39) as follows: an inadequate electrical bond between resistance. If the value of the electrical the electrostatic ground connector and resistance is more than 1.5 milliohms PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS its support on several tank installations. after the secondary measurement, the DIRECTIVES The actions specified by this AD are tank is unusable and the telex specifies a repair. The DGAC classified this telex 1. The authority citation for part 39 intended to prevent refueling a tank that continues to read as follows: is not adequately electrically bonded, as mandatory and issued AD 2000– which could generate an electric arc 302(A), dated July 12, 2000, to ensure Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. the continued airworthiness of these between the refueling nozzle and the § 39.13 [Amended] tank, causing an explosion. helicopters in France. Interested persons have been afforded 2. Section 39.13 is amended by DATES: Effective November 6, 2002. an opportunity to participate in the adding a new airworthiness directive to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ed making of this amendment. No read as follows: Cuevas, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, comments were received on the 2002–20–03 Eurocopter France: Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations proposal or the FAA’s determination of Amendment 39–12898. Docket No. Group, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0111, the cost to the public. The FAA has 2000–SW–55–AD. telephone (817) 222–5355, fax (817) determined that air safety and the Applicability: Model AS332C, L, L1, and 222–5961. public interest require the adoption of L2; AS350B, BA, B1, B2, B3, and D; AS355E, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A the rule as proposed. F, F1, F2, and N; AS–365N2; AS 365 N3; proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 to We estimate that 736 helicopters of SA330F, G, and J; SA–360C; SA–365C, C1, include an AD for ECF Model AS332C, and C2 helicopters with a metal ferry fuel U.S. registry will be affected by this AD. tank (tank), part number (P/N) 330A L, L1, and L2; AS350B, BA, B1, B2, B3, Measuring the electrical resistance 871310.00, .01, .02, .03, or .04, installed; and and D; AS355E, F, F1, F2, and N; AS– between the tank electrostatic ground Model SA.316B and C; and SA.319B 365N2; AS 365 N3; SA330F, G, and J; connector and the tank filler neck will helicopters with a tank, P/N 3160S 7375020, SA–360C; SA–365C, C1, and C2; take approximately 1⁄2 work hour per or 3160S 7375020–1, installed, certificated in SA.316B and C; and SA.319B helicopter to accomplish, and the any category. helicopters was published in the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter Federal Register on May 16, 2002 (67 Based on these figures, the total cost identified in the preceding applicability FR 34880). That action proposed to impact of this AD on U.S. operators is provision, regardless of whether it has been require, before the next refueling of an estimated to be $22,080 for the first otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in installed tank or before the first fueling the area subject to the requirements of this refueling of all installed tanks. AD. For helicopters that have been modified, after installing a tank, a one-time The regulations adopted herein will altered, or repaired so that the performance measurement of the electrical resistance not have a substantial direct effect on of the requirements of this AD is affected, the between the tank electrostatic ground the States, on the relationship between owner/operator must request approval for an connector and the tank filler neck to the national Government and the States, alternative method of compliance in

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61771

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. Compliance: Required before the next (a) Measure the electrical resistance The request should include an assessment of refueling of an installed tank or before the between the tank electrostatic ground the effect of the modification, alteration, or first fueling after installing a tank, unless connector (item C) and the tank filler neck repair on the unsafe condition addressed by accomplished previously. (item G) as shown in Figure 1 of this AD. If this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not To prevent refueling a tank that is not the value of the electrical resistance is more adequately electrically bonded, which could been eliminated, the request should include than 1.5 milliohms, refueling the tank is generate an electric arc between the refueling specific proposed actions to address it. nozzle and the tank, causing a fuel tank prohibited. See Figure 1 as follows: explosion, accomplish the following:

Note 2: Eurocopter Telex No. 000112 dated Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION June 6, 2000, pertains to the subject of this 19, 2002. AD. Eric D. Bries, Federal Aviation Administration (b) An alternative method of compliance or Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, adjustment of the compliance time that Aircraft Certification Service. 14 CFR Part 39 provides an acceptable level of safety may be [FR Doc. 02–24988 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] [Docket No. 2001–SW–41–AD; Amendment used if approved by the Manager, Regulations BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 39–12895; AD 2002–20–01 Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. Operators shall submit their requests through RIN 2120–AA64 an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may concur or comment and then send Airworthiness Directives; Model HH– it to the Manager, Regulations Group. 1K, TH–1F, TH–1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, Note 3: Information concerning the UH–1E, UH–1F, UH–1H, UH–1L, and existence of approved alternative methods of UH–1P; and Southwest Florida compliance with this AD, if any, may be Aviation Model SW204, SW204HP, obtained from the Regulations Group. SW205, and SW205A–1 Helicopters, Manufactured by Bell Helicopter (c) Special flight permits will not be Textron, Inc. for the Armed Forces of issued. the United States (d) This amendment becomes effective on November 6, 2002. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed Administration, DOT. in Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile ACTION: Final rule. (France) AD 2000–302(A), dated July 12, 2000. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 ER02OC02.004 61772 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

specified military surplus helicopters the Model UH–1 military surplus PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS that requires updating the product helicopters. If we were to add the DIRECTIVES identification, extending the application additional helicopter models or part of the AD to other models, continuing numbers as proposed by the commenter, 1. The authority citation for part 39 the existing retirement time for certain we would need to issue a Supplemental continues to read as follows: main rotor tension-torsion (TT) straps, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. To Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. and adding the TT strap part numbers avoid further delay in the effectivity of to the applicability. This amendment is the published proposals, we are issuing § 39.13 [Amended] prompted by the need to expand the this final rule as proposed. The 2. Section 39.13 is amended by applicability to additional military comments suggesting an expansion of adding a new airworthiness directive to surplus helicopters and to add two part these AD provisions to additional model read as follows: numbers to the applicability. The helicopters and TT strap part numbers 2002–20–01 Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. actions specified by this AD are will be further evaluated and may be (previously Utah State University); Firefly intended to prevent failure of a TT incorporated into a subsequent AD. Aviation Helicopter Services (previously strap, loss of a main rotor blade, and After careful review of the available Erickson Air-Crane Co.); Garlick subsequent loss of control of the data, including the comments noted Helicopters, Inc.; Global Helicopter helicopter. above, the FAA has determined that air Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, safety and the public interest require the LLC (previously Western International DATES: Effective November 6, 2002. adoption of the rule as proposed. Aviation, Inc.); Hawkins and Powers FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The FAA estimates that 75 helicopters Aviation, Inc.; International Helicopters, Michael Kohner, Aviation Safety Inc.; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Smith of U.S. registry will be affected by this Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.; Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, AD, that it will take approximately 8 Rotorcraft Certification Office, Fort Southwest Florida Aviation; Tamarack work hours per helicopter to accomplish Helicopters, Inc. (previously Ranger Worth, Texas 76193–0170, telephone the required actions, and that the Helicopter Services, Inc.); U.S. Helicopter, (817) 222–5447, fax (817) 222–5783. average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Inc.; and Williams Helicopter Corporation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Required parts will cost approximately (previously Scott Paper Co.): Amendment proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 to $10,484 per helicopter. Based on these 39–12895. Docket No. 2001–SW–41–AD. include an AD for Model HH–1K, TH– figures, the total cost impact of the AD Applicability: Model HH–1K, TH–1F, TH– 1F, TH–1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, on U.S. operators is estimated to be 1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, UH–1F, UH–1H, UH–1F, UH–1H, UH–1L, and UH–1P; $822,300. UH–1L, and UH–1P; and Southwest Florida and Southwest Florida Aviation Model The regulations adopted herein will Aviation Model SW204, SW204HP, SW205, SW204, SW204HP, SW205, and and SW205A–1 helicopters, manufactured by not have a substantial direct effect on Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI) for the SW205A–1 helicopters was published the States, on the relationship between Armed Forces of the United States, with in the Federal Register on April 10, the national Government and the States, main rotor tension-torsion (TT) strap, part 2002 (67 FR 17305). That action or on the distribution of power and number (P/N) 204–012–122–1, 204–012–122– proposed updating the product responsibilities among the various 5, 2601399, or 2606650, installed, certificated identification, extending the application levels of government. Therefore, it is in any category. of the AD to other models, continuing determined that this final rule does not Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter the existing retirement time for certain have federalism implications under identified in the preceding applicability TT straps, and adding the TT strap part Executive Order 13132. provision, regardless of whether it has been numbers to the applicability for the For the reasons discussed above, I otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in specified military surplus helicopters. certify that this action (1) is not a the area subject to the requirements of this Interested persons have been afforded AD. For helicopters that have been modified, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under altered, or repaired so that the performance an opportunity to participate in the Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a of the requirements of this AD is affected, the making of this amendment. Due ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT owner/operator must request approval for an consideration has been given to the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 alternative method of compliance in comments received. FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. One commenter states that Model will not have a significant economic The request should include an assessment of AH–1 series helicopter should be added impact, positive or negative, on a the effect of the modification, alteration, or to the applicability section of the AD, substantial number of small entities repair on the unsafe condition addressed by because Model AH–1 series helicopters under the criteria of the Regulatory this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not are currently being operated in been eliminated, the request should include Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has specific proposed actions to address it. experimental and restricted categories, been prepared for this action and it is and have identical TT straps as the HH– Compliance: Required before further flight, contained in the Rules Docket. A copy unless accomplished previously. 1K and UH–1L helicopter that are of it may be obtained from the Rules To prevent failure of a TT strap, loss of a included in the applicability of the AD. Docket at the location provided under main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of The commenter also states that the FAA the caption ADDRESSES. control of the helicopter, accomplish the should evaluate TT strap, part number following: 204–310–101–101, because ‘‘this current List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (a) Remove and replace any TT strap with production TT strap is life-limited Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 1,200 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 24 * * * to 1,200 hours of operation or a safety, Safety. months since the initial installation, whichever occurs first. calendar time of two years’’ when Adoption of the Amendment installed on standard category type (b) An alternative method of compliance or Accordingly, pursuant to the adjustment of the compliance time that certificated Bell products. provides an acceptable level of safety may be The FAA concurs, however the intent authority delegated to me by the used if approved by the Manager, Rotorcraft of AD’s, Docket Numbers 2001–SW–41– Administrator, the Federal Aviation Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, AD and 2001–SW–42–AD, was to Administration amends part 39 of the FAA. Operators shall submit their requests update the model applicability and type Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR through an FAA Principal Maintenance certificate holders of AD 80–17–09 for part 39) as follows: Inspector, who may concur or comment and

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61773

then send it to the Manager, Rotorcraft glucan soluble fiber for the health claim. examined the then current state of Certification Office. Therefore, we are amending the scientific opinion regarding the role of Note 2: Information concerning the regulation that authorizes a health claim total dietary fiber in general, without existence of approved alternative methods of on the relationship between soluble focusing on any particular dietary fiber. compliance with this AD, if any, may be fiber from whole oats and reduced risk Although we denied the use of a health obtained from the Rotorcraft Certification of CHD to include this additional source claim relating total dietary fiber to Office. of beta-glucan soluble fiber. reduced risk of CVD (58 FR 2552, (c) Special flight permits will not be DATES: This interim final rule is January 6, 1993), we authorized a health issued. claim relating fruits, vegetables, and (d) This amendment becomes effective on effective October 2, 2002. Submit November 6, 2002. written or electronic comments by grain products that contain dietary fiber, December 16, 2002. particularly soluble dietary fiber, to Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September reduced risk of CHD, one of the more 18, 2002. ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to the Dockets Management Branch common serious forms of CVD (58 FR Eric Bries, (HFA–305), Food and Drug 2552, January 6, 1993). Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. We concluded that, based on the Aircraft Certification Service. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit totality of publicly available scientific [FR Doc. 02–24993 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] electronic comments to http:// evidence, there was significant scientific BILLING CODE 4910–13–P www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments. agreement that the evidence supported an association between diets low in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: saturated fat and cholesterol and high in James E. Hoadley, Center for Food fruits, vegetables, and grain products DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– (i.e., foods that are low in saturated fat HUMAN SERVICES 830), Food and Drug Administration, and cholesterol and that are good 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, Food and Drug Administration sources of dietary fiber) and reduced MD, 20740–3835, 301–436–1450. risk of coronary heart disease (58 FR 21 CFR Part 101 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 2552 at 2572). We therefore authorized [Docket No. 01Q–0313] I. Background a health claim in part 101 (21 CFR part 101) in § 101.77 on the association A. The Nutrition Labeling and between diets low in saturated fat and Food Labeling: Health Claims; Soluble Education Act of 1990 Dietary Fiber From Certain Foods and cholesterol and high in vegetables, fruit, Coronary Heart Disease The Nutrition Labeling and Education and grain products that contain soluble Act of 1990 (the 1990 amendments) fiber and a reduced risk of CHD. AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, (Public Law 101–535) amended the In the 1993 dietary fiber and CVD HHS. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act final rule, in response to a comment ACTION: Interim final rule. (the act) in a number of important ways, regarding the apparent including confirming FDA’s authority to hypocholesterolemic properties of SUMMARY: The Food and Drug regulate health claims on food labels specific food fibers, e.g., oat bran, we Administration (FDA) is amending the and in food labeling. agreed that the effectiveness of naturally regulation authorizing a health claim on We issued several new regulations in occurring fibers in foods may be the relationship between beta-glucan 1993 that implemented the health claim documented for specific food products soluble fiber from whole oat sources and provisions of the 1990 amendments. (e.g., oat bran meeting specified reduced risk of coronary heart disease Among these were § 101.14 (21 CFR parameters) (58 FR 2552 at 2567). We (CHD). The amendment adds as an 101.14) (58 FR 2478, January 6, 1993), further stated that if a manufacturer additional eligible source of whole oat which set out the rules for the could document, through appropriate beta-glucan soluble fiber, the soluble authorization and use of health claims, studies, that dietary consumption of the fraction of alpha-amylase hydrolyzed and § 101.70 (21 CFR 101.70) (58 FR soluble fiber in its particular food has oat bran or whole oat flour with a beta- 2478, January 6, 1993), which the effect of lowering low density glucan soluble fiber content of up to 10 established a process for petitioning the lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, and has percent on a dry weight basis (dwb) and agency to authorize health claims about no adverse effects on other heart disease not less than that of the starting material a substance-disease relationship and set risk factors (e.g., high density (dwb). We (FDA) are taking this action out the types of information that any lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol), it should in response to a petition jointly filed by such petition must include. Each of petition for a health claim for its the Quaker Oats Co. and Rhodia, Inc. these regulations became effective on particular product (58 FR 2552 at 2567). (the petitioners). We concluded May 8, 1993. C. 1997 Soluble Fiber From Whole Oats previously that there was significant In addition, we conducted extensive and Coronary Heart Disease Health scientific agreement that a relationship reviews of the evidence on the 10 Claim exists between the beta-glucan soluble substance-disease relationships listed in fiber of certain whole oat sources and the 1990 amendments, including dietary We subsequently received a petition the reduction of risk of CHD by lowering fiber and reduced risk of cardiovascular for, and authorized, a health claim on blood cholesterol levels. We now have disease (CVD). As a result of our review, the relationship between soluble fiber concluded, based on the publicly we have authorized claims that relate to from whole oats and reduced risk of available scientific evidence that, in 8 of these 10 relationships. CHD (the soluble fiber from whole oats addition to rolled oats, oat bran, and final rule) (62 FR 3584, January 23, whole oat flour, the soluble fraction of B. 1990 to 1993 Dietary Fiber and 1997; modified at 62 FR 15343, March alpha-amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or Cardiovascular Disease Health Claim 31, 1997). We initially proposed to whole oat flour with a beta-glucan Evaluation authorize a health claim on the content up to 10 percent (dwb) and not During 1990 to 1993, we conducted association between oat bran and less than that of the starting material an extensive review of the relationship oatmeal and reduced risk of CHD (the (dwb) is an appropriate source of beta- between dietary fiber and CVD. We oats proposed rule) (61 FR 296, January

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61774 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

4, 1996). However, we concluded in the CHD as do oat bran and rolled oats (62 health claim petition to FDA on April final rule that the type of soluble fiber FR 3584 at 3586). Further, this 21, 2001, under section 403(r)(4) of the found in whole oats, i.e., beta-glucan conclusion was corroborated by Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act soluble fiber, is the component evidence from the rodent intestinal (the act) (21 U.S.C. 343(r)(4)). The primarily responsible for the contents studies. These studies petition requested that the agency hypocholesterolemic effects associated demonstrate that the beta-glucan soluble amend the ‘‘Soluble fiber from certain with consumption of whole oat foods as fiber from whole oat flour retains the foods and coronary heart disease health part of a diet that is low in saturated fat same level of viscosity in the rodent claim’’ at § 101.81 to include a fourth and cholesterol (62 FR 3584 at 3585). digestive tract as does that from rolled source of beta-glucan soluble fiber We reached this conclusion based on oats (62 FR 3584 at 3586). The whole eligible for the claim. The petitioners evidence that there is a dose response oats final rule concluded that beta- requested that this amendment be made between the level of beta-glucan soluble glucan soluble fiber was the appropriate ‘‘* * * with specific reference to the fiber from whole oats and the level of substance for the subject of the health Quaker-Rhodia group Oatrim, known as reduction in blood total- and LDL- claim, and that the three eligible sources Oatrim (BETATRIM).’’ The petition cholesterol, and that intakes of beta- of this substance were oat bran, rolled notes that ‘‘[n]ot all Oatrims have been glucan soluble fiber at or above 3 gram oats, and whole oat flour. tested for cholesterol-lowering efficacy; (g) per day were more effective in hence we are limiting our petition to the lowering serum lipids than lower intake D. 1998 Amendment to Broaden the subgroup Oatrim (BETATRIM), Oatrims levels (62 FR 3584 at 3585). As such, we Claim to ‘‘Soluble Fiber From Certain with demonstrated cholesterol-lowering concluded that, rather than oat bran and Foods and CHD’’ efficacy’’ (Ref. 1). FDA filed the petition rolled oats, the appropriate substance In the soluble fiber from whole oats for comprehensive review in accordance for the subject of the authorized claim final rule, we acknowledged the with section 403(r)(4) of the act on July is beta-glucan soluble fiber from whole likelihood that consumption of other 20, 2001 (Ref. 2). oats. We further determined that the sources of beta-glucan soluble fiber, as The petitioners’ description of the relationship is scientifically valid in well as other sources and types of substance that is the subject of the that there is significant scientific soluble fibers, will affect blood lipid health claim is broader than what the agreement, based on the totality of levels, and thus, the risk of heart disease available evidence supports. We have publicly available evidence, that beta- (62 FR 3584 at 3587). At that time, FDA determined that the evidence supports glucan soluble fiber from whole oats, as considered structuring the final rule as specifying the substance that is the part of a diet low in saturated fat and an umbrella regulation authorizing the subject of the claim as the beta-glucan- cholesterol, may reduce the risk of CHD use of a claim for ‘‘soluble fiber from containing soluble fraction of alpha- (62 FR 3584 at 3598). certain foods’’ and risk of CHD. Such amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or whole Several comments to the oats action would have allowed flexibility in oat flour with a beta-glucan soluble fiber proposed rule suggested that products expanding the claim to other specific content up to 10 percent (dwb) and not containing whole oat flour made from food sources of soluble fiber when less than that of the starting material 100 percent oat groats also should be consumption of those foods has been (dwb), also known as oatrim (Ref. 3). eligible to bear the health claim (62 FR demonstrated to help reduce the risk of This oatrim substance is produced by 3584 at 3585). The reasons given heart disease. However, the agency the methods described by Inglett and included: (1) Whole oat flour contains concluded that it was premature to do Newman, 1994 (Ref. 3). In brief, the beta-glucan soluble fiber as does oat so inasmuch as FDA had not reviewed manufacturing method consists of first bran and rolled oats; (2) whole oat flour the totality of evidence on other, preparing a 10 to 40 percent slurry of a is derived from the same starting nonwhole oat sources of soluble fiber milled oat product (specifically, oat material as rolled oats (i.e., whole oat (62 FR 3584 at 3588). In 1998, FDA bran or whole oat flour) in water groats) and, other than the smaller announced that, in response to a health containing 25 to 50 parts per million particle size of whole oat flour, whole claim petition and on the totality of the calcium to stabilize the subsequently oat flour possesses a chemical and available scientific evidence, it had added alpha-amylase enzyme, and with physical composition virtually identical concluded that soluble fiber from a pH adjusted between 5.5 and 7.5. to that of rolled oats; (3) intestinal psyllium seed husk, similar to beta- Then the starch of the oat product is content viscosity data from rodent glucan soluble fiber from whole oats, liquefied by adding a thermostable studies demonstrate that whole oat flour alpha-amylase enzyme and processing may reduce the risk of CHD by lowering ° beta-glucan soluble fiber retains blood cholesterol levels (63 FR 8103, at a temperature (70 to 100 C) and time viscosity similar to that of the beta- February 18, 1998). In that action, FDA (10 to 60 minutes) determined by the glucan soluble fiber from oat bran and broadened § 101.81 to include soluble desired product properties. After completion of the enzymatic hydrolysis rolled oats during processing and fiber from psyllium seed husk, and also digestion; and (4) data from one human of the starch, the enzyme is inactivated modified the heading in § 101.81 from, clinical study and several experimental and the water-soluble fraction ‘‘* * * Soluble fiber from whole oats animal studies demonstrate that whole consisting of soluble oat fiber and and risk of coronary heart disease’’ to oat flour has similar effects on blood maltooligosaccharides is separated from ‘‘* * * Soluble fiber from certain foods cholesterol levels as oat bran and rolled the water-insoluble residue by and risk of coronary heart disease oats (62 FR 3584 at 3585). centrifugation (Ref. 3). For brevity, we (CHD).’’ We were persuaded that the clinical will refer to this substance as oatrim, data showing the positive effects of II. Petition To Amend § 101.81 by which is the substance that is the consuming whole oat flour foods on Adding an Additional Eligible Source of subject of the claim in this interim final blood cholesterol, and comments Beta-Glucan Soluble Fiber From Whole rule. Oatrim was developed by George showing compositional similarities Oats Inglett, Agriculture Research Service, between whole oat flour and rolled oats, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) provided sufficient evidence for us to A. Background (Ref. 3). conclude that whole oat flour has the The Quaker Oats Co. and Rhodia, Inc. The petition describes the substance same effects relative to reduced risk of (the petitioners), jointly submitted a that is the subject of the health claim to

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:28 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61775

be ‘‘oatrim (BETATRIM),’’ a source of ‘‘nutritive value’’ is defined in The 1992 Quaker Oats Co. ‘‘oat beta-glucan soluble fiber and oat § 101.14(a)(3) as ‘‘value in sustaining documentation of GRAS self- starch obtained by enzymatic and/or human existence by such processes as determination (Ref. 1, Appendix 3) acid-base hydrolysis of whole oat flour promoting growth, replacing loss of characterized oatrim as the water or oat bran.’’ Thus, the substance as essential nutrients, or providing soluble, partially enzymatically described by the petition includes, in energy.’’ The petitioners provided three hydrolyzed starch fraction of whole oat addition to solubilized beta-glucan- examples of food categories (bars, flour. Oatrim was described as containing oat products produced by the beverages and beverage mixes) in which representing about 60 percent of the enzymatic hydrolysis method, oatrim could be used as an ingredient at whole oat flour starting material, and solubilized beta-glucan-containing oat a level providing 0.75 g beta-glucan containing 4 to 6 percent beta-glucan products produced by an acid-base soluble fiber per serving, the level soluble fiber and 6.9 percent total chemical hydrolysis method. In necessary to justify the claim (Ref. 1, dietary fiber. The Quaker Oats Co. addition, BETATRIM is the petitioners’ Table 3: Some Uses of Oatrim determined that the use of oatrim as a brand-name for a group of beta-glucan- (BETATRIM)). At this level, oatrim fat replacer in fresh ground and containing food ingredients. The provides nutritive value because it processed meats and poultry products, petitioners have noted that the products provides a consequential source of salad dressings, baked goods, baking they include under their brand-name are calories and soluble fiber. Therefore, the mixes, processed cheese, yogurt, ice ‘‘oatrims’’ processed by either alpha- preliminary requirement of cream and frozen desserts, snack foods, amylase enzymes or by acid/base § 101.14(b)(3)(i) is satisfied. vegetable oil spreads, icings and hydrolysis, and having a beta-glucan frostings, frozen entrees, and 3. The Substance Is Safe and Lawful soluble fiber content ranging between 4 confections was GRAS. The basis of the and 25 percent. However, as discussed The petition states that oatrim has safety determination was the similarity later in this preamble, we are limiting been used as a food ingredient in a of oatrim to oat starch and maltodextrin, the substance that is the subject of the variety of food products. The petition two food ingredients that are generally health claim to the soluble fraction of also notes that oatrim-containing foods recognized as safe for food use. alpha-amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or including cereals, frozen foods, dairy The 1991 ConAgra Specialty Grain whole oat flour with a beta-glucan products, beverages, baked products, Products Co. documentation of GRAS soluble fiber content of up to 10 percent mixes, and meat and poultry products self-determination (Ref. 1, Appendix 4) (dwb) and not less than that of the have been consumed by the public for characterized the processing of oatrim starting material (dwb). a number of years. The agency therefore as ‘‘oat flour or oat bran that is pre- is satisfied that the substance is a food, B. Review of Preliminary Requirements gelatinized and enzyme thinned, by food ingredient, or a component of a for a Health Claim alpha-amylase, to facilitate separation food ingredient. and recovery of the soluble fraction.’’ It 1. The Substance Is Associated With a The petitioners assert that the basis noted that the basis of the safety Disease for Which the U.S. Population for safe and lawful use of oatrim in food determination was the similarity of Is at Risk as a food ingredient, at levels necessary oatrim to other existing cereal adjuncts, CHD continues to be a disease that to justify the health claim, is that such such as pre-cooked flours, pre-cooked has a large impact on mortality and food use of oatrim is GRAS (generally bran, and starches. morbidity in the general adult U.S. recognized as safe) by GRAS self- The petitioners also submitted a letter population. As explained in the existing determination. In addition, the from Joseph F. Borzelleca, Consultative beta-glucan soluble fiber from whole petitioners declare that BETATRIM Services, Medical College of Virginia & oats health claim (§ 101.81), FDA derived from either oat bran or whole Toxicology and Pharmacology, Inc. (Ref. recognizes the CHD risk reduction oat flour, and subjected to hydrolysis by 1, Appendix 5), stating his opinion that benefit resulting from effects on blood treatment with safe and suitable food beta-glucan soluble fiber extracted from total and LDL-cholesterol associated grade enzymes and/or GRAS listed food oat bran or oat flour through enzymatic with certain foods that are sources of grade acids or bases, is GRAS through or by acid/base hydrolysis and soluble dietary fiber. While age-adjusted scientific procedures for use as a fat containing a maximum concentration of CHD mortality rates in the United States substitute in a variety of foods. The beta-glucan of 25 percent is GRAS when had been steadily decreasing since petitioners also declare that over the last used as a water-binder, humectant, or approximately 1960, recent evidence several years, Quaker Oats and Rhodia texture modifier. However, the has suggested that the decline in CHD have sold BETATRIM with a substance that is the subject of this mortality has slowed (Ref. 4). CVD concentration of 4 to 6 percent beta- opinion letter is beta-glucan soluble accounts for more than 900,000 U.S. glucan soluble fiber, which has been fiber; the letter mentions neither oatrim deaths annually and has been incorporated by food manufacturers into nor BETATRIM, and does not describe recognized as the dominant cause of a number of foods, including low-fat a manufacturing process that would death in the United States for at least pancakes, muffins, biscuits, a low-fat, identify clearly the subject of the letter the last 50 years (Ref. 4). Based on these high-fiber nutrition bar, and fat-free as oatrim. facts, FDA concludes that, as required in frankfurters (Ref. 1). The petitioners The documentation of GRAS self- § 101.14(b)(1), CHD is a disease for submitted documentation of a 1992 determination (Ref. 1, Appendices 3 and which the U.S. population is at risk. GRAS self-determination for oatrim by 4) includes oatrim produced by alpha- The Quaker Oats Co. (Ref. 1, Appendix amylase hydrolysis and with a beta- 2. The Substance Is a Food 3), a 1991 GRAS self-determination for glucan content of up to approximately Oatrim is to be consumed at ‘‘other oatrim by ConAgra (Ref. 1, Appendix 4), 10 percent. The petition suggests that than decreased dietary levels,’’ and and an individual opinion regarding the the Borzelleca Consultative Services’ contributes nutritive value when used at GRAS status of purified forms of beta- opinion on the GRAS status of beta- a level providing at least 0.75 g beta- glucan soluble fiber from oats (Ref. 1, glucan soluble fiber extends to the glucan soluble fiber per serving, in a Appendix 5) as evidence that oatrim petitioners’ BETATRIM products that variety of food products. The term meets the safe and lawful requirement. are manufactured by hydrolysis with

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61776 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

suitable acids or bases and that have a study and several experimental animal gum on serum cholesterol levels in beta-glucan content of up to 25 percent. studies demonstrating that consumption humans. The study of Torronen et al., FDA is not challenging the of whole oat flour had similar effects on 1992 (Ref. 6) and that of Pick et al., 1996 petitioners’ determination that the beta- blood cholesterol levels as does (Ref. 9) both investigated the effects of glucan-containing soluble fraction of consumption of oat bran or rolled oats oat bran concentrate products on serum hydrolyzed oat bran or whole oat flour and (2) compositional similarities cholesterol levels in humans. While oat produced by treatment with either between whole oat flour and rolled oats gums and oat bran concentrate are alpha-amylase enzymes or with suitable (62 FR 3584 at 3586). This conclusion sources of oat beta-glucan soluble fiber, acids or bases is GRAS. However, the was corroborated by evidence that the the subject of the petition is oatrim and scientific evidence submitted, as beta-glucan soluble fiber from whole oat other BETATRIM products, the beta- discussed in section III of this flour retains the same level of viscosity glucan-containing soluble fraction from document, only supports a relationship in the digestive tract as does that from hydrolyzed oat bran or whole oat flour. between oatrim, i.e., the soluble fraction rolled oats. Accordingly, the soluble Neither oat gum nor oat bran of alpha-amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or fiber from whole oats final rule included concentrates are produced through an whole oat flour with beta-glucan soluble whole oat flour, along with oat bran and extraction process analogous to the fiber content up to 10 percent (dwb) and rolled oats, as eligible sources of beta- process for producing oatrim. As none not less than that of the starting material glucan soluble fiber for the health claim. of these four studies utilized the (dwb), and a reduced risk of CHD. The We now are applying those same criteria substance that is the subject of the substance that is the subject of this to evaluate the petitioned request to add petition, they were not relevant to the health claim does not include the oatrim and other BETATRIM products present consideration and were soluble fraction of hydrolyzed oat bran to the sources of beta-glucan soluble excluded from review. or whole oat flour solubilized by acids fiber listed in § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A). The study reported in Behall et al., or bases or containing a beta-glucan B. Review of Scientific Evidence of the 1997 (Ref. 10) investigated the effects on content of over 10 percent or with less Substance-Disease Relationship blood lipids of adding an oat fiber beta-glucan than that of the starting extract, identified as the oatrim material. FDA has evaluated the 1. Scientific Evidence of Efficacy in developed by George Inglett, Agriculture petitioner’s position that the use of Cholesterol Reduction Research Service, USDA, to diets of oatrim at a level providing 0.75 g beta- a. Human serum lipid studies of mildly hypercholesterolemic subjects. glucan soluble fiber per serving is safe oatrim. The criteria that the agency used The oat fiber extracts had either 1.6 and lawful. Based on its review, FDA to identify studies pertinent to the percent or 10.2 percent by weight beta- concludes that the petitioners have current review were the same as those glucan soluble fiber (low beta-glucan satisfied the preliminary requirement of previously used when reviewing and high beta-glucan, respectively). § 101.14(b)(3)(ii) to demonstrate, to evidence supporting the relationship Both oat fiber extracts (high and low) FDA’s satisfaction, that the use of between reduced risk of CHD and were provided by Quaker Oats Co. and oatrim, as described previously, is safe consumption of soluble fiber from by ConAgra, Inc. The petitioners and lawful as a food ingredient at levels whole oat products (61 FR 296 at 298) comment in the petition that all of the necessary to justify a claim (Ref. 5). and consumption of psyllium husk oatrim that was used in this study had The agency has not made its own soluble fiber (62 FR 28234 at 28237, been processed by the enzymatic determination regarding the GRAS May 22, 1997). These criteria are: (1) methods licensed from George Inglett. status of either oatrim or other Include an adequate presentation of The oat fiber extracts were added to test BETATRIM products. Moreover, an data, study design, and methods; (2) be diets, replacing 5 percent of the fat agency determination of the GRAS available in English; (3) include energy with a corresponding amount of status of these other BETATRIM estimates, or enough information to carbohydrate energy, resulting in beta- products would not be relevant to the estimate, soluble dietary fiber intakes; glucan soluble fiber consumption of substance that we are authorizing for (4) include direct measurement of blood approximately 0.8 g/day (maintenance this health claim, i.e., oatrim, because total cholesterol and other blood lipids diet, no oat fiber extract addition), 1.6 such BETATRIM is different from the related to CHD; and (5) be conducted in to 2.0 g/day (low beta-glucan extract oatrim that is the subject of this health persons who represent the general U.S. added), or 5.1 to 7.6 g/day (high beta- claim and there is insufficient evidence population. Further, factors that exclude glucan extract added). The oat fiber before the agency to support a finding human studies from review are: (1) extracts were added to the diet in on the relationship between these other Reports published only in abstract form, several foods including fruit juice, BETATRIM products and a reduced risk (2) studies using special population applesauce, muffins, cookies, cake, of CHD. The agency notes that groups, and (3) secondary prevention brownies, waffles, gelatin, yogurt, authorization of a health claim for a studies (i.e., subjects who already have spaghetti sauce and meat loaf. The study substance should not be interpreted as had a myocardial infarction). In included 23 mildly affirmation that the substance is GRAS. addition, in this current evaluation of hypercholesterolemic adult subjects (age III. Review of Scientific Evidence of the the relationship between beta-glucan 38 to 61 years) (mean serum total- Substance-Disease Relationship soluble fiber from oatrim and reduced cholesterol 212 ± 7 mmole/dL; mean risk of CHD, the agency has included LDL-cholesterol 141 ± 6 mmole/dL). The A. Basis for Evaluating the Relationship only those studies in which the maintenance diet was fed for 1 week Between Oatrim and CHD substance tested was identified to be followed by diets containing one of the As previously noted, in the 1997 oatrim or other BETATRIM products. oat fiber extracts for two 5-week periods soluble fiber from whole oats final rule Reports of five human clinical studies in a crossover pattern. In comparison to the agency was persuaded that whole with data on serum lipids were basal serum lipid levels measured oat flour has the same effects relative to submitted with this petition (Refs. 6 to following the initial maintenance diet reduced risk of CHD as do oat bran and 10). The study of Braaten et al., 1994 week, serum total-cholesterol was rolled oats. The agency based its (Ref. 7) and that of Beer et al., 1995 (Ref. statistically significantly lower (p < conclusion on: (1) Data from a clinical 8) both investigated the effects of oat 0.05) by 9.5 percent (low beta-glucan

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61777

extract) and by 14.8 percent (high beta- glucan. Oatrim did not affect plasma manufacturing of oatrim, much of the glucan extract) following the oat fiber HDL-cholesterol levels in either of the starch present in the whole oat flour or extract supplemented diet periods. The above two studies (Refs. 3 and 16). remaining in the oat bran has been mean serum total-cholesterol levels Yokoyama et al., 1998 (Ref. 18) converted to soluble amylodextrins, and were also statistically different (p < reported on the effects of oatrim on nonwater soluble components of the 0.05) between the two beta-glucan cholesterol levels in a starting milled oat products are removed extract-supplemented diet periods. hypercholesterolemic hamster model. by centrifugation. However, like oat Likewise, for oat fiber extract- The hamster diets were supplemented bran, the oatrim fraction produced from supplemented diets, statistically with one of four oat flour products, or the manufacturing methods of Inglett significant decreases (p < 0.05) of serum with cellulose. The oat flour products and Newman, 1994 (Ref. 3) retains most LDL-cholesterol levels of 14.8 percent included a beta-glucan-enriched oat of the beta-glucan soluble fiber and (low beta-glucan extract) and by 20.8 flour, a 5-percent beta-glucan oatrim, a fiber-associated substances found in percent (high beta-glucan extract) were 10-percent beta-glucan oatrim, and a whole oat products. observed, compared to the maintenance beta-glucan-free hydrolyzed oatrim. All 3. Rat Intestinal Viscosity Studies diet period. Serum LDL-cholesterol diets, except for the cellulose control levels were not significantly different and the beta-glucan-free hydrolyzed As explained in the soluble fiber from between the two oat fiber extract- oatrim, contained equivalent amounts of whole oats final rule, the viscosity of supplemented diets. Serum HDL- beta-glucan. The two oatrim-containing intestinal contents is known to be a cholesterol levels were not significantly diets and the beta-glucan-free oatrim critical factor in the ability of soluble different among the maintenance, low hydrolyzate diet, were effective in dietary fiber to reduce the risk of CHD, beta-glucan, or high beta-glucan diet showing statistically significant and soluble dietary fiber viscosity is periods. decreases (p < 0.05) in plasma total- and affected in unpredictable ways by food The results of Behall et al., 1997 (Ref. LDL-cholesterol levels relative to that of processing, or following ingestion, by 10), the only available study that the cellulose-containing diet. The beta- the digestive system (62 FR 3584 at evaluated the effects of oatrim on glucan enriched oat flour-containing 3586). Therefore, evidence human serum lipid levels, demonstrate diet reduced neither plasma total- nor demonstrating that the level of viscosity that consumption of a variety of foods LDL-cholesterol levels. Statistically in the digestive tract of the beta-glucan- containing oatrim produced by the significant reductions (p < 0.05) in the containing oatrim is similar to the level enzymatic method, in amounts plasma HDL-cholesterol level, relative of viscosity of rolled oats, oat bran, and providing sufficient beta-glucan soluble to that of the cellulose-containing whole oat flour is an important factor in fiber to qualify for the health claim, may control diet, occurred with the two our decision to add oatrim as an contribute to statistically significant oatrim-containing diets and with the additional source of oat beta-glucan reductions in serum total- and LDL- enriched oat flour-containing diet, but soluble fiber eligible for the health cholesterol levels. Further, there not with the oatrim hydrolyzate- claim. As noted in the soluble fiber from appears to be a positive dose-response containing diet. whole oats final rule (62 FR 3584 at of the amount of beta-glucan soluble Consistent with the clinical study, 3587), there are no generally accepted or fiber from oatrim and the beneficial data from three animal models validated criteria for predicting which effect on serum total cholesterol. corroborate the finding that oatrim sources or processed forms of beta- b. Animal serum lipid studies of products containing beta-glucan soluble glucan soluble fiber beyond oat bran, oatrim. The petition included reports fiber lower blood total- and LDL- rolled oats, and whole oat flour are from nine studies that investigated the cholesterol levels. Furthermore, with capable of reducing blood total- and effects of processed oat bran products the exception of the study employing a LDL-cholesterol levels. Therefore, FDA on cholesterol metabolism in hamster model (Ref. 18), HDL- must evaluate data that are relevant to experimental animal models (Refs. 3, cholesterol levels were not significantly each source of beta-glucan soluble fiber and 11 to 18). Among these were studies altered. and compare these data to other in which the oat products tested were authorized sources. FDA considered 2. Composition of Oatrim Relative to oat gums (Refs. 11, 12, 14, and 15) or evidence demonstrating that the Whole Oat Products processed oat bran concentrate (Refs. 13 processed sources of beta-glucan soluble and 17). Results from these six studies As discussed previously, a key factor fiber retain the same level of viscosity were not directly relevant to the in our decision to add whole oat flour in the digestive tract as soluble fiber consideration of oatrim or other to the food sources of beta-glucan from rolled oats to determine whether BETATRIM products as a source of beta- soluble fiber eligible for the health claim the processed forms can provide the glucan soluble fiber eligible for the was evidence that, other than being same benefits as rolled oats (62 FR 3584 health claim, and were thus excluded milled to a smaller particle size, the at 3586). from review. Three of the nine studies composition of whole oat flour and The petitioners submitted results of investigated effects of oatrim products rolled oats is the same (62 FR 3584 at animal tests to show that beta-glucan on blood cholesterol level in 3586). Oat bran differs from whole oat soluble fiber from oatrim or other experimental animals (Refs. 3, 16, and flour in that a portion of the starch-rich BETATRIM products retains the 18). Preliminary data from Inglett and endosperm of whole oat flour has been viscosity characteristics of soluble fiber Newman 1994 (Ref. 3) suggested removed whereas the outer soluble in whole oat products (rolled oats, oat reductions of plasma total- and LDL- fiber-rich layers of the oat groat are bran, and whole oat flour) in the rodent cholesterol associated with the addition retained. Although oatrim is derived digestive tract (Refs. 19 to 22). Gallaher of oatrim containing 10-percent beta- from two of the same eligible food et al., 1999 (Ref. 21) reported data on rat glucan to the diet in a sources of beta-glucan soluble fiber intestinal contents supernatant viscosity hypercholesterolemic chick model. currently authorized for the health (ICSV) resulting from rats consuming an These results were confirmed by Inglett claim, i.e., whole oat flour and oat bran, oat product meal. Rats that had been et al., 1994 (Ref. 16) in a followup study the composition of oatrim differs from fasted overnight were meal-fed a whole with a larger sample of chicks and with each. Oatrim differs from oat bran and oat-based cereal (Cheerios, cooked and an oatrim containing 8.6-percent beta- whole oat flour in that, in the uncooked oatmeal, or cooked oat bran).

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61778 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Two hours later, the intestinal contents BETATRIM products with beta-glucan for whole oat products only. As we are were collected, then centrifuged, and content less than 20 percent. now proposing to extend eligible beta- the viscosities of the resultant The ICSV data demonstrate that the glucan sources to include a processed supernatants were determined. viscosity characteristics of beta-glucan extract of oat bran and whole oat flour, Differences in resultant mean ICSV soluble fiber in intact whole oat we also need to reconsider the utility of values among the whole oat-based products is not degraded in the beta- physiochemical measures of the beta- cereals tested were not statistically glucan-containing soluble fraction of glucan soluble fiber sources that would significant (p > 0.05). Gallaher et al., alpha-amylase hydrolyzed whole oat be predictive of effectiveness in 1999 (Ref. 21) did not report data products. Further, the type of hydrolysis lowering blood lipids. However, we are regarding the beta-glucan content of the treatment, alpha-amylase enzymatic or unaware of clinical data that establish a whole oat-based cereals tested; however, acid/base, does not appear to have an direct correlation of any physiochemical based on information provided in the effect on viscosity characteristics in measures (e.g., molecular weight, or study report we have estimated that the products with beta-glucan content of 20 viscosity) and of beta-glucan soluble whole oat-based cereal test meals percent. fiber sources and effects on blood lipids. Viscosity data from the ex vivo rat contained approximately 0.12 g C. Physiochemical Properties (Cheerios) to 0.22 g (oat bran) of beta- intestinal model of Gallaher et al. (Ref. glucan per meal. As noted previously, there are no 21) have been considered as The ICSV data from Gallaher et al., generally accepted or validated criteria corroborating evidence that the 1999 (Ref. 21) were subsequently for predicting which sources or processing of whole oat flour or of compared to ICSV data for the processed forms of beta-glucan soluble oatrim does not significantly affect petitioners’ enzymatically processed fiber are capable of reducing blood LDL- viscosity properties of the whole oat BETATRIM, also tested by Gallaher cholesterol, and therefore have an effect starting material from which it is made. under the same test protocol (Ref. 22). on CHD risk. Comments to the original However, we have no direct clinical The BETATRIM tested included a 4- soluble fiber from the whole oats evidence demonstrating the percent beta-glucan BETATRIM, a 20- proposed rule (62 FR 3584 at 3591) applicability of this model to predicting percent beta-glucan BETATRIM, and a suggested that the effect on blood lipids blood lipid-lowering effect in humans. blend of the two containing 12-percent from consumption of beta-glucan Further, there are many methods of beta-glucan. The petition identified the soluble fiber is related to both the measuring the complex viscosity BETATRIM products used in this study molecular weight and the solution properties and the result is dependent as all having been produced with the viscosity of the beta-glucan. The upon the conditions of measurement. alpha-amylase process. These test meals comments stated that processing Although we do not recognize a provided between 0.02 g and 0.10 g methods can alter the molecular standard method for measuring soluble beta-glucan per meal. The blended 12- structure of the beta-glucan molecule viscosity applicable to a range of percent beta-glucan test meal (0.06 g and may cause it to lose its effect on conditions, we do accept that soluble beta-glucan/meal) yielded a mean ICSV blood cholesterol levels. The comments fiber viscosity is a major value comparable to that of 0.12 to 0.22 suggested that to ensure that the physiochemical property responsible for g beta-glucan/meal from whole oat- processed oat-containing food product physiological effects of consuming based cereals. The mean ICSV value will provide the effects associated with soluble fiber, e.g., lowering blood lipids, resulting from the high beta-glucan beta-glucan soluble fiber in the starting and that viscosity is related to polymer BETATRIM (0.10 g beta-glucan/meal) material, i.e., oat bran, rolled oats, and size of the soluble fiber. For example, a was approximately four times greater whole oat flour, the finished oat product study of viscosity as a variable in than that of 0.12 to 0.22 g beta-glucan/ should be tested to determine whether effectiveness of beta-glucan in altering meal from whole oat-based cereals. its beta-glucan soluble fiber has retained blood glucose and insulin responses to These data indicate that the enzymatic the physical properties, such as an oral glucose load (Ref. 23) found a processing of whole oat products into molecular weight, that it had in the significant correlation between peak BETATRIM, and the subsequent starting material. FDA was not blood glucose and a combination of digestion in the rat gastrointestinal tract, convinced, at the time of our initial beta-glucan concentration and do not degrade the viscosity of oat beta- soluble fiber from whole oats and CHD molecular weight. The agency is glucan soluble fiber relative to that of risk health claim rulemaking, that there requesting comment and scientific data whole oat products. was a need to require molecular weight on the potential of using a molecular The petitioners provided a report of a or viscosity testing of foods containing weight or other physiochemical third viscosity study that was conducted oat bran, rolled oats, or whole oat flour. properties as a predictive parameter of to compare the viscosity of BETATRIM Although processing of whole oat the ability of beta-glucan soluble fiber processed by the acid/base chemical substances could result in extensive from highly processed sources to be method to that of BETATRIM depolymerization of the beta-glucan, effective in lowering blood lipids. enzymatically processed (Ref. 22). This there was clinical evidence Lacking direct evidence correlating viscosity study was conducted with the demonstrating that most oat bran or physicochemical properties of a same test protocol as before, and using rolled oats products processed as ready- substance with cholesterol-lowering two sources of 20-percent beta-glucan to-eat cereals, muffins, breads, or other efficacy in humans, we continue to rely content BETATRIM, one enzymatically foods, whether they were consumed hot on clinical intervention studies processed and the other acid/base or cold, were effective in significantly demonstrating effectiveness of a beta- processed. The mean ICSV values for lowering blood lipids when consumed glucan source in LDL-cholesterol the two sources of 20-percent beta- as part of an appropriate diet. reduction when we authorize additional glucan content BETATRIM were not Some studies failed to find blood eligible sources of beta-glucan soluble statistically significantly different and lipid lowering effectiveness associated fiber. For this health claim, we were were comparable to that of the previous with consumption of highly processed able to determine that a beta-glucan study. No data were provided with oat gum extracts, but such studies were source from oat bran or whole oat flour respect to comparative ICSV values of not relevant to FDA’s analysis because (the starting materials), combined with enzymatic and acid/base processed FDA was authorizing the health claim limitations on the manufacturing

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61779

process (the alpha-amylase process used viscosity characteristics. We note, whole oat flour with a beta-glucan to manufacture the oatrim substance however, that the substance tested in content up to 10 percent (dwb) and not tested by Behall et al. (Ref. 10)) and on the clinical cholesterol-lowering less than that of the starting material the beta-glucan content of the finished efficacy study, i.e., alpha-amylase (dwb) as the fourth source of beta- product, are sufficient to ensure an hydrolyzed oat bran or whole oat flour, glucan soluble fiber. We are not adequate description of the substance with not more than 10 percent beta- restricting the eligible substance to the that is the subject of this claim. The glucan content, was manufactured both Quaker-Rhodia BETATRIM brand-name, substance that is the subject of the by the Quaker Oats Co. and by ConAgra, so that all foods that meet the eligibility claim, i.e. oatrim, is that which was Inc. Because the data upon which this requirements for oatrim under § 101.81 used in the Behall et al. study (Ref. 10) health claim is based is not limited to may use the claim. To this end, we are that demonstrated a reduction in risk of petitioners’ brand name products, FDA amending § 101.81, as discussed in CHD. Parties considering variations of will not limit the health claim to these the processing method used to produce products. Instead, the health claim will section V of this document, to include the oatrim used in the Behall et al. be available to any substances that meet beta-glucan soluble fiber from oatrim. clinical trial (Ref. 10) would need to FDA’s definition of oatrim, as specified We have also concluded that there is demonstrate the bioequivalence in previously. insufficient evidence at this time to cholesterol reduction of their products Moreover, the substance tested in the include beta-glucan-containing acid/ to those oat beta-glucan sources listed in clinical cholesterol-lowering efficacy base hydrolyzed oat products as a § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A), and submit these study did not include acid-base substance eligible for the health claim. data to FDA in a petition to amend the hydrolyzed products or products with Although there are direct clinical data health claim regulation to include such beta-glucan content exceeding 10 and corroborating animal plasma lipids processing variations in the definition of percent. Therefore, as previously and viscosity data to support addition of oatrim. discussed, the agency is not including oatrim with a beta-glucan content up to substances other than oatrim, defined as 10 percent, the only available data IV. Decision To Amend the Health the beta-glucan containing soluble regarding hydrolyzed oat bran or whole Claim: Soluble Fiber From Whole Oats fraction from alpha-amylase hydrolyzed and Reduced Risk of CHD to Include oat bran or whole oat flour with a beta- oat flour with a beta-glucan content over Oatrim as an Eligible Source of Oat glucan soluble fiber content up to 10 10 percent and that is manufactured Beta-Glucan Soluble Fiber percent (dwb) and not less than that of using acid/base hydrolysis, are from a Results from Behall et al., 1997 (Ref. the starting material (dwb), as an single experiment comparing viscosity 10) indicate that, like the effects of eligible source of beta-glucan for this of two oat products containing 20- consuming rolled oats, oat bran, and health claim. Based on the information percent beta-glucan. In one oat product, whole oat flour, the beta-glucan- before us, we are persuaded that the the hydrolysis treatment was alpha- containing soluble fraction from alpha- clinical evidence of positive effects on amylase; in the other oat product, the amylase hydrolyzed oat bran and whole blood cholesterol of consuming this hydrolysis treatment was acid/base (Ref. oat flour with a beta-glucan soluble fiber oatrim substance, provides sufficient 22). In section II.B.3 of this document, content up to 10 percent is effective in evidence for the agency to conclude that we discussed whether oatrim used at reducing blood total- and LDL- oatrim has the same effects relative to levels necessary to justify a claim has cholesterol levels, which in turn may reduced risk of CHD as do rolled oats, been demonstrated to be a safe and reduce the risk of heart disease. Three oat bran and whole oat flour. Further, lawful substance. FDA is not studies employing various animal this conclusion is corroborated by challenging the petitioners’ contention models also demonstrate a relationship evidence from rat intestinal contents that BETATRIM products produced between consumption of oatrim and a studies that demonstrate that processing from oat bran and whole oat flour reduction in cholesterol levels. of such oatrim does not degrade the treated with either alpha-amylase, or Furthermore, results from an viscosity characteristics of beta-glucan suitable acids or bases, and containing experimental animal model of intestinal soluble fiber relative to the viscosity up to 25-percent beta-glucan, are GRAS. viscosity indicate that oatrim yields characteristics of the whole oat sources intestinal contents supernatant viscosity from which it is produced. The Hence, our decision not to include similar to that of beta-glucan soluble available clinical study demonstrated hydrolyzed oat products with a beta- fiber in whole oat products. These data efficacy of oatrim on reducing serum glucan content of more than 10 percent provide evidence of a physiological cholesterol with oatrim added to the and beta-glucan-containing acid/base equivalence of beta-glucan soluble fiber diet by incorporating it into a variety of hydrolyzed oat products, as substances from oatrim and beta-glucan soluble foods including fruit juice, applesauce, which may be used in a food to make fiber from whole oat sources such as oat muffins, cookies, cake, brownies, the food eligible to bear a claim about bran and rolled oats. Thus, these data waffles, gelatin, yogurt, spaghetti sauce, such sources of soluble fiber and support FDA’s previous determination and meat loaf. These foods cover a range reduced risk of CHD, rests on the lack that, based on the totality of publicly of viscosities, densities, and textures of sufficient data to demonstrate such a available evidence, there is significant (Ref. 10). The foods were functional, relationship. We will evaluate any scientific agreement that a relationship and the petitioners did not note any clinical data submitted in response to exists between consumption of certain matrix effects on beta-glucan this interim final rule to demonstrate, by beta-glucan soluble fiber sources and availability. Therefore, we conclude that validated measures, that a relationship reduced risk of CHD. the health claim for oatrim need not be exists between consumption of The petition requested that the restricted to any particular food category hydrolyzed oat products with beta- amendment specifically reference or type (Ref. 5). glucan content over 10 percent and of Quaker-Rhodia BETATRIM brand-name In conclusion, we find that there is acid/base hydrolyzed oat products and products because they are the only sufficient evidence to amend sources with demonstrated blood § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A) by adding the beta- a reduced risk of CHD, to determine cholesterol-lowering efficacy and glucan-containing soluble fraction from whether such data warrant a retention of the whole oat product alpha-amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or modification to this rule.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:28 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61780 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

V. Description of Modifications to (c)(2)(ii)(A)(3) of this section by of soluble fiber per reference amount § 101.81 solubilization of the starch in the starting customarily consumed of the food material with an alpha-amylase hydrolysis product * * *’’ The phrase used A. Nature of the Substance; Eligible process, and then removal by centrifugation initially, ‘‘whole oat soluble fiber,’’ was Sources of Soluble Fiber of the insoluble components consisting of a high portion of protein, lipid, insoluble intended to mean beta-glucan soluble Section 101.81(c)(2)(ii) (nature of the dietary fiber, and the majority of the flavor fiber from whole oats (62 FR 3584 at substance; eligible sources of soluble and color components of the starting 3588). This was based on information fiber) lists the types and sources of material. Oatrim shall have a beta-glucan that the soluble fiber content of whole soluble fiber that have been soluble fiber content up to 10 percent (dwb) oats is predominantly (approximately 87 demonstrated to FDA’s satisfaction to and not less than that of the starting material percent or more) beta-glucan. Thus, the have a relationship to the reduced risk (dwb). total soluble fiber content of whole oats of CHD. Section 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A) lists B. Nature of the Food Eligible to Bear significantly reflects the beta-glucan beta-glucan soluble fiber from whole oat the Claim present. Moreover, the agency thought sources, along with a method of analysis the term ‘‘soluble fiber’’ would be more Section 101.81(c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) for beta-glucan soluble fiber by the familiar to consumers than ‘‘beta- currently specifies that a food eligible to Association of Official Analytical glucan,’’ because soluble fiber can be bear the health claim shall include one Chemists. Section 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A)(1) declared on the nutrition label; whereas, or more of the whole oat foods from through (c)(2)(ii)(A)(3) identifies the beta-glucan is a technical term that may paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section whole oat products that are eligible not be widely understood. However, (i.e., oat bran, rolled oats, whole oat sources of beta-glucan, i.e., oat bran, because of the possibility that oatrim- flour), and that the whole oat food shall rolled oats, and whole oat flour. containing foods bearing the health contain at least 0.75 g of soluble fiber The nature of the substance for which claim could have insufficient amounts per reference amount customarily we have concluded there is sufficient of beta-glucan, the specific type of consumed of the food product. We are evidence to justify its addition to the list soluble fiber that is the subject of this concerned that expanding the eligible of eligible oat sources of beta-glucan is interim final rule, FDA is redesignating sources of beta-glucan soluble fiber from more narrowly circumscribed than that current § 101.81(c)(2)(iii)(A)(2), and the current three whole oat sources to of the BETATRIM products requested by adding new paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(2) include oatrim, which is an extract of the petitioners. Oatrim, the substance to specifying that the oatrim-containing whole oat sources and has a character be added as an eligible oat source of food bearing the health claim contain at more as a food ingredient than as a beta-glucan soluble fiber is defined by least 0.75 g of beta-glucan per reference whole oat food, may render current the specific manufacturing process amount customarily consumed. FDA paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) open to described by Newman and Inglett, 1994 also is specifying that current paragraph different interpretations as to the (Ref. 3), by the limitations on the (c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) refer to the three oat contribution of soluble fiber from starting material from which the oatrim products previously authorized (i.e., oat oatrim-containing foods to meet the 0.75 is extracted (i.e., oat bran or whole oat bran, rolled oats, and whole oat flour). g requirement. Oatrim-containing foods flour as defined in § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A)), In addition, FDA intends to consider could contain sources of soluble dietary and by the limitations on the beta- in a future separate rulemaking the fiber other than oatrim. Although such glucan content of the finished product advisability of amending paragraph foods may meet the criteria in (i.e., not less than that of the starting § 101.81(c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) to clarify that § 101.81(c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) to bear the material and not more than 10 percent any food eligible for the health claim on health claim (e.g., include a whole oat (dwb)). the basis of containing a whole oat food In this interim final rule, we are product listed in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) must contain at least 0.75 g of beta- amending § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A) by adding and contain at least 0.75 g of soluble glucan soluble fiber from the whole oat § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A)(4) which will fiber), they would not necessarily source rather than 0.75 g of soluble fiber specify the beta-glucan-containing contain sufficient beta-glucan soluble of unspecified type. soluble fraction of alpha-amylase fiber from the oatrim ingredient to C. Other Requirements hydrolyzed oat bran and whole oat contribute in a meaningful way to the 3 flour, with a beta-glucan content up to g or more per day of beta-glucan fiber All other requirements in 10 percent (dwb) and not less than that from whole oats necessary to reduce the § 101.81(c)(1) through (c)(2)(i) must be of the starting material (dwb), as a risk of CHD. met before any health claim involving The ‘‘Nature of the Food’’ section of source of beta-glucan soluble fiber an oatrim-containing product can be the whole oats health claim originally eligible to be the subject of this claim. utilized. FDA is providing that any or was worded: ‘‘The food shall contain at Since the processing of oat bran and all of the optional information in least 0.75 gram (g) per reference amount whole oat flour into oatrim involves § 101.81(d) may apply to oatrim. customarily consumed of whole oat only a liquefaction of starch and soluble fiber from the eligible sources D. Model Health Claims separation of insoluble components listed in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this without alteration of the beta-glucan This interim final rule to amend section * * *’’ existing § 101.81(c)(2) does not affect soluble fiber present in the starting However, when proposing to amend material, we are specifying that the beta- the model health claims specified in this regulation to broaden the health paragraph (e) of § 101.81. glucan content of the oatrim product is claim to the proposed rule on ‘‘Soluble not less than that of the starting material Fiber from Certain Foods and CHD’’ and VI. Issuance of an Interim Final Rule (dwb). New § 101.81(c)(2)(ii)(A)(4) to add psyllium seed husk as an and Immediate Effective Date specifies: additional source of soluble dietary fiber We are issuing this rule as an interim Oatrim. The soluble fraction of alpha- amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or whole oat eligible for the claim (62 FR 28234, May final rule, effective immediately, with flour, also known as oatrim. Oatrim is 22, 1997) the wording of an opportunity for public comment. produced from either oat bran as defined in § 101.81(c)(2)(iii)(A) was Section 403(r)(7) of the act authorizes us paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this section, or unintentionally changed to the present to make proposed regulations issued whole oat flour as defined in paragraph form that requires ‘‘* * * 0.75 gram (g) under section 403(r) of the act effective

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61781

upon publication pending consideration 12866 classifies a rule as significant if that would minimize the economic of public comment and publication of a it meets any one of a number of impact of the rule on small entities. final regulation, if the agency specified conditions, including: Having As previously explained, this interim determines that such action is an annual effect on the economy of $100 final rule will not generate any necessary. This authority enables us to million or more, or adversely affecting compliance costs for any small entities, act promptly on petitions that provide in a material way a sector of the because it does not require small information that is necessary to: (1) economy, competition, or jobs. A entities to undertake any new activity. Enable consumers to develop and regulation also is considered a No small business will choose to use the maintain healthy dietary practices, (2) significant regulatory action if it raises soluble fiber from oatrim and CHD enable consumers to be informed novel legal or policy issues. We have claim allowed by this rule unless it promptly and effectively of important determined that this interim final rule is believes that doing so will increase its new knowledge regarding nutritional not a significant regulatory action as profits. Accordingly, we certify that this and health benefits of food, or (3) ensure defined by Executive Order 12866. interim final rule will not have a that scientifically sound nutritional and This interim final rule will not significant economic impact on a health information is provided to generate any compliance costs relative substantial number of small entities. consumers as soon as possible. Interim to the status quo, because it does not Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, no final regulations made effective upon require anyone to undertake any new further analysis is required. activity. No firm will choose to use the publication under this authority are C. Unfunded Mandates deemed to be final agency action for claim allowed by this rule unless the purposes of judicial review. The firm believes that doing so will increase Title II of the Unfunded Mandates legislative history indicates that such its profits. Because it specifies the Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) regulations should be issued as interim manner in which a health claim can be requires cost-benefit and other analyses final rules (H. Conf. Rept. No. 105–399, made in product labeling, this rule before any rulemaking if the rule would at 98 (1997)). imposes restrictions that may lead to include a ‘‘Federal Mandate that may The petitioners have submitted social costs compared with alternative result in the expenditure by State, local, requests for the agency to consider requirements for making the claim. The and tribal governments, in the aggregate, making any proposed regulation on the costs of making the claim under the or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 petitioned health claim effective upon specified requirements, however, would or more (adjusted annually for inflation) publication of an interim final rule (Ref. not differ significantly from the costs in any 1 year.’’ We have determined that 1). We acknowledge that all three of the under plausible alternative this interim final rule does not eligible criteria in section 403(r)(7)(A) of requirements. constitute a significant regulatory action the act have been met in the petition This interim final rule will generate under the Unfunded Mandates Reform submitted by Quaker Oats and Rhodia, social benefits because it provides for Act. new information in the market regarding Inc. The health claim will provide VIII. Environmental Impact consumers with important health the relationship between soluble fiber information on the package label and the risk of CHD. We have already The agency has determined under 21 regarding the role of oatrim products in authorized a health claim on beta- CFR 25.32(p) that this action is of a type lowering cholesterol and reducing the glucan soluble fiber from certain other that does not individually or risk of heart disease. The health claim whole oat sources and psyllium seed cumulatively have a significant effect on husk as sources of soluble fiber and the also will provide consumers with the human environment. Therefore, risk of CHD. Amending the existing scientifically sound information on the neither an environmental assessment health claim to include oatrim as an nutritional and health benefits of foods nor an environmental impact statement eligible source of beta-glucan soluble containing oatrim and will enable is required. fiber will allow firms to inform consumers to develop and maintain consumers of the benefits of soluble IX. Paperwork Reduction Act healthy dietary practices that include fiber from oatrim. The provisions of this FDA concludes that the labeling the incorporation of foods containing information in this format will signal to provisions of this interim final rule are hydrolyzed oat products into their diets. consumers that we have found the claim not subject to review by the Office of Therefore, we are granting petitioners’ to be truthful, not misleading, and Management and Budget because they requests for issuance of an interim final scientifically valid. Because it specifies do not constitute a ‘‘collection of rule for this health claim. the conditions under which a health information’’ under the Paperwork VII. Analysis of Impacts claim can be made, this rule may lead Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– to benefits that are greater or smaller 3520). Rather, the food labeling health A. Regulatory Impact Analysis than under alternative requirements for claim on the association between oatrim We have examined the economic making the claim. The benefits of and reduced risk of CHD is a ‘‘public implications of this interim final rule as allowing the relevant claim, however, disclosure of information originally required by Executive Order 12866 and would not differ significantly from the supplied by the Federal government to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. benefits under plausible alternative the recipient for the purpose of 601–612), and the Unfunded Mandates requirements. disclosure to the public’’ (5 CFR Reform Act of 1995. Executive Order 1320.3(c)(2)). 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and benefits of available regulatory We have examined the economic X. Federalism alternatives and, when regulation is implications of this interim final rule as We have analyzed this interim final necessary, to select regulatory required by the Regulatory Flexibility rule in accordance with the principles approaches that maximize net benefits Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612). If a rule has a set forth in Executive Order 13132. We (including potential economic, significant economic impact on a have determined that the rule does not environmental, public health and safety, substantial number of small entities, the contain policies that have substantial and other advantages; distributive Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the direct effects on the States, on the impacts; and equity). Executive Order agency to analyze regulatory options relationship between the National

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61782 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Government and the States, or on the 7. Braaten, J. T., P. J. Wood, F. W. Scott, Fibers,’’ Federation of American Societies for distribution of power and responsibility M. S. Wolynetz, M. K. Lowe, P. Bradley- Experimental Biology Journal, 15: A290, among the various levels of government. White, and M. W. Collins, ‘‘Oat Beta-Glucan 2001. Accordingly, we have concluded that Reduces Blood Cholesterol Concentration in 21. Gallaher, D. D., K. J. Wood, C. M. Hypercholesterolemic Subjects,’’ European Gallaher, L. F. Marquart, and A. M. Engstrom, the interim final rule does not contain Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 48:465–474, ‘‘Intestinal Contents Supernatant Viscosity of policies that have federalism 1994. Rats Fed Oat-Based Muffins and Cereal implications as defined in the Executive 8. Beer, M. U., E. Arrigoni, and R. Amado, Products,’’ Cereal Chemistry, 76:21–24, 1999. order and consequently, a federalism ‘‘Effects of Oat Gum on Blood Cholesterol 22. Gallaher, D. D., ‘‘Intestinal Contents summary impact statement is not Levels in Healthy Young Men,’’ European Supernatant Viscosity of Rats Meal-Fed required. Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 49:517–522, Oatrim and Its Cholesterol Lowering Effect in 1995. Rats,’’ (Sup 1, Docket No. 01Q–0313) 1999. XI. Comments 9. Pick, M. E., Z. J. Hawrysh, M. I. Gee, E. 23. Wood, P. J., M. V. Beer, and G. Butler, Toth, M. L. Garg, and R. T. Hardin, ‘‘Oat Bran ‘‘Evaluation of the Role of Concentration and Interested persons may submit to the Concentrate Bread Products Improve Long- Molecular Weight of Oat Beta-Glucan in Dockets Management Branch (see Term Control of Diabetes: A Pilot Study,’’ Determining Effect of Viscosity on Plasma ADDRESSES) written or electronic Journal of the American Dietetic Association, Glucose and Insulin Following an Oral comments regarding this interim final 96:1254–1261, 1996. Glucose Load,’’ British Journal of Nutrition, rule by [see DATES]. Two copies of any 10. Behall, K. M., D. J. Scholfield, and J. 84:19–23, 2000. written comments are to be submitted, Hallfrisch, ‘‘Effect of Beta-Glucan Level in List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 101 except that individuals may submit one Oat Fiber Extracts on Blood Lipids in Men copy. Submit one electronic copy. and Women,’’ Journal of the American Food labeling, Nutrition, Reporting Comments are to be identified with the College of Nutrition, 16:46–51, 1997. and recordkeeping requirements. 11. Chen, W.-J. L, J. A. Anderson, and M. Therefore, under the Federal Food, docket number found in brackets in the R. Gould, ‘‘Effects of Oat Bran, Oat Gum and heading of this document. Received Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under Pectin on Lipid Metabolism of Cholesterol- authority delegated to the Commissioner comments may be seen in the Dockets Fed Rats,’’ Nutrition Reports International, Management Branch office between 9 24:1093–1098, 1981. of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 101 is a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 12. Welch, R. W., D. M. Peterson, and B. amended as follows: Friday. Schrmaka, ‘‘Hypocholesterolemic and Gastrointestinal Effects of Oat Bran Fractions PART 101—FOOD LABELING XII. References in Chick,’’ Nutrition Reports International, 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR The following references have been 38:551–561, 1988. part 101 continues to read as follows: 13. Ranhotta, G. S., J. A. Gelroth, K. placed on display in the Dockets Astroth, and C. S. Rao, ‘‘Relative Lipidemic, Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1453, 1454, 1455; 21 Management Branch (see ADDRESSES) Responses in Rats Fed Oat Bran or Oat Bran U.S.C. 321, 331, 342, 343, 348, 371; 42 U.S.C. and may be seen by interested persons Concentrate,’’ Cereal Chemistry, 67:509–511, 243, 264, 271. between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 1990. 2. Section 101.81 is amended by through Friday. 14. Oda, T., S. Aoe, S. H. Sanda, and Y. adding paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)(4), by 1. The Quaker Oats Co. and Rhodia, Inc., Ayano, ‘‘Effects of Soluble Fiber Preparations revising paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(1), by ‘‘Oatrim (BetaTrimTM) Health Petition,’’ Isolated from Oat, Barley, and Wheat on redesignating paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(2) HCN1, vol. 1, Docket No. 01Q–0313, April Liver Cholesterol Accumulation in as paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(3), and by 12, 2001. Cholesterol-Fed Rats,’’ Journal of Nutritional 2. Letter from Lynn Larsen, Center for Food Science and Vitaminology,’’ 39:73–79, 1993. adding new paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A)(2) to Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, to 15. Oda, T., S. Aoe, S. Imanishi, Y. read as follows: Priscilla Samuel and Robert Murray, The Kanazawa, H. Sandra, and Y. Ayano, ‘‘Effects § 101.81 Health claims: Soluble fiber from Quakers Oats Co., Let 1, Docket No. 01Q– of Dietary Oat, Barley, and Guar Gums on certain foods and risk of coronary heart 0313 and James T. Elfstrum, Rhodia, Inc., Let Serum and Lipid Concentrations in Diet- disease (CHD). 2, Docket No. 01Q–0313, July 20, 2001. Induced Hyper-triglyceridemic Rats,’’ Journal 3. Inglett, G.E., and R. K. Newman, ‘‘Oat of Nutritional Science and Vitaminology,’’ * * * * * Beta-Glucan-Amylodextrins: Preliminary 40:213–217, 1994. (c) * * * Preparations and Biological Properties,’’ 16. Inglett, G. E., K. Warner, and R. K. (2) * * * Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 45:53–61, Newman, ‘‘Sensory and Nutritional (ii) * * * 1994. Evaluations of Oatrim,’’ Cereal Foods World, (A) * * * 4. Cooper, R., J. Cutler, P. Desvigne- 39:775–759, 1994. (4) Oatrim. The soluble fraction of Nickens, S. P. Fortmann, L. Friedman, R. 17. Malkki, Y., K. Pelkon, O. Myllymaki, R. alpha-amylase hydrolyzed oat bran or Havlik, G. Hogelin, J. Marler, P. McGovern, Torronen, O. Hanninen, and K. Syrjanen, whole oat flour, also known as oatrim. G. Morosco, L. Mosca, T. Pearson, Jeremiah ‘‘Effects of Oat Bran Concentrate on Rat Oatrim is produced from either oat bran Stamler, D. Stryer, and T. Thom, ‘‘Trends and Serum Lipids and Liver Fat Infiltration,’’ as defined in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of Disparities in Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, this section or whole oat flour as and Other Cardiovascular Diseases in the 49:S321–S324, 1995. defined in paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)(3) of United States. Findings of the National 18. Yokoyama W. H., B. E. Knuckles, A. this section by solubilization of the Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Stafford, and G. Inglett, ‘‘Raw and Processed Prevention,’’ Circulation, 102:3137–3147, Oat Ingredients Lower Plasma Cholesterol in starch in the starting material with an 2000. the Hamster,’’ Journal of Food Science, alpha-amylase hydrolysis process, and 5. Memorandum to the record concerning 63:713–715, 1998. then removal by centrifugation of the oatrim beta-glucan health claim petition, 19. Freiburger, L. M., and D. D. Gallaher, insoluble components consisting of a prepared by Michael A. Adams, FDA, June ‘‘Association Between Intestinal Contents high portion of protein, lipid, insoluble 28, 2002. Viscosity and Cholesterol Lowering in Rats dietary fiber, and the majority of the 6. Torronen, R., L. Kansanen, M. Uusitupa, Fed Fermentable and non-Fermentable flavor and color components of the O. Hanninen, O. Myllymaki, H. Harkonen, Dietary Fibers,’’Federation of American starting material. Oatrim shall have a and Y. Malkki, ‘‘Effects of an Oat Bran Societies for Experimental Biology Journal, beta-glucan soluble fiber content up to Concentrate on Serum Lipids in Free-Living 14: A291, 2000. Men with Mild to Moderate 20. Freiburger, L. M., and D. D. Gallaher, 10 percent (dwb) and not less than that Hypercholesterolemia,’’ European Journal of ‘‘Mechanism of Cholesterol Lowering in Rats of the starting material (dwb). Clinical Nutrition, 46:621–627, 1992. Fermentable and non-Fermentable Dietary * * * * *

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61783

(iii) * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice received no comments in response to (A) * * * published in the Federal Register of that notice. (1) One or more of the whole oat foods February 11, 2002 (67 FR 6265), FDA The agency has carefully considered from paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(A)(1), announced that a food additive petition the potential environmental effects of (FAP 2A4731) had been filed by Ecolab (c)(2)(ii)(A)(2), and (c)(2)(ii)(A)(3) of this this action. FDA has concluded that the section, and the whole oat foods shall Inc., Ecolab Center, 370 N. Wabasha St., action will not have a significant impact contain at least 0.75 gram (g) of soluble St. Paul, MN 55102, proposing to amend on the human environment, and that an fiber per reference amount customarily the food additive regulations in Part 173 consumed of the food product; or Secondary Direct Food Additives environmental impact statement is not (2) The food containing the oatrim Permitted in Food for Human required. The agency’s finding of no from paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)(4) of this Consumption (21 CFR part 173) to significant impact and the evidence section shall contain at least 0.75 g of provide for the safe use of a mixture of supporting that finding, contained in an beta-glucan soluble fiber per reference peroxyacetic acid, octanoic acid, acetic environmental assessment, may be seen amount customarily consumed of the acid, hydrogen peroxide, in the Dockets Management Branch (see food product; or peroxyoctanoic acid, and 1- ADDRESSES) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., * * * * * hydroxyethylidene-1,1-diphosphonic Monday through Friday. acid as an antimicrobial agent on meat Dated: September 27, 2002. This final rule contains no collection parts, trim, and organs. of information. Therefore, clearance by Margaret M. Dotzel, The agency has previously approved the Office of Management and Budget Associate Commissioner for Policy. the use of the subject mixture on red under the Paperwork Reduction Act of [FR Doc. 02–25067 Filed 9–27–02; 4:39 pm] meat carcasses (§ 173.370(b)(1)) in 1995 is not required. BILLING CODE 4160–01–S response to an earlier petition submitted by Ecolab, Inc. In the evaluation that led Any person who will be adversely to that regulation, the agency considered affected by this regulation may at any DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ‘‘red meat’’ to include the species cattle, time file with the Dockets Management HUMAN SERVICES swine, sheep, goats, and equine. The Branch (see ADDRESSES) written or United States Department of electronic objections. Each objection Food and Drug Administration Agriculture’s Food Safety and shall be separately numbered, and each Inspection Service (FSIS) uses the term numbered objection shall specify with 21 CFR Part 173 ‘‘meat’’ to refer to these species (9 CFR particularity the provisions of the [Docket No. 02F–0042] 301.2). Thus, FDA is removing the term regulation to which the objection is ‘‘red’’ as a descriptor for ‘‘meat made and the grounds for the objection. Secondary Direct Food Additives carcasses’’ in § 173.370(b)(1) to make its Each numbered objection on which a terminology consistent with FSIS. Permitted in Food for Human hearing is requested shall specifically so Consumption FDA has evaluated data in the petition and other relevant material. state. Failure to request a hearing for AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Based on this information, the agency any particular objection shall constitute HHS. concludes that the proposed use of the a waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered objection for ACTION: Final rule. additive is safe and the additive will achieve its intended technical effect as which a hearing is requested shall SUMMARY: The Food and Drug an antimicrobial agent on meat include a detailed description and Administration (FDA) is amending the carcasses, parts, trim, and organs. analysis of the specific factual food additive regulations to provide for Therefore, FDA is approving the use information intended to be presented in the safe use of a mixture of peroxyacetic of a mixture of peroxyacetic acid, support of the objection in the event acid, octanoic acid, acetic acid, octanoic acid, acetic acid, hydrogen that a hearing is held. Failure to include hydrogen peroxide, peroxyoctanoic peroxide, peroxyoctanoic acid, and 1- such a description and analysis for any acid, and 1-hydroxyethylidene-1,1- hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-diphosphonic particular objection shall constitute a diphosphonic acid as an antimicrobial acid as an antimicrobial agent on meat waiver of the right to a hearing on the agent on meat carcasses, parts, trim, and carcasses, parts, trim, and organs. objection. Three copies of all documents organs. This action is in response to a Accordingly, § 173.370 is amended as are to be submitted and are to be petition filed by Ecolab, Inc. set forth below. identified with the docket number In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR DATES: This rule is effective October 2, found in brackets in the heading of this 171.1(h)), the petition and the 2002. Submit written or electronic document. Any objections received in documents that FDA considered and objections and requests for a hearing by response to the regulation may be seen November 1, 2002. relied upon in reaching its decision to approve the petition are available for in the Dockets Management Branch ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to inspection at the Center for Food Safety between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday the Dockets Management Branch (HFA– and Applied Nutrition by appointment through Friday. 305), Food and Drug Administration, with the contact person (see FOR 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). As MD 20852. Submit electronic objections provided in § 171.1(h), the agency will Food additives. to http://www.fda.gov/dockets/ delete from the documents any ecomments. Therefore, under the Federal Food, materials that are not available for Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: public disclosure before making the Andrew D. Laumbach, Center for Food documents available for inspection. authority delegated to the Commissioner Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– In the notice of filing, FDA gave of Food and Drugs and redelegated to 265), Food and Drug Administration, interested parties an opportunity to the Director, Center for Food Safety and 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, submit comments on the petitioner’s Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is MD 20740, 202–418–3071. environmental assessment. FDA amended as follows:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61784 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

PART 173—SECONDARY DIRECT EFFECTIVE DATE: This action was addressing these requirements. 66 FR FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN effective as of September 18, 2002. 56481. FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: On June 18 and August 6, 2002, Doris Lo, U. S. Environmental California submitted plan revisions 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR Protection Agency, Region 9, Air addressing several of the severe area part 173 continues to read as follows: Division (AIR–2), 75 Hawthorne Street, requirements for the San Joaquin Valley Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348. San Francisco, CA 94105–3901, (revised title V operating permit and 2. Section 173.370 is amended by Telephone: (415) 972–3959; new source review programs to address revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as [email protected]. the new lower 25 ton per year major follows: source cutoff for volatile organic SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: compounds (VOCs) and oxides of § 173.370 Peroxyacids. I. Background nitrogen (NOX) and the offset ratio of * * * * * 1.3:1; rule requiring fees for major (b)(1) The additive is used as an The San Joaquin Valley Ozone sources should the area fail to attain by antimicrobial agent on meat carcasses, Nonattainment Area includes the 2005; and RACT rules for most sources parts, trim, and organs in accordance following counties in California’s subject to the lower major source with current industry practice where the central valley: San Joaquin, part of applicability threshold). Furthermore, 1 maximum concentration of peroxyacids Kern, Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, on September 6, 2002, California is 220 parts per million (ppm) as Stanislaus and Tulare. submitted San Joaquin Valley Air peroxyacetic acid, and the maximum When the CAA was amended in 1990, Pollution Control District commitments concentration of hydrogen peroxide is each area of the Country that was to adopt new and revised control 75 ppm. designated nonattainment for the 1-hour measures. * * * * * ozone standard, including the San Joaquin Valley, was classified by II. Final Action Dated: September 18, 2002. operation of law as ‘‘marginal,’’ L. Robert Lake, A. Finding of Failure To Submit ‘‘moderate,’’ ‘‘serious,’’ ‘‘severe’’ or Required SIP Revisions Director, Office of Regulations and Policy, ‘‘extreme’’ depending on the severity of Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. the area’s air quality problem. CAA While California’s submittals address [FR Doc. 02–25078 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] sections 107(d)(1)(C) and 181(a). Each of several of the severe area requirements BILLING CODE 4160–01–S these CAA classifications has different for the San Joaquin Valley and help requirements, with the most stringent ensure progress towards clean air, there requirements for ‘‘extreme’’ areas. Based are still requirements which have not ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION on its air quality during the 1987–1989 been addressed. Specifically, the State AGENCY period, the San Joaquin Valley has not submitted a demonstration of nonattainment area was initially attainment of the ozone NAAQS by no 40 CFR Part 52 classified as serious with an attainment later than 2005 (sections 181(a) and 182(c)(2)(A)), a demonstration (known [CA–084–FON; FRL–7387–9] date of no later than November 15, 1999. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991) as reasonable further progress or rate of Finding of Failure To Submit State and CAA section 181(a)(1). progress) of creditable emission Implementation Plan Revisions for On June 19, 2000, EPA proposed to reductions of ozone precursors of at Ozone (1-Hour Standard), California— find that the San Joaquin Valley had least 3% per year until the attainment San Joaquin Valley failed to attain the 1-hour ozone year (section 182(c)(2)(B)), a RACT rule national ambient air quality standards for lime kilns addressing the 25 ton per AGENCY: Environmental Protection (NAAQS) by the serious area attainment year major source cutoff (section Agency (EPA). date of November 15, 1999. 65 FR 182(b)(2)(C)), an inventory (section ACTION: Final rule. 37926. A final finding of failure to attain 172(c)(3)) and contingency measures was published on October 23, 2001 (66 (section 172(c)(9)). Thus, EPA is today SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to FR 56476) and the Valley was thus making a finding of failure to submit SIP find that California failed to submit state reclassified by operation of law as a revisions addressing these CAA implementation plan (SIP) revisions severe ozone nonattainment area required elements. required under the Clean Air Act (CAA (effective December 10, 2001). Along If California does not submit the or Act) for the severe San Joaquin Valley with the severe classification, the Valley required plan revisions within 18 Ozone Nonattainment Area (the San became subject to new planning months of the effective date of today’s Joaquin Valley or the Valley). The requirements under section 182(d) of rulemaking, pursuant to CAA section required revisions are an attainment the CAA. Under section 182(d), severe 179(a) and 40 CFR 52.31, the offset demonstration, a reasonable further area plans must meet the requirements sanction identified in CAA section progress demonstration, a reasonably for serious area plans in addition to 179(b) will be applied in the affected available control technology (RACT) those for severe areas. Moreover, the area. If the State has still not made a rule for lime kilns, an inventory and severe area plan revisions for the area complete submittal 6 months after the contingency measures. California was must also meet the more general offset sanction is imposed, then the required to submit these revisions by nonattainment provisions of section highway funding sanction will apply in May 31, 2002. 172(c). In its final reclassification the affected area, in accordance with 40 This action triggers the 18-month 2 action, EPA set May 31, 2002 as the due CFR 52.31. The 18-month clock will clock for mandatory application of date for submittal of plan revisions sanctions and 2-year clock for a Federal 2 In a 1994 rulemaking, EPA established the implementation plan (FIP) under the Agency’s selection of the sequence of these two 1 See 66 FR 56476 (November 8, 2001)(boundary sanctions: The offset sanction under section Act. This action is consistent with the change for the San Joaquin Valley establishing the 179(b)(2) shall apply at 18 months, followed 6 CAA mechanism for assuring SIP eastern portion of Kern County as its own months later by the highway sanction under section submissions. nonattainment area). 179(b)(1) of the Act. EPA does not choose to deviate

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61785

stop and the sanctions will not take substantive review of submitted SIPs. implications, that imposes substantial effect if, within 18 months after the date See 58 FR 51270, 51272, note 17 direct compliance costs, and that is not of the finding, EPA finds that the State (October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 required by statute, unless the Federal has made a complete submittal (August 4, 1994). government provides the funds addressing these severe area ozone necessary to pay the direct compliance III. Administrative Requirements requirements for the San Joaquin Valley. costs incurred by State and local In addition, CAA section 110(c)(1) A. Executive Order 12866 governments, or EPA consults with provides that EPA must promulgate a The Office of Management and Budget State and local officials early in the federal implementation plan (FIP) no has exempted this regulatory action process of developing the proposed later than 2 years after a finding under from Executive Order 12866, entitled regulation. EPA also may not issue a section 179(a) unless EPA takes final ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’ regulation that has federalism action to approve the submittal within implications and that preempts State 2 years of EPA’s finding. B. Executive Order 13211 law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the B. Effective Date Under the This rule is not subject to Executive process of developing the proposed Administrative Procedures Act Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect regulation. This final action is effective on Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 This rule will not have substantial September 18, 2002. Under the FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is direct effects on the States, on the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 not a significant regulatory action under relationship between the national U.S.C. 553(d)(3), an agency rulemaking Executive Order 12866. government and the States, or on the may take effect before 30 days after the distribution of power and date of publication in the Federal C. Executive Order 13045 responsibilities among the various Register if an agency has good cause to Executive Order 13045, entitled levels of government, as specified in mandate an earlier effective date. Protection of Children from Executive Order 13132, because it does Today’s action concerns SIP revisions Environmental Health Risks and Safety not alter the relationship or the that are already overdue and the State Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), distribution of power and has been aware of applicable provisions applies to any rule that: (1) Is responsibilities established in the Clean of the CAA relating to overdue SIPs. In determined to be ‘‘economically Air Act. Thus, the requirements of addition, today’s action simply starts a significant’’ as defined under Executive section 6 of the Executive Order do not ‘‘clock’’ that will not result in sanctions Order 12866, and (2) concerns an apply to this rule. for 18 months, and that the State may environmental health or safety risk that E. Executive Order 13175 ‘‘turn off’’ through the submission of a EPA has reason to believe may have a complete SIP submittal. These reasons disproportionate effect on children. If Executive Order 13175, entitled support an effective date prior to 30 the regulatory action meets both criteria, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with days after the date of publication. the Agency must evaluate the Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA C. Notice-and-Comment Under the environmental health or safety effects of to develop an accountable process to Administrative Procedures Act the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by This final agency action is not subject preferable to other potentially effective tribal officials in the development of to the notice-and-comment and reasonably feasible alternatives regulatory policies that have tribal requirements of the APA, 5 U.S.C. considered by the Agency. This rule is implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal 533(b). EPA believes that because of the not subject to Executive Order 13045 implications’’ is defined in the limited time provided to make findings because it does not involve decisions Executive Order to include regulations of failure to submit regarding SIP intended to mitigate environmental that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on submissions, Congress did not intend health or safety risks. one or more Indian tribes, on the such findings to be subject to notice- relationship between the Federal D. Executive Order 13132 and-comment rulemaking. However, to government and the Indian tribes, or on the extent such findings are subject to Executive Order 13132, entitled the distribution of power and notice-and-comment rulemaking, EPA Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, responsibilities between the Federal invokes the good cause exception 1999) revokes and replaces Executive government and Indian tribes.’’ pursuant to the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, This final rule does not have tribal Notice and comment are unnecessary Enhancing the Intergovernmental implications. It will not have substantial because no EPA judgment is involved in Partnership. Executive Order 13132 direct effects on tribal governments, on making a nonsubstantive finding of requires EPA to develop an accountable the relationship between the Federal failure to submit SIPs required by the process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and government and Indian tribes, or on the CAA. Furthermore, providing notice timely input by State and local officials distribution of power and and comment would be impracticable in the development of regulatory responsibilities between the Federal because of the limited time provided policies that have federalism government and Indian tribes, as under the statute for making such implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have specified in Executive Order 13175. determinations. Finally, notice and federalism implications’’ is defined in Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not comment would be contrary to the the Executive Order to include apply to this rule. public interest because it would divert regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct Agency resources from the critical effects on the States, on the relationship F. Regulatory Flexibility Act between the national government and The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) from this presumptive sequence in this instance. the States, or on the distribution of generally requires an agency to conduct For more details on the timing and implementation power and responsibilities among the a regulatory flexibility analysis of any of the sanctions, see 59 FR 39832 (August 4, 1994), promulgating 40 CFR 52.31, ‘‘Selection of sequence various levels of government.’’ Under rule subject to notice and comment of mandatory sanctions for findings made pursuant Executive Order 13132, EPA may not rulemaking requirements unless the to section 179 of the Clean Air Act.’’ issue a regulation that has federalism agency certifies that the rule will not

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61786 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

have a significant economic impact on I. Submission to Congress and the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION a substantial number of small entities. Comptroller General AGENCY Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and The Congressional Review Act, 5 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 small governmental jurisdictions. U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small This final rule will not have a Business Regulatory Enforcement [FRL–7387–5] significant impact on a substantial Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Approval and Promulgation of number of small entities because that before a rule may take effect, the Implementation Plans; Louisiana; findings of failure to submit required agency promulgating the rule must Baton Rouge Nonattainment Area; SIP revisions do not by themselves submit a rule report, which includes a Ozone; 1–Hour Ozone Attainment create any new requirements. Therefore, copy of the rule, to each House of the Demonstration; Attainment Date I certify that this action will not have a Congress and to the Comptroller General Extension, and Withdrawal of significant economic impact on a of the United States. EPA will submit a Nonattainment Determination and substantial number of small entities. report containing this rule and other Reclassification G. Unfunded Mandates required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and AGENCY: Environmental Protection Under section 202 of the Unfunded Agency (EPA). Mandates Reform Act of 1995 the Comptroller General of the United ACTION: Final rule. (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Clean Air Act prepare a budgetary impact statement to cannot take effect until 60 days after it (Act), EPA is approving the Louisiana 1- accompany any proposed or final rule is published in the Federal Register. hour ozone attainment demonstration that includes a Federal mandate that This rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule as State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the may result in estimated costs to State, defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Baton Rouge serious ozone local, or tribal governments in the J. Petitions for Judicial Review nonattainment area. In conjunction with aggregate; or to private sector, of $100 its approval of the attainment million or more. Under section 205, Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean demonstration, EPA is: approving EPA must select the most cost-effective Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Louisiana’s transport demonstration and and least burdensome alternative that this action must be filed in the United extending the ozone attainment date for achieves the objectives of the rule and States Court of Appeals for the the Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment is consistent with statutory appropriate circuit by December 2, area to November 15, 2005, while requirements. Section 203 requires EPA 2002. Filing a petition for retaining the area’s current classification to establish a plan for informing and reconsideration by the Administrator of as a serious ozone nonattainment area; advising any small governments that withdrawing EPA’s June 24, 2002, may be significantly or uniquely this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial rulemaking determining nonattainment impacted by the rule. and reclassification of the Baton Rouge EPA has determined that today’s review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial ozone nonattainment area; finding that action does not include a Federal the Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment review may be filed, and shall not mandate that may result in estimated area meets the reasonably available postpone the effectiveness of such rule costs of $100 million or more to either control measures (RACM) requirements or action. This action may not be State, local, or tribal governments in the of the Act; approving the State’s aggregate, or to the private sector. The challenged later in proceedings to enforceable commitment to perform a CAA provision discussed in this notice enforce its requirements. (See section mid-course review and submit a SIP requires states to submit SIPs. This 307(b)(2).) revision to EPA by May 1, 2004; notice merely provides a finding that List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 approving the motor vehicle emissions California has not met that requirement. budget (MVEB) and an enforceable Accordingly, no additional costs to Environmental protection, Air commitment to submit revised budgets State, local, or tribal governments, or to pollution control, Intergovernmental using MOBILE6; and approving an the private sector, result from this relations, Particular matter, Reporting enforceable transportation control action. and recordkeeping requirements. measure (TCM). This action also approves SIP H. National Technology Transfer and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Advancement Act submittals relating to corrections to the Dated: September 18, 2002. Section 12 of the National Technology 1990 Base Year Emissions Inventory, the Transfer and Advancement Act Wayne Nastri, 9% Rate-of-Progress Plan (ROPP), and (NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal Regional Administrator, Region IX. the 15% ROPP. agencies to evaluate existing technical [FR Doc. 02–24912 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] DATES: This rule is effective October 2, standards when developing a new BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 2002. The amendment to § 81.319 which regulation. To comply with NTTAA, published on June 24, 2002 (67 FR EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 42688) and were revised on August 20, consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 2002 (67 FR 53882) are withdrawn. and applicable when developing ADDRESSES: Copies of documents programs and policies unless doing so relevant to this action are available for would be inconsistent with applicable public inspection during normal law or otherwise impractical. EPA business hours at the following believes that VCS are inapplicable to addresses: U.S. Environmental today’s action because it does not Protection Agency, Region 6, Air require the public to perform activities Planning Section, 1445 Ross Avenue, conducive to the use of VCS. Dallas, Texas 75202–2733; Louisiana

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61787

Department of Environmental Quality, determination and reclassification iii. Revisions to the Post-1996 ROPP. 7920 Bluebonnet Boulevard, Baton (which is being withdrawn as a result of The Post-1996 ROPP, also referred to as Rouge, Louisiana 70884. Please contact this final rule) is imminent. In addition, the 9% ROPP, was approved on July 2, the appropriate office at least 24 hours EPA finds good cause for making this 1999 (64 FR 35930). in advance. action effective immediately because, in iv. Revisions to the Inspection and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. part, it relieves a restriction that would Maintenance (I/M) program. Maria L. Martinez, Air Planning Section otherwise go into effect. v. Attainment MVEBs for 2005 for (6PD–L), EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Information Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, VOCs and Nitrogen Oxides (NOX). telephone (214) 665–2230. This section provides additional vi. An enforceable commitment to information by addressing the following SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submit revised MVEBs within 24 Throughout this document whenever questions: months after the release of MOBILE6. ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean I. What Louisiana SIP revisions are the topic vii. An enforceable commitment for EPA. of this action? mid-course review. II. What previous actions have been taken Background regarding the Baton Rouge area attainment viii. An enforceable transportation A notice of proposed rulemaking was demonstration and attainment date? control measure referred to as the III. What MVEBs are we approving? published on this action on August 2, Advanced Transportation Management IV. What revisions concerning the 1990 Base System. 2002 (67 FR 50391). EPA has also Year Emissions Inventory, the 9% ROPP, published a notice regarding the Baton and the 15% ROPP are we approving? ix. An emissions control strategy that Rouge area’s potential eligibility for an V. Implementation of RACM. incorporates federal, state, and local attainment date extension on May 9, VI. What are the requirements for full control measures. 2001 (66 FR 23646). EPA received approval of the attainment demonstration? x. Revisions to Louisiana’s New VII. Did Louisiana fulfill these requirements comments on these proposals. EPA has Source Review (NSR) rules. also published a related notice: the for full approval? ‘‘Extension of Attainment Dates for VIII. What are the criteria for an attainment xi. Substitute contingency measures. date extension? Downwind Transport Areas,’’ 64 FR IX. How did Louisiana satisfy the criteria for (b) On February 27, 2002, LDEQ 14441 (March 25, 1999). That notice an attainment date extension? submitted final rules for the emission announced EPA’s interpretation of the X. What action is EPA taking regarding the reductions credit banking program. Act regarding the possibility of Determination of Nonattainment as of (c) On February 27, 2002, LDEQ also extending attainment dates for ozone November 15, 1999, and Reclassification submitted final revisions to the nonattainment areas that had been published on June 24, 2002? XI. What comments were received on the contingency measures proposed in the classified as moderate or serious for the December 31, 2002, SIP submittal. 1-hour ozone standard and which are proposals covered by this final action, and downwind of areas that have interfered on the March 25, 1999, publication of the (d) On May 20, 2002, LDEQ submitted attainment date extension policy, and how with their ability to demonstrate a letter concerning the revisions to the has EPA responded to those? rulemaking dealing with VOC emissions attainment. In that notice EPA also XII. What action is EPA taking regarding the noted that we intended to finalize our State submittals addressed by this final from industrial wastewater. interpretation only when we applied rule? (e) On July 25, 2002, the Governor this policy in the context of individual submitted Louisiana’s final rule for the rulemakings addressing specific I. What Louisiana SIP Revisions Are the Topic of This Action? control of emissions of nitrogen oxides. attainment demonstrations and requests Prior to that, on February 1, 2002, LDEQ for attainment date extensions. We have The Baton Rouge ozone had submitted changes to the proposed received comments on our application nonattainment area encompasses the rule for control of NOX emissions and of this policy to the Baton Rouge area. East Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge, on April 8, 2002, LDEQ had submitted Therefore, in this final rule, EPA Ascension, Iberville, and Livingston a letter requesting parallel processing of Parishes (40 CFR 81.319). The State of responds to adverse comments on these revisions to the State’s NOX regulations. proposed rulemakings and notices. For Louisiana made several submittals to us details on the SIP submittals and EPA’s relating to the ozone attainment EPA has taken separate final actions analysis of the submittals, refer to the demonstration and their request for an on other parts of the Baton Rouge SIP, notices of the proposed rules referenced extension of the attainment date for the including the I/M Program, NOX above in this paragraph, and the Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment area. regulations, NSR, emissions reductions technical support documents for the The submittals listed below relate credit banking, and Contingency August 2, 2002, and May 9, 2001, directly to EPA’s final action described Measures. EPA also approved SIP proposals. in this document: revisions dealing with VOC emissions EPA is making this final rulemaking (a) On December 31, 2001, LDEQ from industrial wastewater which are effective immediately. Section 553(d) of submitted an ozone attainment published at 67 FR 41840 (June 20, the Administrative Procedure Act demonstration and transport SIP 2002). In this final rulemaking the generally provides that rules may not revision. The SIP revision included: following are considered: The ozone take effect earlier than 30 days after they i. A revision to the 15% ROPP for the attainment demonstration plan and its are published in the Federal Register. control of Volatile Organic Compounds associated MVEBs; the transport SIP However, if an Agency identifies a good (VOC) emissions in the Baton Rouge related materials; the RACM analysis; cause, section 553(d)(3) allows a rule to area. The 15% Rate ROPP was approved the revisions to the 1990 base year take effect earlier, provided that the by EPA on October 22, 1996 (61 FR inventory, the 15% ROPP, and the Post- Agency publishes its reasoning in the 54737). 1996 ROPP, the attainment date final rule. EPA is making this action ii. Revisions to the 1990 base year extension, and a withdrawal of effective immediately because the emissions inventory. The inventory was nonattainment determination and effective date of the nonattainment approved on July 2, 1999 (64 FR 35930). reclassification.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61788 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

II. What Previous Actions Have Been effective date of the determination and Rouge area. These budgets were posted Taken Regarding the Baton Rouge Area reclassification rule. on the EPA website for public comment. Attainment Demonstration and On August 2, 2002 (67 FR 50391), No comments were received by EPA (67 Attainment Date? EPA proposed to approve Louisiana’s 1- FR 46970). EPA is approving these On May 9, 2001 (66 FR 23646), EPA hour ozone attainment demonstration MVEBs because they are consistent with SIP for the Baton Rouge ozone proposed to find that the Baton Rouge the control measures in the SIP, and the nonattainment area. Also, in that notice ozone nonattainment area had not SIP as a whole demonstrates attainment we proposed to approve an extension of attained the 1-hour ozone national of the 1-hour ozone standard. The the ozone attainment date for the Baton ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) rationale for our approval is detailed in Rouge area to November 15, 2005, while by the attainment date for serious the August 2, 2002, proposed action. retaining the area’s classification as a nonattainment areas (November 15, Louisiana has committed to revise its serious ozone nonattainment area if EPA 1999). Also in that notice, EPA issued 2005 MVEBs within two years after the took final action to approve the State’s a notice of the Baton Rouge area’s release of MOBILE6. Louisiana has ozone attainment demonstrations. EPA potential eligibility for an attainment committed to not performing also proposed other related actions in transportation conformity date extension, pursuant to EPA’s, the August 2, 2002, proposal. ‘‘Guidance on Extension of Air Quality determinations during the second year Additionally, EPA has taken separate following the release of MOBILE6 Attainment Dates for Downwind actions on other related revisions to the Transport Areas’ (hereinafter referred to unless and until the State submits an Baton Rouge SIP, including the I/M MVEB which is developed using as the attainment date extension policy) Program (proposed at 67 FR 44410, July (Richard D. Wilson, Acting Assistant MOBILE6 and which we find adequate. 2, 2002), NOX regulations (proposed at All States whose attainment Administrator for Air and Radiation) 67 FR 30638, May 7, 2002, and 67 FR issued on July 16, 1998. In the May 9, demonstrations include the effects of 48095, July 23, 2002), NSR (proposed at the Tier 2/sulfur program have 2001, Federal Register, EPA proposed to 67 FR 48090, July 23, 2002), emissions finalize the reclassification of the Baton committed to revise and resubmit their reductions credit banking (proposed at MVEBs after we release MOBILE6. If a Rouge nonattainment area only after the 67 FR 48083, July 23, 2002), area had an opportunity to qualify for an state fails to meet its commitment to Contingency Measures (proposed at 67 submit revised budgets using MOBILE6, attainment date extension under the FR 35468, May 20, 2002), and SIP EPA could make a finding of failure to attainment date extension policy. revisions dealing with VOC emissions implement the SIP, which would start a Subsequent to our May 9, 2001, from industrial wastewater (67 FR sanctions clock under section 179 of the proposed rulemaking, a relevant court 41840, June 20, 2002). Please see the Act. decision was issued which affected related final actions which published in EPA’s proposed rulemaking for the the Federal Register on September 26, The final approval action we are Baton Rouge area. EPA was in the September 27, and September 30, 2002. taking today will be effective for process of reviewing the Attainment EPA has received comments on conformity purposes only until revised Plan/Transport SIP when the United portions of our May 9, 2001; June 24, MVEBs are submitted and we have States District Court for the Middle 2002; and August 2, 2002, proposed found them adequate. In other words, District of Louisiana entered a Judgment rules. The Tulane Environmental Law the budgets we are approving today will on March 7, 2002, ordering EPA to Clinic and the Louisiana Environmental apply for conformity purposes only determine, by June 5, 2002, whether the Action Network (LEAN) submitted until there are new, adequate budgets Baton Rouge area had attained the adverse comments on portions of the consistent with the State’s commitments applicable ozone standard under the May 9, 2001; June 24, 2002; and August to revise the budgets. The new budgets CAA. LEAN v. Whitman, No. 00–879–A. 2, 2002, proposed rules. Earthjustice will apply for conformity purposes after In compliance with the Court’s Order, submitted adverse comments on we find them adequate. EPA signed on June 5, 2002, and portions of the August 2, 2002, We are limiting the duration of our published in the Federal Register on proposed rule. Louisiana Generating, approval in this manner because we are June 24, 2002, (67 FR 42688) our LLC and Big Cajun I and II (LAGen), only approving the attainment determination that the Baton Rouge area submitted adverse comments on Section demonstration and the budgets based on did not attain the 1-hour ozone standard 4.2.1 of the SIP in response to our the State’s commitment to revise them. by November 15, 1999 in the Federal August 2, 2002, proposed approval. All Therefore, if we confirm that the revised Register (67 FR 42688). By operation of other comments on the proposals budgets are adequate, they will be more law, that determination would result in supported EPA’s proposed actions. In appropriate than the budgets we are the Baton Rouge area being reclassified this final rule, EPA responds to the approving for conformity purposes now. from a serious to a severe nonattainment adverse comments received in response If the revised budgets raise issues area on the effective date of that rule. to the relevant proposals. EPA also about the sufficiency of the attainment EPA concurrently proposed to extend responds to relevant adverse comments demonstration, we will work with the the effective date of our determination on its March 25, 1999, notice of State to address the issues. If the revised from August 23, 2002, to October 4, interpretation regarding the attainment budgets show that motor vehicle 2002 (67 FR 42697, June 24, 2002). On date extension policy (64 FR 14441). emissions are lower than the budgets we August 20, 2002, we published an approve, a reassessment of the action finalizing the modification of the III. What MVEBs Are We Approving? attainment demonstration’s analysis effective date of our June 24, 2002, final On December 31, 2001, Louisiana will be necessary before reallocating the reclassification from August 23, 2002, submitted motor vehicle emissions emission reductions or assigning them until October 4, 2002. budgets for the 2005 attainment year for to the MVEB as a safety margin. In other In the June 24, 2002, proposed the Baton Rouge area in their SIP. The words, the State must assess how its rulemaking, EPA also set forth its intent attainment year MVEBs established by original attainment demonstration is to withdraw the final determination and this plan that we are approving are impacted by using MOBILE6 v reclassification, if EPA granted the State 15.48 tons per day for VOC and 34.26 MOBILE5 before they reallocate any an attainment date extension before the tons per day for NOX for the Baton apparent motor vehicle emission

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61789

reductions resulting from the use of ROPP for the Baton Rouge area on July permit plus 0.6 tons per day of point MOBILE6. 2, 1999 (64 FR 35930). source reductions (163 tons per year or The revisions we are approving today 0.45 tons per day of VOCs from the Dow IV. What Revisions Concerning the consist of revisions to the 1990 Base Chemical permit and 56 tons per year or 1990 Base Year Emissions Inventory, Year Emissions Inventory, the 15% 0.15 tons per day of VOCs from the the 9% ROPP, and the 15% ROPP Are ROPP, and the 9% ROPP, which were BASF Corporation permit). We approving? submitted as part of the December 31, There were also an additional 1.2 tons Under the 1990 Clean Air Act 2001, Attainment Plan/Transport SIP. per day of reductions required for the Amendments (CAAA), States have the Specifically, they were submitted as 9% ROPP identified in the revisions. responsibility to inventory emissions part of the substitute contingency These were taken from the 13.0 tons per contributing to NAAQS nonattainment, measures. The substitute contingency day Trunkline emissions reductions that to track these emissions over time, and measures are the subject of a separate were netted from the post-90 emissions to ensure that control strategies are EPA rulemaking action which published growth. being implemented that reduce in the Federal Register on September For additional detailed discussions on emissions and move areas towards 26, 2002. the above mentioned revisions please attainment. The CAAA require ozone The revisions consisted of emission see our August 2, 2002, rulemaking (67 nonattainment areas designated as reductions resulting from the FR 50396). EPA received adverse moderate, serious, severe, and extreme installation of VOC emission controls at comments concerning these revisions. to submit a plan within three years of the Trunkline Gas Company—Patterson Those comments are addressed 1990 to reduce VOC emissions by 15 Compressor Station (hereinafter referred elsewhere in this notice. percent within six years after 1990. The to as Trunkline or Trunkline facility) in V. Implementation of RACM St. Mary Parish. The Trunkline facility baseline level of emissions, from which Section 172(c)(1) of the Act requires the 15 percent reduction is calculated, is located approximately 40 kilometers from the Baton Rouge ozone attainment demonstration SIPs to is determined by adjusting the base year provide for the implementation of all inventory to exclude biogenic emissions nonattainment area. In 1997, EPA issued a policy allowing 1-hour ozone RACM as expeditiously as practicable. and to exclude certain emission EPA has previously provided guidance reductions not creditable towards the 15 nonattainment areas to take credit in their Post-1996 ROPP 2 for emission interpreting the RACM requirements of percent. The 1990 base year emissions 172(c)(1). (See 57 FR 13498, 13560.) We inventory is the primary inventory from reductions obtained from sources outside the designated nonattainment also discussed the RACM requirements which the periodic inventory, the in our August 2, 2002, Federal Register Reasonable Further Progress projection area, provided the sources are no farther away than 100 km (for VOC sources) or proposal. EPA has reviewed the state’s inventory, and the modeling inventory submitted analyses, the process used to are derived.1 The base year inventory 200 km (for NOX sources) away from the 3 review and select transportation control plays an important role in modeling nonattainment area. The Trunkline Gas Company had not measures, the state’s evaluation of demonstrations for areas classified as potential stationary source control moderate and above. accounted for 13.4 tons per day of VOC emissions. As a result, the VOC measures, and the attainment year States containing ozone emissions from this facility had not emissions inventories for the Baton nonattainment areas classified as been included in the point source Rouge area. While the Act requires marginal to extreme were required emissions inventory for 1990. Emissions nonattainment areas to implement under section 182(a)(1) of the 1990 reported in a corrected 1992 annual available RACM measures, EPA does CAAA to submit a final, comprehensive, emissions inventory submitted to LDEQ not believe that section 172(c)(1) accurate, and current inventory of actual on June 6, 1997, are the best estimate of requires implementation of potential ozone season, weekday emissions from the source’s 1990 base year emissions. RACM measures that either require all sources by November 15, 1992. This These emissions were added back to the intensive and costly implementation inventory is for calendar year 1990 and 1990 base year emissions inventory. The efforts or that produce relatively small is denoted as the base year inventory. It revised 1990 VOC base year inventory emissions reductions that will not includes both anthropogenic and that included these Trunkline emissions accelerate attainment of the ozone biogenic sources of VOC, NO , and X (i.e., 13.4 tons per day) would result in standard. carbon monoxide (CO). a total of 204.6 tons per day revised Analyses conducted by LDEQ Section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Act 1990 base year inventory. concluded that the additional set of requires each State having one or more An additional 2.0 tons per day of evaluated measures are not reasonably ozone nonattainment areas classified as emission reductions required were available for the Baton Rouge area, serious or higher to develop a plan by identified in the 15% ROPP revisions. because: (a) Some would require an November 15, 1994, that provides for The additional 2.0 tons per day were intensive and costly effort for numerous additional actual VOC reductions of at offset by 1.4 tons per day ‘‘surplus’’ 9% small area sources, and (b) the measures least three percent per year, averaged ROPP reduction from the Trunkline would not produce emission reductions over each consecutive three year period, sufficient to advance the attainment beginning six years after enactment of 2 EPA has historically allowed a surplus emission date in the Baton Rouge area. Therefore, the Act, until such time as these areas reduction in ROPP to be credited towards meeting the measures were rejected as possible have attained the NAAQS for ozone. the section 172 and section 182 requirements. RACM. EPA’s rationale is that not allowing excess emission EPA received adverse comments on EPA approved the revisions to the 9% reductions to be used as contingency measures discourages areas from reducing emissions ‘‘as our proposed finding that Louisiana has 1 Further information on these inventories and expeditiously as practicable’’ and is, therefore, satisfied the RACM requirements of the their purpose can be found in the ‘‘Emission inconsistent with section 172 of the CAA. Act. Those comments are addressed Inventory Requirements for Ozone State 3 EPA memorandum, ‘‘Guidance for below. EPA believes that the reductions Implementation Plans,’’ U.S. Environmental Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing from the measures rejected by the State Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning PM10 NAAQS,’’ from Richard D. Wilson, Acting and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, would not accelerate attainment of the Carolina, March 1991. December 29, 1997. ozone NAAQS. Based upon EPA’s

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61790 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

review of the State’s analysis and EPA is approving the State’s attainment IX. How Did Louisiana Satisfy the submission, the explanation provided in demonstration. EPA also finds that the Criteria for an Attainment Date our August 2, 2002, proposed rule (67 appropriate attainment date is Extension? FR 50391) and our interpretation of the November 15, 2005, based on the Louisiana satisfied the criteria for an Act, EPA is approving Louisiana’s attainment demonstration. EPA received attainment date extension as follows: RACM analysis. adverse comments regarding the State’s 1. EPA finds that Louisiana has modeled attainment demonstration. VI. What Are the Requirements for Full demonstrated that it is a downwind area These comments and our responses are Approval of the Attainment affected by transport from the Houston summarized elsewhere in this notice. Demonstration? area and that Houston contributes to the The attainment demonstration SIP VIII. What Are the Criteria for an Baton Rouge area’s ozone must meet applicable criteria as detailed Attainment Date Extension? nonattainment; in the Act. The specific requirements of EPA’s policy regarding an extension 2. As explained elsewhere in this the Act for serious ozone nonattainment of the ozone attainment date for the notice, EPA finds that the State of areas are found in section 182(c). Baton Rouge area was set forth in EPA’s Louisiana has submitted an approvable Section 172 provides the general notice of proposed rulemakings dated attainment demonstration that provides requirements for nonattainment plans. May 9, 2001 (66 FR 23646, 23650– for attainment no later than the date Refer to our August 2, 2002, proposal 23651) and August 2, 2002 (67 FR emissions reductions are expected from (67 FR 50391) for further details of 50391). On July 16, 1998, a guidance the upwind area. Furthermore, all of the requirements for attainment memorandum entitled ‘‘Extension of control measures needed for attainment demonstrations. Attainment Dates for Downwind have been adopted and submitted to Transport Areas’’ was issued by EPA EPA. These measures include all serious VII. Did Louisiana Fulfill These and was published in a notice of area requirements under section 182(c). Requirements for Full Approval? interpretation on March 25, 1999 (64 FR 3. EPA has determined that Louisiana EPA guidance published in 1996 12221). In it, EPA set forth its has adopted local measures required by provides that states may rely on a interpretation of the Act regarding the the Act for the area’s current modeled attainment demonstration extension of attainment dates for ozone classification as a serious nonattainment supplemented with additional weight of nonattainment areas that have been area. See Louisiana’s SIP submittals and evidence (WOE) to demonstrate classified as moderate or serious for the 67 FR 50391 (August 2, 2002) and the attainment (‘‘Guidance on the Use of 1-hour ozone standard, and which are references cited therein for a discussion Modeled Results to Demonstrate downwind of areas that have interfered of the local measures adopted by the Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS,’’ with the moderate and serious State. EPA–454/B–95–007, June 1996). In our nonattainment areas’s attainment of the 4. With respect to implementation of August 2, 2002, Federal Register notice ozone standard by dates prescribed in all adopted measures as expeditiously we listed documents containing many of the Act. EPA stated that it will consider as practicable but no later than the time EPA’s guidelines affecting the content extending the attainment date for an upwind controls are expected, and review of ozone attainment area or a state that: Louisiana has demonstrated to EPA that demonstration submittals. (67 FR 1. Has been identified as a downwind all control measures would be in place 50394.) In that notice, we also described area affected by transport from either an by November 15, 2005. This is two years in detail the modeling requirements for upwind area in the same state with a in advance of the Houston, Texas, an attainment demonstration as well as later attainment date or an upwind area upwind area that is contributing to the the additional analyses that may be in another state that significantly Baton Rouge area’s nonattainment. considered when the deterministic contributes to downwind ozone Since the local measures adopted by approach, as described in EPA nonattainment; Louisiana necessary for attainment will guidance, does not show attainment (67 2. Has submitted an approvable be implemented no later than 2005 and FR 50394–50395). In the same Federal attainment demonstration with any EPA finds that they will be Register document, EPA details the necessary, adopted local measures, and implemented as expeditiously as statistical and modeling data presented with an attainment date that shows it practicable, the State has shown that in the state’s attainment demonstration will attain the 1-hour standard no later this element of the attainment date that support the validity of the ozone than the date that the emission extension policy has been satisfied. modeling results and the adequacy of reductions are expected from upwind EPA therefore concludes, consistent the adopted ozone attainment strategies. areas in the final NOX SIP call and/or with the attainment date extension The State concludes, and EPA concurs, the statutory attainment date for upwind policy, the State has met the criteria for that the modeling system performs at an nonattainment areas, i.e., assuming the an attainment date extension. EPA is acceptable level because it satisfactorily boundary conditions reflecting those thus extending the attainment date for reproduces peak ozone concentrations upwind emission reductions; the Baton Rouge area to November 15, relative to the monitored peak ozone 3. Has adopted all applicable local 2005, to allow the upwind reductions to concentrations. The modeling system measures required under the area’s occur before attainment is required. adequately simulates the observed current ozone classification and any Additional background information on magnitude and spatial and temporal additional emission control measures EPA’s attainment date extension policy patterns of monitored ozone demonstrated to be necessary to achieve can be found in the following Federal concentrations. Furthermore, the attainment, assuming the emission Register notices: modeling results accurately differentiate reductions occur as required in the 64 FR 14441 (March 25, 1999) between days with marginal ozone upwind areas; and 64 FR 12284 (March 18, 1999) levels and days with elevated ozone 4. Has provided that it will implement 64 FR 18864 (April 16, 1999) concentrations. Therefore, based on the all adopted measures as expeditiously 64 FR 27734 (May 21, 1999) modeling and WOE results presented by as practicable, but no later than the date 64 FR 70459 (December 16, 1999) the State which confirm the adequacy of by which the upwind reductions needed 65 FR 20404 (April 17, 2000) the adopted emission control strategy, for attainment will be achieved. 66 FR 585 (January 3, 2001)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61791

66 FR 634 (January 3, 2001) the Determination and Reclassification EPA sets forth below in this section 66 FR 666 (January 3, 2001) until October 4, 2002. On August 20, our responses to adverse comments 66 FR 17647 (April 3, 2001) 2002 (67 FR 53882), EPA finalized the received on these notices which are 66 FR 20122 (April 19, 2001) modification of the effective date of the relevant to this rulemaking. EPA also 66 FR 26913 (May 15, 2001) Determination of Nonattainment as of received comments relating to the 66 FR 33996 (June 26, 2001) November 15, 1999, and Reclassification proposal to determine that the Baton 67 FR 30574 (May 7, 2002) of the Baton Rouge Ozone Rouge area did not attain the ozone EPA received comments regarding the Nonattainment Area, extending it until standard by November 15, 1999. These basis for and application of the October 4, 2002. comments relate primarily to the extension policy in granting the Baton In our August 2, 2002, Federal necessity of making the nonattainment Rouge ozone nonattainment area an Register document (67 FR 50391), EPA determinations, and the appropriate attainment date extension. Those proposed to withdraw the Notice of attainment date if the area were comments and our responses to Determination of Nonattainment and reclassified. In EPA’s June 24, 2002, comments are summarized elsewhere in Reclassification if we approved an final rule, EPA responded to adverse this document. attainment date extension prior to the comments on the proposed X. What Action Is EPA Taking effective date of the Determination of determination that the area did not Regarding the Determination of Nonattainment. As noted in our August attain the standard by November 15, Nonattainment as of November 15, 2, 2002, proposal, EPA believes this is 1999, and finalized the reclassification 1999, and Reclassification Published on appropriate for a number of reasons. to severe nonattainment. (67 FR 42688, June 24, 2002? Since we are today granting an 42693–42695). The effective date of that extension until November 15, 2005, for action was extended to October 4, 2002. On May 10, 2000, the Governor of attainment of the 1-hour ozone Today we are withdrawing our June 24, Louisiana requested an attainment date standard, EPA’s obligation under 2002, final rule. extension for the Baton Rouge area. On section 181(b)(2)(A) of the Act to Finally, some of the comments May 9, 2001, EPA proposed its finding determine attainment is thereby shifted received in Docket A–98–47 on EPA’s that the Baton Rouge area did not attain into the future. As a result, we are notice regarding ‘‘Extension of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the hereby withdrawing the published Attainment Dates for Downwind applicable attainment date (66 FR nonattainment determination and the Transport Areas’’ 64 FR 12221 (March 23646). In that proposed action, we also consequent reclassification, which has 25, 1999), are relevant to this stated that Louisiana was seeking an not yet gone into effect. Therefore, the rulemaking. EPA incorporates its extension of its attainment date Baton Rouge area retains its responses to those comments, set forth pursuant to EPA’s attainment date classification as a serious ozone in 66 FR 586, 66 FR 634, 66 FR 666 extension policy. EPA proposed to take nonattainment area. As stated (January 3, 2001), and 66 FR 26913 (May final action on the determination of previously, comments on our proposal 15, 2001), 66 FR 33996 (June 26, 2001), nonattainment and reclassification of to extend the attainment date are 66 FR 33996 (June 26, 2001), and 67 FR the Baton Rouge area only after the area addressed below. In today’s action, we 30574 (May 7, 2002), insofar as herein had received an opportunity to qualify are withdrawing the Notice of relevant. for an attainment date extension under Nonattainment Determination and The following discussion summarizes the attainment date extension policy. Reclassification, prior to its becoming and responds to all adverse comments: Louisiana submitted an Attainment effective. EPA received adverse Comments Received in Response to the Plan/Transport SIP on December 31, comments relating to our proposal to May 9, 2001 (67 FR 23646), Proposal 2001, for the Baton Rouge area. EPA was withdraw the nonattainment in the process of reviewing the determination and consequent Comment 1: Eleven comment letters Attainment Plan/Transport SIP when, reclassification in the event we granted were received with statements of on March 7, 2002, the United States an attainment date extension. Those support for EPA’s proposed eligibility District Court for the Middle District of adverse comments are addressed below for a transport-based attainment date Louisiana entered a Judgment ordering in this document. extension. Two comment letters were EPA to determine, by June 5, 2002, received in opposition to the transport- whether the Baton Rouge area had XI. What Comments Were Received on based attainment date extension. The attained the applicable ozone standard the Proposals Covered by This Final commenters in support believed that the under the CAA. LEAN v. Whitman, No. Action, and on the March 25, 1999, Baton Rouge area was affected by the 00–879–A. In compliance with the Publication of the Attainment Date transport of ozone from the Houston- Court’s Order, EPA signed on June 5, Extension Policy, and How Has EPA Galveston, Texas, nonattainment area 2002, and published in the Federal Responded to Those? (hereinafter referred to as Houston). The Register on June 24, 2002, (67 FR 42688) EPA received comments from the commenters in opposition believed that our determination that the Baton Rouge public on the Notices of Proposed either the Baton Rouge area did not area did not attain the 1-hour ozone Rulemaking published on May 9, 2001; meet the conditions under EPA’s standard by November 15, 1999. June 24, 2002; and August 2, 2002, for transport-based attainment date On June 24, 2002, EPA published its the proposed approval of the Baton extension policy, that the time for ‘‘Determination of Nonattainment as of Rouge’s ozone attainment making an attainment determination November 15, 1999, and Reclassification demonstration and attainment date was overdue, and/or the Act did not of the Baton Rouge Ozone extension. EPA received adverse give EPA the authority to grant the Nonattainment Area; State of Louisiana; comments from Tulane and LEAN for transport-based attainment date Final Rule’’ (67 FR 42688). The effective our May 9, 2001 and the August 2, 2002, extension. date of that Determination and proposals. We received adverse Response 1: In this final rule, EPA Reclassification was initially set at comments from Earthjustice on our responds to the relevant adverse August 23, 2002. However, in a separate August 2, 2002, proposal. EPA also comments on EPA’s legal authority to notice the same day (67 FR 42697), EPA received comments in support of the extend the Baton Rouge area’s proposed to extend the effective date of proposals from 24 commenters. attainment date received in response to

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61792 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

that proposal. The responses to Comments Received in Response to the v. EPA, (No. 01–60537), argued comments in a number of prior August 2, 2002 (67 FR 50391), Proposal September 4, 2002. EPA should await rulemakings concerning the attainment Twenty-seven comment letters were the outcomes of those cases. The fact date extensions granted in Washington, received on our August 2, 2002, that the Louisiana SIP provides for DC, Springfield, Massachusetts, Greater proposed approval rulemaking. Of these RACM and ROPP does not fix the Connecticut, Beaumont, Texas, the St. twenty-seven letters, we received four proposed rules shortfalls. The area Louis area, and Atlanta, Georgia, are comment letters with adverse comments should still be reclassified. Response 3: While the DC Circuit has relevant and responsive to the dealing with our proposed action. issued a decision concerning comments received on Baton Rouge. In Comment 2: One commenter contends Washington, DC, EPA nevertheless those prior rulemakings, EPA responded that EPA lacks statutory authority to believes that its approach is justified to similar challenges to the legality of approve the request for an attainment and is currently continuing to litigate the attainment date extension policy, date extension based on EPA’s the pertinent legal issues in two other and EPA therefore incorporates its attainment date extension policy. The Circuits. The Seventh Circuit has yet to responses to those comments, set forth commenter asserts that the current rule on the attainment date extension in 66 FR 586, 66 FR 634, 66 FR 666 classification for the Baton Rouge area is issue with regard to the St. Louis area, (January 3, 2001), 66 FR 26913 (May 15, ‘‘severe’’ and not ‘‘serious.’’ The and the Fifth Circuit, which would have 2001), 66 FR 33996 (June 26, 2001), and commenter contends that EPA has jurisdiction to review EPA’s rulemaking 67 FR 30574 (May 7, 2002), insofar as already determined that the area failed herein relevant. regarding Baton Rouge, has yet to rule to attain the ozone standard within the on the attainment date extension issue Many of the legal arguments and other meaning of section 181(b)(2)(A) of the in the context of Beaumont, Texas. issues raised in the comments Act, and that, therefore, the Baton Rouge When these Circuits issue their addressing the attainment date area was reclassified by operation of decisions in these cases, EPA will extension proposed in Baton Rouge law, despite EPA’s refusal to reevaluate its position with respect to have also been addressed in the briefs acknowledge this. The commenter Baton Rouge. EPA has filed in litigation concerning incorporates by reference its arguments Comment 4: Commenters claim that the extensions in Washington, DC Sierra as to the legality of the attainment date on two occasions—on separate Club v. Whitman, Nos. 01–1070 (DC extension policy contained in its briefs amendments offered by Senator Kasten Cir.), St. Louis, Sierra Club v. EPA 01– in Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, in 1990 and Senator Levin in 1994, 2844, No. 01–2845 (7th Cir.), Sierra Club 160–162 (DC Cir. 2002); Opening and Congress rejected amendments to the v. Whitman, Nos. 01–5123 and 01–5299 Reply Briefs of Sierra Club in Sierra Clean Air Act providing for attainment (DC Cir.), and Beaumont, Sierra Club v. Club v. EPA, DC Cir. 01–1070, at Part I; date extensions. EPA, No. 01–60537 (5th Cir.). These Earthjustice Comments dated April 26, Response 4: Neither amendment cited briefs have been placed in the docket for 1999, addressing EPA’s proposal by commenters corresponds with EPA’s this rulemaking and are incorporated entitled ‘‘Extension of Attainment Dates attainment date extension policy, and herein by reference. for Downwind Transport Area.’’ 64 Fed. there is no evidence that either was Reg. 14441 (March 25, 1999); Transcript acted upon by Congress. In its prior Commenters cite to prior case law in of Oral Argument in Sierra Club v. EPA, rulemaking notices and briefs EPA has support of such propositions as: a list of DC Cir. 01–1070 (February 4, 2002). answered the arguments that the specific remedial provisions excludes Response 2: EPA has responded to the commenters raised on the Kasten the possibility of inferring that Congress contentions regarding the legality of amendment. As to the Levin intended any additional forms of relief; EPA’s attainment date extension policy amendment cited by commenters, this an agency cannot substitute its policy in its responses to comments on the bill did not address attainment date choices for those of Congress; the May 9, 2001, proposed rulemaking. As extensions, but rather a revision to attainment deadlines are central to the to the assertion that the classification of section 182(h)(1) concerning rural CAA and cannot be adjusted. EPA has the Baton Rouge area is ‘‘severe’’ and transport areas that was aimed at previously set forth its views on these not ‘‘serious,’’ EPA, prior to the Court- original classifications. This proposed issues in its prior responses and in its ordered rulemaking published on June amendment did not propose attainment briefs. None of the cases or arguments 24, 2002, had issued no final date extensions, but rather dealt with cited by the commenters alters these rulemaking determining that the Baton areas that made no significant views, or undermines EPA’s authority to Rouge area had not attained the contribution to their own ozone interpret the text of the statute in its full standard by November 1999. Therefore, concentrations, and proposed to treat context so as to give effect to the Baton Rouge area was not them as rural transport areas. In offering Congressional intent. EPA is reclassified to ‘‘severe.’’ Moreover, since this amendment, Senator Levin implementing the attainment date EPA is today issuing a final attainment expressly noted that EPA was grappling extension not as a mere Agency policy date extension and withdrawing its June with the issue of other areas, whose air preference, but in order to fulfill 24, 2002, determination prior to that quality is affected by the area’s own Congressional intent. Moreover, even in determination taking effect, the Baton emissions as well as those from upwind the absence of explicit statutory Rouge area remains classified as a areas. Senator Levin’s bill did not authority, EPA may grant extensions of serious area. EPA incorporates its address this situation, because he time under the CAA where it concludes responses to the comments contained in acknowledged EPA’s plans ‘‘to issue a that Congress would have done the its briefs in the cases cited above. new policy on ozone transport that will same had it foreseen the circumstances Comment 3: One commenter argues hold areas responsible only for that presented. NRDC v. EPA, 22 F.3d 1125 that the DC Circuit has decided portion of the ozone problem which (D.C. Cir. 1994). adversely to the attainment date they cause.’’ However, this new policy Please see the responses to related extension, and that similar cases are is expected to only correct another comments concerning Baton Rouge’s pending before the Seventh Circuit and inequity in the act, the fact that eligibility for an extension in the before the Fifth Circuit, which is downwind areas suffering from comment section below. considering this issue in the Sierra Club significant ozone and other pollution

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61793

transported from more severely polluted incorporates by reference its responses analyze transportation control measures areas have less time to achieve to the comments contained in its briefs (TCM) RACM for mobile sources. attainment. The change in attainment in the cases cited above. Louisiana’s analysis is explained in deadlines will not address the problem Comment 7: Commenters argue that Chapter 5 of the SIP. LDEQ analyzed a of areas inappropriately designated in EPA should not approve the RACM broad range of TCMs identified and the first place. 140 Cong. Rec. S10538– analysis for the Baton Rouge area listed in section 108(f) of the Act for 05 (August 3, 1994). because it does not meet the RACM availability. As part of its Comment 5: Commenters contend that requirements of the CAA. They also analysis, LDEQ relied on the most it is too late for Louisiana to apply for argue that the State and EPA cannot recent and comprehensive TCM a transport extension, and that any lawfully limit RACM analyses to only evaluation study that exists for the application for an extension should be those measures likely to advance Baton Rouge area and reflects updated denied on the failure of the state to attainment dates, nor can they lawfully attainment year vehicle miles traveled submit a timely application for an apply an ‘‘intensive and costly effort’’ (VMT) and emissions reduction extension and for failure to meet the test. Opening and Reply Briefs of Sierra estimates. Based on its analysis, LDEQ requirements of the attainment date Club in Sierra Club v. EPA, DC Cir. 01– included in the SIP an enforceable TCM extension in a timely fashion. 1070, at Part II. The commenter adds to implement an advanced Response 5: EPA disagrees that it is that even if that were not the case, transportation management system and too late to grant Louisiana an attainment arguendo, the states and EPA must still a vehicle I/M program. Relative to the date extension. First, Louisiana is not consider a reasonable range of potential total NOX reductions required to applying for an attainment date RACM measures, and to the extent that demonstrate attainment of the 1-hour extension under section 181(a)(5), but in they reject measures as allegedly not ozone NAAQS in the Baton Rouge area, accordance with EPA’s transport-based constituting RACM, must offer a additional NOX reductions from other attainment date extension policy. EPA reasoned and statutorily permissible TCMs in the Baton Rouge area that believes that the area timely applied for explanation for doing so. Another might be implemented constitute a very an attainment date extension pursuant commenter argues that control measures small percentage (approximately 1%) of to EPA’s attainment date extension are clearly available. The commenters the total reductions required for policy and that it has made the requisite go on to state that: (1) There are many attainment. Thus, LDEQ concluded, an showing for an extension based upon stationary VOC emissions to work with, EPA agrees, that for RACM purposes transport. In its notice of proposed and (2) many industries in the implementation of additional TCMs rulemaking EPA set forth the history of nonattainment area are reducing their would not produce emissions this rulemaking action and also noted VOC emissions from stationary sources. reductions sufficient to the advance the that EPA had provided additional time Since these facilities are actually attainment date. for the area to submit documentation in making these reductions, the commenter support of its request for an attainment concludes that the SIP argument that Louisiana also analyzed control date extension. 67 FR 50391 (August 2, VOC reductions at this time are deemed options as RACM for major stationary 2002); 66 FR 23646 (May 9, 2001), 66 FR to be technologically infeasible is sources of VOC and NOX. Louisiana has 38608 (July 25, 2001) (supplemental clearly incorrect. The commenter implemented Reasonable Available proposed rule). As EPA noted in its final further states that the LDEQ refers to Control Technology (RACT) for major rulemaking of June 24, 2002 (67 FR computer modeling results in the SIP to stationary sources of NOX and VOC. As 42697), Footnote 3, EPA received no imply that the requirements of RACM in the commenter notes, many industries adverse comments on its supplemental the CAA can be avoided. in the Baton Rouge area are already proposal to extend Louisiana’s transport Response 7: Louisiana performed a reducing their VOC emissions from SIP submission date to December 31, RACM analysis for potential control of stationary sources to meet the VOC 2002. NOX and VOC emission sources not RACT requirements of the Act. The 24% Comment 6: Congress foresaw the included in the attainment rate-of-progress VOC emissions problem of ozone transport and demonstration for the Baton Rouge 1- reductions required under the Act have provided a solution under sections 110 hour ozone attainment area. Each already been achieved in the Baton and 126. Louisiana never petitioned control measure option was evaluated Rouge area. Modeling analysis for the EPA under section 126 for a finding that according to: (1) The State’s authority to Baton Rouge area indicates that a 30% sources in Texas significantly implement controls; (2) the amount of ‘‘across the board’’ reduction in VOC contributed to ozone problems in Baton NOX reductions created by the control emissions yields less than a 1 ppb Rouge. measure; (3) the amount of VOC decrease in the ozone peak for all three Response 6: As EPA has noted in reductions created by the control modeled episodes. Based on its analysis, prior rulemakings, because a functional measure; (4) whether a similar control LDEQ concluded that VOC reductions understanding of transport was late in measure is already being implemented beyond those already in place would coming, the tools envisioned by in the SIP; (5) the cost effectiveness of not be sufficient to bring the area into Congress could not be deployed in time the control; (6) whether SIP credit has attainment sooner than 2005 and were to provide the intended relief. The already been taken for the measure; and not technologically feasible or cost commenter’s contention that EPA (7) whether the measure can be effective at this time. Furthermore, the should not grant Baton Rouge an implemented to advance the attainment modeled attainment demonstration attainment date extension because date. LDEQ conducted analyses of the shows that the Baton Rouge area relies Louisiana should have acted earlier to reductions available from control of upon emissions reductions from outside commence a section 126 petition VOC and NOX emissions from on-road of the attainment area and from federal proceeding to reduce emissions from and off-road mobile sources, major rules with implementation dates that upwind states ignores the fact that an stationary sources of VOC and NOX, and will not occur until 2005. LDEQ adequate analysis and allocation of VOC and NOX area sources. performed a similar analysis for NOX responsibility for transport did not exist In our August 2, 2002, proposed RACM. EPA has reviewed and agrees in time to support relief by the area’s approval, EPA referenced the with the State’s RACM analysis. For original attainment date. EPA methodology Louisiana employed to further details concerning Louisiana’s

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61794 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

RACM analysis please refer to the common sense meaning of the phrase, to the DC Circuit in defense of its RACM TSD and LDEQ’s RACM analysis. ‘‘reasonably available.’’ A measure that approval of the Washington DC ozone The EPA’s approach toward the is reasonably available is one that is SIP, the DC Circuit also found RACM requirement is grounded in the technologically and economically reasonable EPA’s interpretation that it language of the CAA. Section 172(c)(1) feasible and that can be readily could consider costs in a RACM states that a SIP for a nonattainment implemented. Ready implementation analysis and that measures may be area must meet the following also includes consideration of whether rejected if they would require an requirement: ‘‘In general.—Such plan emissions from small sources are intensive and costly effort for regulation provisions shall provide for the relatively small and whether the of many small sources. Sierra Club v. implementation of all reasonably administrative burden, to the States and EPA, 294 F.3d at 162, 163. available control measures as regulated entities, of controlling such Finally, the SIP does not, as the expeditiously as practicable (including sources was likely to be considerable. commenter claims, imply that the such reductions in emissions from As stated in the General Preamble, EPA requirements of RACM in the CAA can existing sources in the area as may be believes that States can reject potential be avoided in the nonattainment area obtained through the adoption, at a measures based on local conditions based on the attainment modeling. The minimum, of reasonably available including cost. 57 FR 13561. SIP merely notes that the attainment control technology) and shall provide When EPA presented this statutory modeling along with the proposed NOX for attainment of the national primary argument in support of its RACM policy reductions from major stationary ambient air quality standards.’’ to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC sources, mobile sources and federal [Emphasis added.] The EPA interprets Circuit in defense of its approval of the rules are shown to be sufficient for the this language as tying the RACM Washington DC ozone SIP, the DC Baton Rouge area to meet the NAAQS requirement to the requirement for Circuit found reasonable EPA’s for ozone by 2005, and that there are no attainment of the national primary interpretation that measures must additional RACM to advance the ambient air quality standard. The CAA advance attainment to be RACM. Sierra attainment date. We do not consider provides that the attainment date shall Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (DC Cir. measures as RACM for the Baton Rouge be ‘‘as expeditiously as practicable but 2002). Specifically, the Court found area if they do not advance the no later than * * *’’ the deadlines that: attainment date, as recently upheld by specified in the CAA. EPA believes that the DC Circuit Court. We are still the use of the same terminology in EPA reasonably concluded that because the requiring the State to demonstrate that Act ‘use[s] the same terminology in conjunction with the RACM conjunction with the RACM requirement’ as all local measures that are RACM are requirement serves the purpose of it does in requiring timely attainment, implemented as expeditiously as specifying RACM as the way of compare 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1) (requiring practicable. expediting attainment of the NAAQS in implementation of RACM ‘as expeditiously Comment 8: A commenter states that advance of the deadline specified in the as practicable but no later than’ the EPA cannot lawfully approve SIPs CAA. As stated in the ‘‘General applicable attainment deadline), with id. which lack rate of progress reductions Preamble’’ (57 FR 13498 at 13560, April § 7511(a)(1) (requiring attainment under same for the full period by the CAA—which 16, 1992), ‘‘The EPA interprets this constraints), the RACM requirement is to be includes not just the reductions requirement to impose a duty on all understood as a means of meeting the required during the period up to deadline for attainment. nonattainment areas to consider all November 15, 1999, but also 9% VOC available control measures and to adopt Id. Moreover, the DC Circuit rejected, as reductions from November 15, 1999 to and implement such measures as are a ‘‘misreading of both text and context,’’ November 15, 2002, and another 9% reasonably available for Sierra Club’s arguments that EPA’s reductions from November 15, 2002 to implementation in the area as interpretation of RACM conflicts with November 15, 2005. Another commenter components of the area’s attainment the Act’s text and purpose and lacks any states that the SIP must include demonstration.’’ [Emphasis added.] In rational basis. reductions until the area achieves its other words, because of the construction Also, LDEQ’s analysis indicates that attainment date. The commenter of the RACM language in the CAA, EPA the development of rules for a large concludes that since the attainment date does not view the RACM requirement as number of very different source is extended, the reasonable further separate from the attainment categories of small sources for which progress demonstration required in demonstration requirement. Therefore, little control information may exist will Section 182(c)(2)(B) must be included in EPA believes that the CAA supports its likely take much longer than any approvable SIP. A commenter interpretation that measures are not development of rules for source asserts that the CAA does not allow for RACM if they do not advance the categories for which control information the revisions to the 15% ROPP, the 1990 attainment date. In addition, EPA exists or that comprise a smaller number Base Year Emission Inventory, nor the believes that it would not be reasonable of larger sources. It is less likely that the Post-1996 ROPP because the CAA does to require implementation of measures emission reductions from such not allow ROPP reductions to occur that would not in fact advance additional rules in the nonattainment outside the nonattainment area. attainment (see 57 FR 13560). EPA has area would advance the attainment date Additionally, the commenter states that historically taken this interpretation and more than emission reductions achieved in order for Louisiana to take credit for consistently implemented it through from controls on major stationary the emission reductions outside the guidance since 1979 (see 44 FR 20372, sources, mobile sources, and federal nonattainment area the State must prove 20375, April 4, 1979). rules in the Baton Rouge area. Thus, it that the reductions would result in The term ‘‘reasonably available is of greater value and more expeditious actual reductions in ozone within the control measure’’ is not actually defined for the State to expend the attainment area. The commenter in the CAA. Therefore, the EPA administrative effort and costs to pursue concludes that LDEQ did not interpretation that potential measures larger reductions from a smaller number specifically model emissions reductions are not to be RACM if they require an of sources. from Trunkline and therefore should not intensive and costly effort for numerous When EPA presented this statutory be allowed to include these credits in its small area sources is based on the argument in support of its RACM policy ROPP. Finally, the commenter argues

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61795

that the reductions have already and 200km (NOX) of the nonattainment international pollution (42 U.S.C. 7415), occurred and since the area remains in area. Trunkline’s emissions changes are interstate transport commissions (42 nonattainment after these reductions included in the overall modeling U.S.C. 7506a), and interstate pollution then the reductions obviously are not analysis, and the results show that abatement (the so-called ‘‘good going to solve the ozone problem and emission reductions are necessary in the neighbor’’ section, 42 U.S.C. 7426). can not be considered progress. The surrounding attainment parishes for the Since a state may petition the EPA to commenter also incorporates by Baton Rouge nonattainment area to regulate sources beyond the state’s reference comments submitted by LEAN demonstrate attainment. Domain-wide boundaries in order to address a on EPA’s proposed approval of modeling, rather than source specific nonattainment area within the state, the Louisiana’s contingency measures dated modeling of facility emission changes state is certainly free to regulate May 20, 2002. such as Trunkline’s, is used to tell us precursor emissions outside the Response 8: EPA’s guidance did not what level of reductions are needed for nonattainment area, but still within the interpret the period of time after the nonattainment area to demonstrate state, that impact the nonattainment granting the attainment date extension attainment. area. Furthermore, LDEQ did conduct a based on transport as requiring Comment 9: One commenter asserts modeling sensitivity run (Run LA–1) to additional rate of progress increments that EPA cannot lawfully approve SIPs evaluate the effectiveness of a 30% NOX from the downwind area, since we that lack contingency measures. The reduction in low-level and elevated determined that the reason the area had commenter further states that as shown sources in Grid D. This modeling not attained was due to upwind in the commenter’s Sierra Club v. EPA sensitivity run demonstrated that transport. Consistent with the purposes briefs, contingency measures must be additional reduction in the simulated of the attainment date extension policy, additional measures that activate in the ozone concentrations and 1-hour ozone EPA believes it would be inequitable to event of a contingency, not surplus exceedance exposure within the 5 require areas in which attainment is reductions from measures being parish nonattainment area is obtained affected by transport to meet additional implemented anyway (e.g., as part of the from NOX emission reductions within local ROPP requirements. EPA believes attainment rate-of-progress SIP). Sierra Grid D from parishes that are outside it would be unreasonable to require the Club, 294 F.3d at 164; Opening and the nonattainment area. downwind area into such progress Reply Briefs of Sierra Club in Sierra Comment 12: One commenter requirement reductions from local Club v. EPA, DC Cir. 01–1070, at Part IV. suggests that the Classification and sources, when the combination of local Response 9: EPA has found the Regression Tree (CART) analysis does reductions with upwind area source contingency measures in the SIP to be not demonstrate that there is a emission reductions is what will bring surplus, permanent and federally significant problem with ozone the area into attainment. In any event, enforceable. EPA is approving these transport. Another commenter indicated to the extent that it should be contingency measures in a separate that the state used an insufficient determined otherwise, and that any action which published in the Federal amount of data (5 years vs. 20 years) in ROPP required should be imposed on Register on September 26, 2002. See determining the ranking system to the downwind area, this would not be EPA’s final action on the contingency calculate expected ozone exceedances required until EPA grants the attainment measures for responses to related (ExEx), leading to uncertainty about the date extension and provides the area comments. reliability of the conclusions reached with a later attainment date. Since the Comment 10: A commenter states that based on these data. requirement was not previously due, EPA should not withdraw its June 24, Response 12: The CART analysis was fulfilling the requirement, if any is 2002, rulemaking determining that conducted to support the episode deemed to exist, is not a condition of Baton Rouge was in nonattainment and selection portion of the Baton Rouge receiving the attainment date extension. reclassifying it from ‘‘serious’’ to local modeling analysis. The CART Responses to Louisiana’s contingency ‘‘severe’’ because to do so would be analysis that was done for the local measures are being addressed in the against both the plain language of the modeling analysis was not specifically Federal Register final action for that CAA and Congressional intent. designed to identify regional transport component of the SIP. Response 10: EPA is withdrawing its conditions. In addition to a transport In reference to the comment June 24, 2002, rulemaking relating to the analysis, the attainment demonstration concerning the modeling of the Baton Rouge reclassification based on must address whether or not local emission reductions from Trunkline, the Louisiana fulfilling EPA’s attainment measures are needed for attainment. If commenter is referred to the above date extension policy and EPA’s the attainment demonstration indicates mentioned December 29, 1997, EPA approval of their attainment that local control measures are required, guidance document. Pages 5 and 6 of demonstration and transport SIP. See the demonstration must quantify the the guidance document discuss EPA’s related responses on EPA’s attainment level of the needed local emission guidance on ROPP. EPA’s guidance date extension policy above. reductions. For the local portion of the ‘‘* * * only requires that an area in Comment 11: The commenter attainment demonstration, the episodes nonattainment for the 1-hour NAAQS indicates that it is a poor idea to adopt modeled were to be primarily ‘‘home- should be allowed to take credit for contingency measures that require grown,’’ rather than dominated by emissions reductions obtained from emission reductions outside the transport. Thus, the meteorological and sources outside the designated nonattainment area. air quality data used in the CART nonattainment area for the post-1999 Response 11: The CAA gives the analysis to characterize potential ROP requirement as long as the sources states considerable latitude and modeling episodes were all local Baton are no farther than 100 km (for VOC discretion in adopting state Rouge data. (The only non-Baton Rouge sources) or 200 km (for NOX sources) implementation plans. The CAA also data was the upper air data obtained away from the nonattainment area.’’ The recognizes that addressing ozone from near-by Slidell, Louisiana, which guidance does not indicate that nonattainment within a given area may has the closest radar profiler.) This modeling of ROPP emissions should be involve regulation of emissions from particular CART analysis did not conducted for EPA to allow the use of sources outside of the nonattainment consider other parameters that may have ROPP emissions within 100km (VOC) area. See CAA sections concerning been more indicative of regional

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61796 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

transport (e.g. surface winds at over a longer period, such as twenty support a conclusion that transport from Calcasieu, Lafayette, etc.). years. Houston occurred frequently enough, Although the use of local Baton Rouge Comment 13: The ‘‘gulf-high’’ since the Baton Rouge area is only data alone is not sufficient to fully conditions associated with transport do allowed 3 exceedances in a 3-year characterize regional transport not demonstrate that the Baton Rouge period, to adversely affect the area’s conditions in Louisiana and neighboring area is suffering from transport from the ability to attain. Thus for Baton Rouge states, the CART analysis approach was Houston-Galveston area. to attain, controls in Houston area, as a component relied upon, to Response 13: We disagree. The well as in Louisiana, are necessary. demonstrate the frequency of transport. August 19, 1993, episode was a ‘‘Gulf- Louisiana has demonstrated that during Meteorological and air quality data for High’’ regime day, and the modeling some Baton Rouge area exceedances, a five-year period (1996–2000) were also results demonstrated that the Houston ozone levels are influenced by characterized and analyzed. The results area significantly contributed to the emissions from the Houston area, and indicated that 7 percent of the Baton Baton Rouge area. This modeling that the Houston area emissions affect Rouge exceedance days (i.e., 2 out of 28 showed an impact of 2–6 ppb on ozone the Baton Rouge area’s ability to meet exceedance days) were potentially concentrations in the Baton Rouge area. attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard associated with transport of ozone and/ CART analysis approach also by November 15, 1999. or precursor pollutants from the characterized this episode as ‘‘Gulf- Comment 14: Modeling used by the Houston area. EPA believes these data High’’ regime. We agree that the relative State (based on August 19, 1993) does demonstrate a sufficient impact from positioning of the center of the high not demonstrate that the Baton Rouge Houston to satisfy the criteria of our pressure zone in the Gulf of Mexico as area is suffering from ozone transport. attainment date extension policy. well as the strength of circulation winds Another commenter indicated that Another CART analyses of frequently determine whether or not transport from EPA’s own data do not show a the Houston area occurs and the level of occurring meteorological conditions significant effect on Baton Rouge from impact of the transported emissions during ozone exceedances for a 10 year Houston’s air pollution. when transport occurs. Because of these Response 14: We disagree. The period (1989–1998) indicated that a considerations,transport from Houston August 19, 1993, modeling results ‘‘Gulf-High’’ regime was associated with to Baton Rouge does not always occur demonstrated that the Houston area 30% of the Baton Rouge exceedance under all conditions labeled ‘‘gulf- significantly contributed to the Baton days during that period. A ‘‘Gulf-High’’ high’’. Rouge area. This modeling showed an existed in the modeled August 19, 1993 Even so, the important point is that on impact of 2–6 ppb on ozone episode. This modeling demonstrated many exceedance days, the Baton Rouge concentrations in the Baton Rouge area that transport of emissions from the and surrounding areas have experienced when the Houston area emissions are Houston area to the Baton Rouge area. meteorological conditions under which zeroed out. A ‘‘Gulf-High’’ existed The impact from the Houston area upon transport from Houston could have during the modeled August 19, 1993 the Baton Rouge area’s ozone contributed to the exceedance. Some episode. The August 1993 episode concentration was 2–6 ppb. 30% of the exceedances in a ten-year occurred during the Gulf of Mexico Air We disagree that the State used period, and some 7% of the exceedances Quality Study (GMAQS) field program insufficient data in determining the in a 5-year period, were associated with and the modeling of that episode ranking system. The CART analysis ‘‘Gulf-High’’ days. It is reasonable to benefitted from intensive, enhanced approach to characterizing episodes and conclude that some appreciable portion ground level, upper-air, and aircraft ranking them on the basis of severity is of the gulf-high days were conducive to measurements. The episode consisted of an alternate approach that has been transport from Houston. a ramp up day on August 18th and a accepted by EPA for other 1-hour ozone Similarly, other meteorological primary episode day on August 19th. SIP modeling applications. These regimes may be conducive to transport Due to the influence of the initial and include Atlanta, Georgia, Birmingham, from Houston. These include ‘‘coastal boundary conditions, EPA guidance Alabama, and Louisville, Kentucky. The return’’ days and ‘‘continental high’’ does not recommend the State to take approach provided in EPA guidance days as discussed further in the the ramp-up day (i.e., August 18th) into (Cox and Chu) uses meteorological data Technical Support Document. These consideration in developing a control of a twenty-year record. Under the same meteorological regimes may also allow strategy. The observed regional meteorological conditions, expected for transport from Houston. Because conditions, including the additional ozone concentrations would possibly be they are common regimes, it is meteorology measurements from the very different if the magnitude or ratios reasonable to assume that some field study, during this period were of the VOC and NOX emissions are occurred on exceedance days. Further, it found to be conducive for potential different. Over the last 20 years the is reasonable to assume that on some of transport of pollutants from the Houston effect of Federal and state regulations those days, transport from Houston area to the Baton Rouge 5-parish have resulted in changes in ratios/ occurred. nonattainment area. CART analyses quantities of VOC and NOX This information concerning the indicate that transport conditions have anthropogenic emissions in the Baton meteorological regimes must be occurred historically and one episode Rouge area. Thus, the CART approach considered together with modeling that (the August 19, 1993) has been modeled applied in the Baton Rouge SIP specifically identifies transport from to demonstrate transport. modeling analysis takes into account Houston, as discussed elsewhere. In addition, a modeling run was only the most recent 5 years of data. Accordingly, although the data is conducted for a period in 1997 (8/30– This approach is followed in an attempt insufficient to quantify specifically the 31) in which not only Houston area to avoid potential complications number of exceedance days with emissions, but also Beaumont Port- inherent in assessing correlations meteorological regimes conducive to Arthur emissions were zeroed out. This between meteorological conditions and transport from Houston, and the number run indicated impacts from the zero-out the observed concentrations when a of days in which transport from in a north-northeasterly direction from major influencing variable (i.e. Houston actually occurred, EPA southeast Texas, with a 10 ppb impact emissions inventory) has likely changed believes that the data is sufficient to in Little Rock which is approximately

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61797

twice the distance from southeast Texas EPA guidance value for Normalized Bias not unusual for modeling to generate to Baton Rouge. The run lends support is ±15 percent and the values for the higher values in grid cells without to the conclusion that Houston August 18 and 19 days are ¥1.9% and monitors, since there are many more contributes to exceedances in the Baton ¥0.2%. This indicates that the model is grid cells without corresponding ozone Rouge area. A relatively small shift in doing a very good job in predicting monitored values than there are grid the direction of the winds during the concentrations similar to the observed cells with monitored values. This is an period modeled may have resulted in a monitored concentrations. For further artifact of modeling and does not, in any bigger impact in the Baton Rouge area, analyses that support approval of this way, mean that the transport modeling which supports the conclusion that episode (without the zero out run), EPA over-predicts the impacts. some of the exceedances in the Baton utilized the Technical Support Comment 17: One commenter Rouge area experienced contributions Document (June 1996) and submittals indicates that the SIP erroneously from Houston. The commenter refers to from LDEQ for the previous attainment indicates that the modeling results EPA’s ‘‘own data’’ in the proposed demonstration SIP. EPA relied upon the indicate that the Houston area has an notice where it states that 7% of the complete package of analyses submitted impact on the Baton Rouge design value ozone exceedances in a five year period by LDEQ in approving the Baton Rouge as high as 6 parts per billion (ppb). The were associated with ‘‘gulf-high’’ met SIP. expected impact on the design value can regime with high level westerly winds. Comment 16: One commenter asserts only be the average impact contributing This statement was derived from the that the model over predicts ozone and to transport not the maximum value. Baton Rouge SIP’s record. It is only one that this error could be due to errors in Another commenter said that even component of the information that EPA the models input that also produce a subtracting the State’s estimate that has looked at in determining that the result of transport from Houston to between 2 and 6 parts per billion of Baton Rouge area is impacted by Baton Rouge. The commenter then ozone is being transported from transport for Houston area emissions. indicates that this is only one possible Houston, the Baton Rouge area is still in EPA has made a judgement that the interpretation for the over-prediction of nonattainment and therefore not frequency of occurrence for transport of the modeled ozone values. sufficiently ‘‘affected by transport’’ to Response 16: The August 1993 Houston’s air pollution is significant qualify for an extension. This episode occurred during the Gulf of enough to be of concern in Baton Rouge. commenter then went on to say that Baton Rouge’s ability to attain is Mexico Air Quality Study (GMAQS) field program and the modeling of that Louisiana has indicated that if the 2–6 affected by the impact on it from the ppb were taken into account that Baton Houston area, as documented above. For episode benefitted from intensive, enhanced ground level, upper-air, and Rouge would be in attainment, which is further information, see the Technical not correct. Support Document and the State’s aircraft measurements. The observed Response 17: The 2–6 ppb is a range submittals. regional conditions during this period Comment 15: Table 1–3 of Louisiana’s were found to be conducive for of potential influence that was SIP shows that the model drastically potential transport of pollutants from estimated based on one set of over-predicts the amount of ozone that the Houston area to the Baton Rouge 5- meteorological conditions. The effect of was actually formed on August 18 and parish nonattainment area. It occurred the 2–6 ppb from transport indicated by 19, 1993, in the Baton Rouge area based in the ‘‘Gulf-High’’ regime, and the the August 19, 1993, modeling impacts upon the ‘‘Unpaired accuracy of the results demonstrate that emissions from upon the current 1-hour design value is peak concentration’’ metric. the Houston area are to contributing difficult, if not impossible, to infer. To Response 15: The model does not significantly to the Baton Rouge area use the average impact, as the drastically over-predict taking into exceedances. The modeling runs commenter indicates, or to analyze the account all of the metrics and graphics. removing all of the anthropogenic exact impact of transport of Houston Unpaired accuracy of the peak emissions in the Houston area showed area emissions/ozone on the Baton concentration is just one of the metrics significant changes in ozone Rouge design value would be used to evaluate model performance and concentration in the Baton Rouge area. misleading and inappropriate. The the August 18 day is the only day The meteorological model showed that ozone design value is driven by the 4th outside the EPA guidance value of ±20 some air masses were coming from the high value recorded at a monitor within percent. The August 18 day was the Houston area. Therefore the a 3 year period. The monitored values model ramp-up day and the August 19 meteorological modeling indicated that are impacted by transport some of the day was the primary episode day. As some air masses, and their pollution time, so it is safe to conclude that the previously noted, due to the influence concentrations, were transported from monitored values that drive the design of the initial and boundary conditions, the Houston area to the Baton Rouge value also are affected by transport some EPA guidance does not recommend the area during this 1993 episode. The fact of the time (Please see other related State to take the ramp-up day (i.e., that the 1993 modeling is predicted responses to comments for more details August 18th) into consideration in ozone concentrations in the domain that on the transport discussion). To this developing a control strategy. The are higher than the monitored values extent the design value is impacted. The August 19 day is within the EPA does not lead to a conclusion that there commenter is correct that the Baton guidance value for this metric. This is an error in the modeling that would Rouge area showed it needed additional metric is a domain wide peak and the result in an erroneous determination in local NOX emission reductions to attain; model may be predicting for the August the magnitude of the impact of transport therefore, even eliminating the 18 day, a peak at a location that did not from Houston to Baton Rouge. Where transported emissions from Texas have a monitor. Another metric there are monitors, the modeling has would not bring the Baton Rouge area evaluated is the Normalized Bias, which predicted comparable ozone into attainment. That the Baton Rouge measures the model’s ability to replicate concentrations for the overall Grid D area needs local emission reductions to observed patterns during the times of domain. The modeling indicated ozone attain, does not mean that the area is not day when available monitoring and concentrations higher than values impacted by transport from Houston or modeled data are most likely to monitored in the Grid D domain in grid that the area does not satisfy the criteria represent similar spatial scales. The cells where monitors did not exist. It is of our attainment date extension policy.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61798 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Comment 18: Louisiana shouldn’t be controls, will advance attainment in the including air modeling, is a dynamic using the BEIS2 data to set biogenic Baton Rouge area. This position is a and evolving field. The model used by emissions. These data are known to be change from only six years ago when LDEQ to support its request for approval incorrect. Once the BEIS2 data are used EPA approved Louisiana’s SIP that of the NOX waiver in 1996 was Urban the computer model will always give relied on computer modeling results to Airshed Model (UAM) IV, which was an the result that controlling NOX will be avoid the very NOX control EPA-approved photochemical grid preferable to controlling hydrocarbon requirements of Section 182(c), that are model. The model used by LDEQ to emissions. This is an artifact of BEIS2 now being touted as the only solution. support its recent request for rescission data and is not an accurate reflection of While computer modeling can be used of the NOX waiver was UAM V, a more reality. The commenter included for general conclusions on potential recently EPA-approved Photochemical references to two reports and indicated strategies, it should not be relied upon Grid Model. This represents a that BEIS2 is inaccurate and should to release industries with controllable significant refinement in modeling have not been used for the attainment emissions from the requirements of technology. demonstration. The commenter then 172(c)1. Comments From LAGen requested that a new attainment Response 19: EPA disagrees with the demonstration be made using more commenter’s assertion that LDEQ used Adverse comments on our proposed accurate biogenics data. computer modeling to release industries approval for the Baton Rouge SIP were Response 18: BEIS2 is the EPA- from the requirements of section also received from LAGen. The approved method for estimating 172(c)(1) of the Act. The state-of-the- commenter supports EPA’s proposal to biogenic emissions. Louisiana followed science of ozone modeling, both the approve the attainment demonstration, EPA’s guidelines while applying BEIS2. modeling tools and the understanding of extend the attainment date and At the time that LDEQ conducted the how ozone is generated, continues to withdraw the reclassification, however, modeling, the BEIS–2 model was (and evolve. Louisiana’s current SIP control they take exception to the proposed remains) the EPA-recommended model strategy is a direct result of these types Control Strategy Element in the SIP’s for developing biogenic emission of improvements. Louisiana conducted Section 4.2.1., ‘‘Permitting of NOX estimates for 1-hour attainment numerous sensitivity runs and they Sources.’’ The commenter contends that demonstration SIP modeling. The report showed that additional VOC controls these SIP revisions could effectively and Biogenic Sources Preferred Methods, were not very beneficial and that NOX unnecessarily result in the imposition of May 1996, indicates that BEIS–2 is the controls were beneficial in reducing the equivalent of a nonattainment rule model recommended to be used for ozone concentrations in the Baton in an attainment area without first estimating biogenic emissions at the Rouge area. Computer modeling is promulgating a rule to establish and time the emissions were being routinely utilized to determine if control implement the new requirements. The developed for the Baton Rouge SIP strategies are beneficial and also to rank commenter also provides detailed modeling. Although EPA is currently control strategies based on resulting comments concerning the SIP revisions. developing a third version of the model decreases in ozone. The following are a summary of those (BEIS–3), it has not been given to the When EPA granted Louisiana NOX detailed comments and EPA’s public for use in formal SIP modeling exemptions under section 182(f) of the responses. applications. However, in recent Act on January 26, 1996 (61 FR 2438), Comment 20: The commenter requests discussions with EPA developers, all EPA reserved the right to reverse the that EPA not approve Section 4.2.1 of indications are that the magnitude of the approval of the exemptions if the SIP revisions, which describes the emissions will likely change very little subsequent modeling data demonstrated permitting of sources of NOX in with BEIS–3 compared to the large an ozone attainment benefit from NOX Louisiana. Although the commenter changes encountered between BEIS and emission controls. Photochemical grid fully supports Louisiana’s newly BEIS–2. Small changes in the magnitude modeling recently conducted for the promulgated NOX RACT regulations, the of biogenic emission estimates would Baton Rouge area SIP indicates control commenter contends that Section 4.2.1 not significantly change the overall of NOX sources will help the area attain results in the imposition of strategy contained in the Baton Rouge the ozone NAAQS. Louisiana therefore nonattainment rules in an attainment area ozone SIP. BEIS–2 was also used to requested that the EPA rescind the NOX area without the required opportunity support the recent 1-hour ozone exemption based on this new modeling for notice and comment rulemaking. attainment demonstration SIP modeling on September 24, 2001. In our proposed The commenter argues that EPA’s rules for Atlanta, Georgia and Birmingham, approval of the rescission of the NOX applicable to approval of SIP revisions Alabama. The two reports that the waiver (May 7, 2002, 67 FR 30638), we requires public notice of such commenter lists seem to indicate some stated that we believed that the State provisions and prohibits EPA from potential issues for refinement in the had adequately demonstrated that approving components of SIP revisions state-of-science of estimating biogenic additional NOX reductions would that were neither noticed to the public emissions. The state-of-the-science contribute to attainment of ozone nor prepared in accordance with state continues to improve in multiple areas NAAQS. Louisiana is not the only state law. The commenter contends that of ozone modeling, and the regulatory that has requested that the EPA rescind Section 4.2.1 constitutes an unlawful authorities have to use the best tools at its NOX waiver based on updated delegation of legislative authority under the time to perform ozone modeling. It photochemical grid modeling state law because LDEQ did not provide is unrealistic to require the use of information. Seven years elapsed proper opportunity for public notice modeling tools (i.e., BEIS3) that become between the LDEQ’s previous modeling and comment of this section of the SIP. available after the modeling was demonstration that additional NOX The commenter also contends that initially conducted and formally reductions would not contribute to area approval of Section 4.2.1 would impose submitted for approval. attainment, and the most recent additional and significant requirements Comment 19: On commenter states modeling events demonstrating that beyond those currently required by state that Louisiana relies on computer additional NOX reductions would help law and that EPA’s approval of this modeling to determine that only NOX the Baton Rouge area attain. As noted provision is an ‘‘action concerning controls, and not stationary VOC source above, pollution control technology, regulations that significantly affect

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61799

energy supply, distribution or use.’’ The Louisiana’s nonattainment New Source Oversight Committee meetings, which commenter also claims that EPA’s Review program. For these reasons, EPA included representatives from private approval of Section 4.2.1 constitutes a is approving the SIP as submitted. industries, local citizens, State, EPA, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and an Comment 21: LAGen indicated that it etc. EPA understands that the State has ‘‘unfunded mandate.’’ Therefore, is very difficult to evaluate the UAM-V made all model inputs available to the according to the commenter, EPA’s modeling in regard to emissions inputs public for review and comment. In approval of Section 4.2.1 requires rendering the regulated community addition, the State instructed it’s review by the Office of Management and without direct access to the inputs on a modeling contractor to provide the Budget. facility by facility basis prior to public access to this information. Response 20: EPA disagrees with the submission of the SIP revisions. Comment 22: LAGen indicated that commenter’s characterization of Section Louisiana Generating indicated that the inputs for the modeling include 4.2.1 of the SIP. As noted in its plain they were not previously able to review overestimated NOX emissions and VOC language, Section 4.2.1 is not intended emission values assigned to individual emissions. LaGen further stated that as new policy or guidance. We disagree facilities to evaluate the inputs. Since these ‘‘excess’’ emissions will not be with the commenter’s interpretation that the submission of the SIP Revisions, available for use as offsets and should Section 4.2.1 of Louisiana’s SIP imposes LAGen has been informed that the not have been included in the model. nonattainment rules in an attainment inputs, or base case inventory, included Response 22: LAGen did not provide area. Section 4.2.1 provides the State’s approximately 4,000 tons per year (TPY) any explanation of how the values acknowledgment of the requirements of of NOX emissions that did not exist provided were derived and what is the sections 110(j) and 165(a)(3) of the Act, during the base case year and much of source of these ‘‘inflated’’ emissions. which prohibit the permitting of which may not be available for use as The basecase emission inventory inputs, emissions from the construction or emission reduction credits. In addition, as well as the meteorological inputs, operation of sources that will cause, or the model inputs included an inflated were utilized to replicate historical contribute to, air pollution in excess of value of approximately 6,600 TPY of ozone exceedance episodes. The State any national ambient air quality VOC emissions and probably the used emission inventories that were standard in any air quality control majority of these will not be creditable. acquired from the LDEQ annual region, or any other applicable emission The use of inflated emissions values in emission inventory submittal from the standard or standard of performance the modeling raises the question of industrial facilities themselves, and under the Act. Thus, Section 4.2.1 is a whether the results support all of the various local, state, and federal recitation of existing requirements control strategies and especially agencies. As required, the State has under state and Federal law. This action permitting. made all these information available to merely approves state law as meeting In another section of its comment the public upon request. LDEQ also Federal requirements and imposes no letter, LAGen indicated that the base utilized other sources for the SIP additional requirements beyond those year inventory used as emissions data modeling that were developed with EPA imposed by state law. This action is not inputs for modeling of the Baton Rouge approved emission modeling tools or a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ nor is area is believed to be considerably techniques. Once the base case UAM–V it an ‘‘unfunded mandate.’’ Therefore inflated (4,000 TPY of NOX and 6,600 modeling were completed, these EPA’s approval of the SIP, including TPY of VOC) through inclusion of emission inventories were then Section 4.2.1, is not subject to review by emissions that were eliminated in years projected to a future year for the the Office of Management and Budget. before the modeling took place. LAGen development of an emission control For this reason, this action is also not claims that the year chosen for inclusion strategy. As outlined by EPA guidance subject to Executive Order 13211, of facility by facility emissions data and procedures, LDEQ’s projected ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That resulted in inflated emissions values. emission inventories accounted for Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Therefore, the results of modeling future growth and control. Specifically, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May exercises are overestimated and the LDEQ included the change in emissions 22, 2001). Control Strategies chosen are based on due to emission offsets, emission EPA also disagrees with the inflated episode values rendering controls, emission growth, and emission commenter regarding public portions of the SIP revisions more reduction credits. While the claimed participation. LDEQ provided notice of stringent than justified by the data. As 4,000 TPY of NOX is a sizeable amount the SIP revisions in several area submitted to EPA, the State’s of emissions, it is only equivalent to newspapers and in the Louisiana Attainment Plan/Transport SIP approximately 2% of the Grid D domain Register on October 20, 2001 (Louisiana unnecessarily punishes primarily total NOX emissions on a daily basis. Register, Vol. 27, No. 10). LDEQ also undeveloped parishes in the Region of Sensitivity modeling runs indicated that conducted a public hearing November Influence by limiting their economic a decrease in VOC emissions of 30% 26, 2001, at which a representative from development options through the domain wide, would only result in a LAGen was present. Any changes made requirement to provide offsets. few ppb change. The commenter to section 4.2.1 before LDEQ submitted Response 21: We disagree. The State indicated that the basecase inventory the SIP to EPA for approval were made provided public notice and a hearing to was inflated by 6,600 TPY of VOC, in response to comments LDEQ received receive comments on all aspects of the which corresponds to approximately on its proposed SIP revisions and do not attainment demonstration SIP modeling, 1% of the Grid D domain. Therefore, if add any new requirements under state including the inventories and excess emissions at the levels the or federal law. EPA believes LDEQ approaches used to develop them. As commenter indicated were included in properly followed the requirements required, the State must make all of this modeling, the resulting change in under state law and under 40 CFR Part these materials available to the public the domain’s ozone values would likely 51 in promulgating these SIP revisions. upon request. Moreover, all modeling be in the ‘‘noise’’ of the model. For additional information about the inputs as well as modeling processes Comment 23: LAGen also indicated permitting of NOX sources, please see used in the State attainment that the inflated emission inputs EPA’s recent approval of Louisiana’s demonstration SIP were presented and resulted in overestimation in the model, NOX RACT regulations and revisions to discussed at the monthly Technical which resulted in more NOX controls

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61800 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

than are actually needed and, therefore, hour ozone standard to November 15, Indian tribes, on the relationship LDEQ should not need to obtain offsets 2005, while retaining the area’s current between the Federal Government and for ‘‘new’’ sources in the surrounding classification as a serious ozone Indian tribes, or on the distribution of area. nonattainment area. power and responsibilities between the Response 23: The commenter’s 3. EPA is approving the 2005 on-road Federal Government and Indian tribes, conclusion is based upon the MVEBs for Louisiana. EPA is also as specified by Executive Order 13175 underlying premise that the model approving Louisiana’s enforceable (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This overestimates emissions, and results in commitment to revise its 2005 MVEBs action also does not have Federalism an over prediction of ozone based on MOBILE6 within two years of implications because it does not have concentrations. Furthermore, the its release. No conformity substantial direct effects on the States, commenter’s remark that the year determinations will be made during the on the relationship between the national chosen for facility emissions in the second year following the release of government and the States, or on the basecase modeling is not representative MOBILE6 unless and until the MVEBs distribution of power and of today’s emission levels is inaccurate. have been recalculated using MOBILE6 responsibilities among the various The purpose of the basecase modeling is and approved by EPA. levels of government, as specified in to use an emission inventory that 4. EPA is approving an enforceable Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, reflects the facility’s emissions during TCM. August 10, 1999). This action merely the ozone episode being modeled (1997 5. EPA is approving the revisions to approves a state rule implementing a and 1999), not current day (2002) the 1990 base year emissions inventory, Federal standard, and does not alter the emission levels. To use 2002 emission the 15% ROPP, and the Post-1996 relationship or the distribution of power levels would not be appropriate for 1997 ROPP. and responsibilities established in the and 1999 episodes. The model inputs 6. EPA finds that the Baton Rouge CAA. This rule also is not subject to represent the best estimates that reflect area meets the requirements pertaining Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of actual emissions, taking into account to RACM under the Act. Children from Environmental Health requirements for ‘‘banked’’ reductions 7. EPA is approving Louisiana’s Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, potentially available for future offsets. enforceable commitment for a mid- April 23, 1997), because it is not The modeled results demonstrated course review. economically significant. attainment for two of the three episodes 8. EPA is withdrawing our June 24, 2002, rulemaking action entitled In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s and the other episode used weight of role is to approve state choices, evidence. For most of the days modeled ‘‘Determination of Nonattainment as of provided that they meet the criteria of in the three episodes the modeling November 15, 1999, and the CAA. In this context, in the absence seemed to under predict at paired Reclassification.’’ For the reasons stated of a prior existing requirement for the monitor vs. observed values. The above in the ‘‘Background’’ portion of State to use voluntary consensus ‘‘Average Accuracy of the Peak’’ the this notice, EPA is making this final standards (VCS), EPA has no authority ‘‘Normalized Bias’’ metrics seem to action immediately effective. to disapprove a SIP submission for indicate that the model was either less Administrative Requirements failure to use VCS. It would thus be that 3% over or was under predicting inconsistent with applicable law for within the Grid D domain for most of Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, the modeled days of the three episodes 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is to use VCS in place of a SIP submission (20 out of 25 days for the Average not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Accuracy of the Peak and 19 out of 25 therefore is not subject to review by the the CAA. Thus, the requirements of days for the Normalized Bias). Both of Office of Management and Budget. For section 12(d) of the National these metrics compare monitored values this reason, this action is also not Technology Transfer and Advancement with modeled values to evaluate the subject to Executive Order 13211, Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not model performance. Model runs ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That apply. This rule does not impose an conducted by LDEQ clearly Significantly Affect Energy Supply, information collection burden under the demonstrated the impact of large Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May provisions of the Paperwork Reduction increases in ‘‘new’’ emissions in the 22, 2001). This action merely approves Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). area of influence. Such increases, state law as meeting Federal without a one-to-one offset, clearly requirements and imposes no additional The Congressional Review Act, 5 impacted the attainment demonstration. requirements beyond those imposed by U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Furthermore, the state is free to adopt a state law. Accordingly, the Business Regulatory Enforcement more stringent control strategy if the Administrator certifies that this rule Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides state wishes (Section 116 of the CAA). will not have a significant economic that before a rule may take effect, the impact on a substantial number of small agency promulgating the rule must XII. What Action Is EPA Taking entities under the Regulatory Flexibility submit a rule report, which includes a Regarding the State Submittals Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this copy of the rule, to each House of the Addressed by This Final Rule? rule approves pre-existing requirements Congress and to the Comptroller General EPA is taking the following actions on under state law and does not impose of the United States. EPA will submit a the state submittals addressed by this any additional enforceable duty beyond report containing this rule and other final rule: that required by state law, it does not required information to the U.S. Senate, 1. EPA is approving the ground-level contain any unfunded mandate or the U.S. House of Representatives, and 1-hour ozone attainment demonstration significantly or uniquely affect small the Comptroller General of the United SIP for the Baton Rouge, Louisiana, governments, as described in the States prior to publication of the rule in ozone nonattainment area. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 the Federal Register. A major rule 2. EPA is approving the State’s (Public Law 104–4). cannot take effect until 60 days after it Transport Demonstration and is granting This rule also does not have tribal is published in the Federal Register. the State’s request for extension, and implications because it will not have a This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as extending the date for attaining the 1- substantial direct effect on one or more defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61801

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. petitions for judicial review of this relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, action must be filed in the United States Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting Subpart T–Louisiana Court of Appeals for the appropriate and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 2. The table in § 52.970(e) entitled circuit by December 2, 2002. Filing a oxides. ‘‘EPA Approved Louisiana petition for reconsideration by the 40 CFR Part 81 Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Administrator of this final rule does not Measures’’ is amended by: affect the finality of this rule for the Environmental protection, Air a. removing the entries for: ‘‘Revision purposes of judicial review nor does it pollution control, National parks, to SIP, 15% ROP Plan;’’ ‘‘Post–1996 extend the time within which a petition Ozone, Wilderness areas. ROP Plan;’’ ‘‘Attainment Demonstration for judicial review may be filed, and Dated: September 24, 2002 for the 1–Hour Ozone NAAQS;’’ ‘‘1999 shall not postpone the effectiveness of Gregg A. Cooke, Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets;’’ and such rule or action. This action may not Regional Administrator, Region 6. ‘‘Revised 1990 Base Year VOC be challenged later in proceedings to Emissions Inventory’’ and enforce its requirements. (See section Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 307(b)(2).) Federal Regulations is amended as b. adding entries to the end of the follows: table. List of Subjects The additions read as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 40 CFR Part 52 § 52.970 Identification of Plan. Environmental protection, Air 1. The authority citation for part 52 * * * * * pollution control, Carbon monoxide, continues to read as follows: (e) * * *

EPA APPROVED LOUISIANA NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES

State submittal Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or date/effective EPA approval date Explanation nonattainment area date

******* Attainment Demonstration for the 1-Hour Ozone Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR NAAQS. 61786]. Ozone Attainment Date Extension to 11/15/05 ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786]. 2005 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786]. Enforceable Transportation Control Measure Appen- Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR dix F. 61786]. Enforceable commitment to perform a mid-course re- Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR view and submit a SIP and revision by 05/01/04. 61786]. Post 1996 Rate of Progress Plan Revisions ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786]. 15% Rate of Progress Plan Revisions ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786]. 1990 VOC Base Year Inventory Revisions ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786]. Reasonable Available Control Measure Analysis ...... Baton Rouge, LA ...... 12/31/2001 October 2, 2002 [67 FR 61786].

PART 81—[AMENDED] 2. The amendment to § 81.319 which Ozone (1-Hour Standard)’’ is amended published on June 24, 2002 (67 FR by revising the entry for the Baton 1. The authority citation for part 81 42688) and were revised on August 20, Rouge area to read as follows: continues to read as follows: 2002 (67 FR 53882) to become effective on October 4, 2002, are withdrawn. The § 81.319 Louisiana. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. table in § 81.319 entitled ‘‘Louisiana— * * * * *

LOUISIANA-OZONE [1-Hour Standard]

Designation Classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

Baton Rouge area: Ascension Parish ...... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ...... 11/15/90 Serious. East Baton Rouge Parish ...... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ...... 11/15/90 Serious. Iberville Parish ...... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ...... 11/15/90 Serious. Livingston Parish ...... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ...... 11/15/90 Serious. West Baton Rouge Parish ...... 11/15/90 Nonattainment ...... 11/15/90 Serious.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61802 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

LOUISIANA-OZONE—Continued [1–Hour Standard]

Designation Classification Designated area Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

******* 1 This date is October 18, 2000, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * * Federal Register informing the public Because EPA considers this action to [FR Doc. 02–24763 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] that the deletion will not take effect. be non-controversial and routine, EPA is BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed, taking it without prior publication of a telephoned, or e-mailed to: Timothy notice of intent to delete. This action Fischer, Remedial Project Manager at will be effective December 2, 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (312) 886–5787, unless EPA receives adverse comments AGENCY [email protected] or Gladys by November 1, 2002 on this document. Beard, State NPL Deletion Process If adverse comments are received within 40 CFR Part 300 Manager at (312) 886–7254, the 30-day public comment period on [email protected], Superfund this document, EPA will publish a [FRL–7383–9] Division, U.S. EPA Region, 5, 77 W. timely withdrawal of this direct final Jackson Blvd. (SR–6J), Chicago, IL deletion before the effective date of the National Oil and Hazardous Substance 60604. deletion and the deletion will not take Pollution Contingency Plan; National Information Repositories: effect. EPA will, as appropriate, prepare Priorities List Comprehensive information about the a response to comments and continue AGENCY: Environmental Protection Site is available for viewing and copying with the deletion process on the basis of Agency. at the Site information repositories the notice of intent to delete and the located at: EPA Region V Library, 77 W. comments already received. There will ACTION: Direct final notice of deletion of be no additional opportunity to a portion of the Department of Energy Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Il 60604, (312) 353–5821, Monday through Friday comment. (DOE) Mound Superfund Site from the Section II of this document explains National Priorities List. 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.; The CERCLA Public Reading Room, Miamisburg Senior the criteria for deleting sites from the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Adult Center, 305 Central Avenue, NPL. Section III discusses procedures Agency (EPA), Region V is publishing a Miamisburg, OH 45342. that EPA is using for this action. Section direct final notice of deletion of Parcel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: IV discusses Parcel 4 of the DOE Mound 4 of the Department of Energy (DOE) Timothy Fischer, Remedial Project Superfund Site and demonstrates how a Mound Superfund Site (Mound Site), Manager at (312) 886–5787, portion of the Site meets the deletion located in Miamisburg, Ohio, from the [email protected] or Gladys criteria. Section V discusses EPA’s National Priorities List (NPL). Beard, State NPL Deletion Process action to delete a portion of the Site The NPL, promulgated pursuant to Manager at (312) 886–7253, from the NPL unless adverse comments section 105 of the Comprehensive [email protected] or 1–800–621– are received during the public comment Environmental Response, 8431, EPA Region V, 77 W. Jackson period. Compensation, and Liability Act Boulevard, Mail Code SR–6J, Chicago, II. NPL Deletion Criteria (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is IL 60604. Section 300.425(e) of the NCP appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provides that releases may be deleted is the National Oil and Hazardous from the NPL where no further response Substances Pollution Contingency Plan Table of Contents is appropriate. In making a (NCP). This direct final deletion is being I. Introduction determination to delete a release from published by EPA with the concurrence II. NPL Deletion Criteria the NPL, EPA shall consider, in of the State of Ohio, through the Ohio III. Deletion Procedures IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion consultation with the State, whether any Environmental Protection Agency V. Deletion Action of the following criteria have been met: (OEPA), because EPA and the OEPA i. Responsible parties or other persons I. Introduction have determined that the Department of have implemented all appropriate Energy has implemented all appropriate EPA Region V is publishing this direct response actions required; response actions required with respect final notice of deletion of a portion of ii. All appropriate Fund-financed to Parcel 4. This deletion does not the Department of Energy Mound (Hazardous Substance Superfund preclude future actions under Superfund Site (Mound Site), from the Response Trust Fund) responses under Superfund or relieve DOE of their Long- NPL. CERCLA have been implemented, and Term Stewardship or Operation and EPA identifies sites that appear to no further response action by Maintenance responsibilities. present a significant risk to public responsible parties is appropriate; or DATES: This direct final notice of partial health or the environment and iii. The remedial investigation has deletion will be effective December 2, maintains the NPL as the list of those shown that the release poses no 2002 unless EPA receives adverse sites. As described in section significant threat to public health or the comments by October 31, 2002. If 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted environment and, therefore, the taking adverse comments are received, EPA from the NPL remain eligible for of remedial measures is not appropriate. will publish a timely withdrawal of the remedial actions if conditions at a Even if a site or portions of a site are direct final notice of deletion in the deleted site warrant such action. deleted from the NPL, where hazardous

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61803

substances, pollutants, or contaminants site from the NPL does not preclude inefficient for Mound due to the number remain at the deleted site above levels eligibility for future response actions and variety of contaminants on the Site. that allow for unlimited use and should future conditions warrant such DOE, EPA, and OEPA agreed that it unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section actions. would be better to evaluate each PRS or 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), requires that building separately, use removal action IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion a subsequent review of the site be authority to remediate each one as conducted at least every five years after The following information provides needed, and establish a goal of no the initiation of the remedial action at EPA’s rationale for deleting Parcel 4 of additional remediation other than the deleted site to ensure that the action the Mound Site from the NPL and EPA’s institutional controls for the final remains protective of public health and finding that the criteria in 40 CFR remedy. Following completion of the environment. If new information 300.425(e) are satisfied: removal actions, a residual risk becomes available which indicates a Site Location evaluation would be conducted to need for further action, DOE or EPA ensure that industrial use of the block may initiate remedial actions. Whenever The Mound Site is located in or building would be safe. DOE, EPA, there is a significant release from a site Miamisburg, Ohio, about 10 miles south and OEPA called this approach the deleted from the NPL, the deleted site of Dayton and 45 miles north of ‘‘Mound 2000 Process.’’ may be restored to the NPL without Cincinnati. The 306-acre site consists of The Mound 2000 Process established application of the hazard ranking a number of industrial buildings in the a Core Team consisting of system. northern portion of the Mound Site, and representatives of DOE, EPA, and OEPA. open land in the southern portion. The The Core Team evaluates each of the III. Deletion Procedures Mound Site is located near an ancient potential contamination problems at the The following procedures apply to the Indian mound; hence the name of the Mound Site and recommends the partial deletion of this Site: DOE facility—the Mound Plant. Parcel 4 appropriate response. It uses (1) The EPA consulted with Ohio on is generally bound to the north by the information gathered from site visits, the partial deletion of the Site from the operational area of the plant, to the east existing data, and knowledge of Mound NPL prior to developing this direct final by off-site residences, to the south by Plant processes to determine whether or notice of deletion. Benner Road, and to the west by the not any action is warranted for potential (2) Ohio concurred with the partial Miami-Erie Canal. A legal description of release sites. If a decision cannot be deletion of the Site from the NPL. Parcel 4 is included in the Record of made based on the information on hand, (3) Concurrently with the publication Decision for Parcel 4, and in the the Core Team identifies the specific, of this direct final notice of partial administrative record for the partial additional information needed. The deletion, a notice of intent to partially deletion decision. Core Team also receives input from delete is published today in the technical experts and from the public. Site History ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the Federal Thus, all stakeholders have an Register, as well as in a major local Most of the Site is owned by the opportunity to express their opinions or newspaper of general circulation at or United States Department of Energy, suggestions for each potential problem near the Site, and is being distributed to which began operations there in 1948 area. appropriate federal, state, and local involving the manufacture of triggering In February 2001, DOE conducted a government officials and other devices for nuclear weapons. As a result residual risk evaluation for Parcel 4 of interested parties. The newspaper notice of past disposal practices and the Mound Site. The purpose of the risk announces the 30-day public comment contaminant releases to the evaluation was to assess risks associated period concerning the notice of intent to environment, including radioactive with levels of contamination that exist partially delete the Site from the NPL. contaminants, the Mound Site was after completion of removal action. The (4) The EPA placed copies of listed on the NPL on November 21, 1989 residual risk evaluation method was documents supporting the partial (54 FR 48184). DOE signed a CERCLA consistent with the CERCLA baseline deletion in the site information Section 120 Federal Facility Agreement risk assessment method to ensure that repositories identified above. (FFA) with EPA in October, 1990. In future users of the land would not be (5) If adverse comments are received 1993, this agreement was modified and exposed to contaminant levels that within the 30-day public comment expanded to include OEPA. DOE serves would pose unacceptable risks. The period on this document EPA will as the lead agency for CERCLA-related residual risk assessment for Parcel 4 publish a timely notice of withdrawal of activities at the Mound Site. determined that limiting use of Parcel 4 this direct final notice of partial deletion to industrial/commercial uses was Remedial Investigation and Feasibility before its effective date and will prepare protective of human health and the Study (RI/FS) a response to comments and continue environment. with a decision on the partial deletion DOE, EPA, and OEPA originally based on the notice of intent to partially planned to address the Mound Site’s Record of Decision Finding delete and the comments already environmental restoration issues under The ROD was signed for Parcel 4 of received. a set of Operable Units(OUs), each of the Mound Site on March 8, 2001. The Deletion or partial deletion of a site which would include a number of selected remedy included institutional from the NPL does not itself create, Potential Release Sites (RRSs). For each controls in the form of deed restrictions alter, or revoke any individual’s rights OU, the site would follow the on future land and groundwater use. or obligations. Deletion or partial traditional CERCLA Process: A DOE, or its successors, as the lead deletion of a site from the NPL does not Remedial Investigation/Feasibility agency for this ROD, has the in any way alter EPA’s right to take Study (RI/FS), followed by a Record of responsibility to monitor, maintain and enforcement actions, as appropriate. Decision (ROD) and Remedial Design/ enforce these institutional controls. In The NPL is designed primarily for Remedial Action (RD/RA). In 1995, after order to maintain protection of human informational purposes and to assist beginning remedial investigations for health and the environment at Parcel 4 EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) several OUs, DOE and its regulators in the future, the institutional controls of the NCP states that the deletion of a concluded that the OU approach was ensure:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61804 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

1. Maintenance of industrial/ remedial actions, removal actions, and EPA, and DOE in 1993, including Long- commercial land use; facility stabilization). This concept of Term Stewardship or Operation and 2. Prohibition against residential use; long-term stewardship includes, inter Maintenance responsibilities. 3. Prohibition against the use of alia, land use controls, monitoring, V. Deletion Action groundwater; maintenance, and information 4. Site access for federal and state management (This definition of long- The EPA, with concurrence of the agencies for the purpose of sampling term stewardship comes from the 1998 State of Ohio, has determined that the and monitoring; and settlement agreement DOE entered into; Department of Energy has implemented 5. Prohibition against removal of NRDC, et al. v. Richardson, et al., Civ. all appropriate response actions Parcel 4 soils from the DOE Mound No. 97–963).’’ The LTS Plan for DOE required, and that no further CERCLA property boundary (as owned in 1998) Mound covers all the above concepts response is appropriate to provide without approval from the Ohio and refers to the processes set up to protection of human health and the Department of Health (ODH) and the ensure the effectiveness of the environment. Therefore, EPA is deleting Ohio Environmental Protection Agency institutional controls. For more Parcel 4 of the Site from the NPL. (OEPA). information, contact Dann Bird, Because EPA considers this action to Miamisburg Mound Community ROD Implementation be non-controversial and routine, EPA is Improvement Corporation, at (937) 865– taking it without prior publication. This DOE has implemented the ROD for 4266 or Sue Smiley, Department of action will be effective December 2, Parcel 4 by placing restrictions in the Energy, at (937) 865–3984. deed for the Parcel. DOE conveyed 2002, unless EPA receives adverse Parcel 4 to the Miamisburg Mound Five-Year Review comments by November 1, 2002. If Community Improvement Corporation Because the remedy for Parcel 4 does adverse comments are received within (MMCIC) on April 19, 2001. Because the not allow unlimited use of and the 30-day public comment period, EPA restrictions have been placed in a Quit unrestricted exposure to the property, will publish a timely withdrawal of this Claim Deed for Parcel 4 and that deed DOE is required by Section 121(c) of direct final notice of deletion before the has been executed with the transfer of CERCLA to review the remedy to assure effective date of the deletion and it will the land to the MMCIC, the restrictions that it continues to protect human not take effect. EPA will prepare a are enforceable and the remedy is health and the environment. While response to comments and as considered ‘‘implemented’. CERCLA requires a review at least once appropriate continue with the deletion While EPA does not believe that any every 5 years after the initiation of process on the basis of the notice of future response actions for Parcel 4 will remedial action, DOE committed itself intent to delete and the comments be needed, if future conditions warrant to conduct such reviews annually. DOE already received. There will be no such action, this area of the Mound Site also committed itself to consult with additional opportunity to comment. would be eligible for Fund-financed U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, and the Ohio List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 response actions. This partial deletion Department of Health on these reviews. affects Parcel 4 only. The remainder of The first Five-Year Review of the Environmental protection, Air the Site, save for those portions deleted Mound Plant was completed on pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous in a previous action (see 66 FR 10371– September 28, 2001. It concluded that waste, Hazardous substances, 10374), remain on the NPL. the Parcel 4 remedy remains protective Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, of human health and the environment. Reporting and recordkeeping Operation and Maintenance of requirements, Superfund, Water Institutional Controls An additional walkover inspection of the Parcel 4 property was accomplished pollution control, Water supply. Under the ROD signed on March 8, on May 21, 2002, and no violations of Dated: September 17, 2002. 2001, the Department of Energy the deed restrictions were documented. Norman Niedergang, committed itself to monitor and maintain the institutional controls for Community Involvement Acting Regional Administrator, Region V. Parcel 4 required by the ROD, and to Public participation activities with For the reasons set out in this enforce them if necessary. The ROD also respect to any response actions in Parcel document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended required DOE to provide U.S. EPA and 4 have been satisfied as required in as follows: Ohio EPA with periodic compliance CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. assessments. Deletion of Parcel 4 from 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42 PART 300—[AMENDED] the NPL does not alter in any way DOE’s U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion 1. The authority citation for part 300 Operation and Maintenance or Long- docket which EPA relied on for continues to read as follows: Term Stewardship obligations under the recommendation of the partial deletion Parcel 4 ROD. A Long-Term of this Site from the NPL are available Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. Stewardship Plan is under development to the public in the information 9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, for the DOE Mound Plant. Long-Term repositories. 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, Stewardship (LTS) is defined as ‘‘the 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. Federal Facility Agreement physical controls, institutions, Appendix B—[Amended] information and other mechanisms Deletion of Parcel 4 from the NPL in needed to ensure protection of people no way alters the obligations of the 2. Table 2 of Appendix B to Part 300 and the environment at sites where DOE Department of Energy under the Federal is amended under Ohio ‘‘OH’’ by has completed or plans to complete Facility Agreement under CERCLA revising the entry for ‘‘Mound Plant ‘cleanup’ (e.g., landfill closures, Section 120, signed by U.S. EPA, Ohio (USDOE)’’ and the city ‘‘Miamisburg.’’

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61805

TABLE 2.—FEDERAL FACILITIES SECTION

State Site name City/County (Notes) a

******* OH ...... Mound Miamisburg P Plant (USDOE)

******* (a) P=Sites with partial deletion(s).

* * * * * revise all of the hospital conditions of National Association of Psychiatric [FR Doc. 02–24641 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] participation (CoPs), emphasizing Health Sys. v. Shalala, 120 F.Supp.2d BILLING CODE 6560–50–U lessening Federal regulations to 33 (D.D.C. 2000).) Plaintiffs challenged eliminate unnecessary structural and one provision of the new CoP, the process requirements, focus on requirement that hospitals must provide DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND outcomes of care, allow greater for an in-person evaluation of a patient HUMAN SERVICES flexibility to hospitals and practitioners by a physician or other licensed to meet quality standards, and place a independent practitioner (LIP) within 1 Centers for Medicaid & Medicare stronger emphasis on quality assessment hour of initiating the use of restraint or Services and performance improvement. The placing the patient in seclusion to proposed rule introduced our intent to address the patients’ violent or 42 CFR Part 482 include a new Patients’ Rights CoP for aggressive behavior. (See hospitals. We solicited comments and § 482.13(f)(3)(ii)(C).) [CMS–3018–N] received strong support for the On September 14, 2000, the Court RIN 0938–AL15 establishment of the new CoP from the ruled in favor of the Secretary with public, mental health advocacy groups, respect to the plaintiffs’ challenge under Medicare and Medicaid Programs; the media, and the Congress. the Administrative Procedures Act; Hospital Conditions of Participation: After the proposed rule was however, the Court ruled against the Clarification of the Regulatory published, reports of injuries and deaths Secretary with respect to the plaintiffs’ Flexibility Analysis for Patients’ Rights associated with the use of restraints and claim that the rule failed to fulfill seclusion increased our concern about certain requirements of the Regulatory AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Flexibility Act (RFA). In its decision, Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. patient safety. State surveyors, patient advocacy groups, the media, and the the Court noted that the RFA requires— ACTION: Interim final rule; clarification • A succinct statement of the need for public also brought complaints about of regulatory flexibility analysis. and objectives of the rule; hospital violations of patients’ rights to • A summary of and response to the SUMMARY: On July 2, 1999, we published our attention. These violations included significant issues raised by public an interim final rule with comment denying or frustrating patients’ access to comments to the RFA assessment in the period introducing a new Patients’ care, denying patients’ full involvement notice of proposed rulemaking; Rights Condition of Participation (CoP) in their treatment, disregarding patients’ • A description and estimate of the that hospitals must meet to be approved advance directives, and denying number of small entities to which the for, or to continue participation in, the patients access to their records. In the rule will be applied; Medicare and Medicaid programs. July 2, 1999 Federal Register (64 FR • A description of the projected Several aspects of that interim final rule 36070), we published an interim final reporting and recordkeeping with comment period were challenged, rule with comment period to address requirements of the rule, including an including its regulatory flexibility these concerns and assure patient safety. estimate of the effect that the analysis (RFA). As a result of this The rule set forth requirements recordkeeping requirements will have action, a Federal court, without supporting and protecting patients’ on small entities; and enjoining continued enforcement of the rights in the hospital setting, • A description of the efforts the rule, ordered the Secretary of the specifically, the right to be free from the agency has taken to minimize the Department Health and Human Services inappropriate use of seclusion and significant economic impact of the rule (DHHS) to complete a compliant RFA to restraint, with requirements to protect on small businesses, including a accompany the interim final rule with the patient when use of either discussion of the less restrictive comment period. This document intervention is necessary. alternatives considered and rejected. The Court, noting that the Secretary addresses the court’s order. B. Legal Challenge of the Interim Final had not made a ‘‘reasonable good faith FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: With Comment Period Jeannie Miller, RN, (410) 786–3164. effort to canvass major options and The interim final rule with comment weigh their probable effects,’’ concluded SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: period was challenged in United States that the agency failed to satisfy the fifth I. Background District Court for the District of element of the Regulatory Flexibility Columbia by the National Association of Act. The case was remanded to the A. General Psychiatric Health Systems, the Department of Health and Human In the December 19, 1997 Federal American Hospital Association, the Services for completion of a compliant Register (62 FR 66726), we published a Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Foundation, RFA without enjoining continued proposed rule that detailed our plans to Incorporated, and Acadia Hospital. (See enforcement of the requirements of the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61806 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

interim final rule with comment period. although Medicare- and Medicaid- b. Training (§§ 482.13(e)(5) and (f)(6)) Accordingly, we are publishing this participating hospitals have diverse Section 482.13(e)(5) requires that staff notice to discuss the alternatives that we characteristics, many are accredited; with direct patient contact (that is, staff considered when developing the July 2, and therefore, could be assumed to have who may be involved either with the 1999 interim final rule with comment been meeting pre-existing accreditation application of a restraint or the period. standards at the time the interim final monitoring, assessment, or reevaluation II. Revised Regulatory Impact Analysis rule with comment period was of a restrained or secluded patient’s of the July 2, 1999 Rule published. condition) are provided with ongoing Furthermore, with the increasing education and training in the proper A. Introduction amount of research and literature and safe use of restraints. Section When we published the July 2, 1999 identifying the potential hazards 482.13(f)(6) parallels these requirements interim final rule with comment period, associated with restraint use, some and adds that staff involved in the we lacked critical factual reports, hospitals were already engaged in application of a physical restraint or studies, and data that would have aided efforts to reduce the use of restraints. seclusion to manage aggressive or in the development of specific cost or The variations among hospitals, the lack violent behavior must receive additional savings estimates. This factor continues of data on the prevalence of restraint or training in alternative methods for to be an obstacle in providing cost seclusion use in hospitals, and the trend handling behavior, symptoms, and estimates on the impact of some of the of restraint use reduction efforts created situations that have been traditionally requirements. problems in the formulation of a treated using restraints or seclusion. At the time of the publication of the specific estimate for the interim final When writing the interim final rule July 2, 1999 interim final rule with rule with comment period. While these with comment period, we considered comment period, at least 80 percent of were obstacles to the formulation of an the burden of requiring training on the the 6,116 inpatient hospitals that estimate for the interim final rule with use of restraints and seclusion for all participate in the Medicare or Medicaid comment period, we invite hospital staff members with direct patient programs were subject to existing feedback on these points so that we may contact. We believed that some persons accreditation requirements pertaining to use this information in formulation of inaccurately construed the requirement the use of restraints and seclusion. the final rule and its impact estimate. to entail the training of dietary, While the pre-1999 Joint Commission administrative, housekeeping, and other for the Accreditation of Healthcare B. Anticipated Effects and Options types of staff who are not involved in Organizations (JCAHO) requirements Considered the application or use of restraints or did not contain all elements addressed 1. Effects on Hospitals seclusion. (See Tag A797, Appendix A by the interim final rule with comment of the State Operations Manual, HCFA period, many parallel standards were in a. Restraint and Seclusion (§ 482.13(e) Pub. No. 7, page A196.) place. There were two major differences and (f)) Most hospitals that participate in between JCAHO’s standards and our Medicare or Medicaid already have standards. The first is that JCAHO did Our regulations in § 482.13(e) and (f) some type of training program; not require the 1-hour face-to-face prohibit the use of restraint and therefore, we believed that these assessment but instead required a phone seclusion for purposes of coercion, requirements refine existing programs call to the LIP. The second is that discipline, convenience or retaliation by rather than mandate new ones. JCAHO’s JCAHO’s monitoring requirements were staff. These regulations also establish standards are applicable to accredited more stringent than ours. It is worth procedures that apply when hospitals hospitals (currently 80 percent of noting that JACHO is enforcing all of use restraint or seclusion. Medicare- and Medicaid-participating our requirements, including the 1-hour We considered developing one set of hospitals) and require a similar training rule, when conducting accreditation general requirements regulating restraint program for staff involved with the surveys. Accredited hospitals operated and seclusion use in all hospitals. application of restraints or seclusion. in an atmosphere that emphasized the However, based on public comments (See JCAHO’s 2000 Comprehensive elimination of unnecessary restraint, and recent concern regarding the risks Accreditation Manual for Hospitals monitoring use, and reporting sentinel associated with restraint and seclusion standard TX 7.1.1.3 (which indicates events to the JCAHO. Therefore, we use for behavior management situations, that staff orientation and education approximated that 4,893 facilities were we concluded that one set of create a culture emphasizing prevention already subject to restraint and requirements did not afford patients and appropriate use of restraint or seclusion requirements. The remaining with adequate protections. Moreover, seclusion as well as encouraging 1,223 facilities (non-profit, proprietary, we believe that it is important to alternatives) and standard TX 7.1.3.1.4 and government-funded) would be maintain consistency between Federal (which requires that restraint or subject to any existing state laws and accreditation standards. Therefore, seclusion is only used correctly by concerning the use of restraint and we adopted an approach to restraints competent, trained staff)). seclusion. Additionally, at least two and seclusion similar to the existing Lastly, we considered no training States (New York and Pennsylvania) standards that JCAHO created (for requirements; however, the Hartford had established detailed regulations and example, differentiating between Courant newspaper series indicated that policies regarding the use of restraint situations when a restraint is being used training programs are a key ingredient and seclusion in State-run and private to manage behavior and the concept of in assuring a reduction in patient facilities. Therefore, we concluded that time limited orders). Accordingly, we injuries and deaths associated with the the majority of hospitals were already made a distinction between restraint use use of restraints and seclusion. To omit affected by restraint and seclusion- in the provision of acute medical and this requirement in the interim final related requirements, even if they were postsurgical care (§ 482.13(e)) and rule with comment period would have not equal in all points to the restraint and seclusion use for the been to leave a critical gap in the requirements specified in the interim management of aggressive or violent strategy to improve patient care and final rule with comment period. Thus, behavior (§ 482.13(f)). assure patient safety.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61807

c. Face-to-Face Monitoring without a demonstrable benefit in many others, it is essential to examine: (1) The (§ 482.13(f)(4)) cases. immediate situation, that is whether the When the interim final rule with patient has been injured by the The hospital CoPs require continuous comment period was published in July intervention; (2) the patient’s reaction to face-to-face monitoring of a patient who 1999, we were not aware of any data the intervention; (3) the patient’s overall is simultaneously physically restrained regarding the appropriateness of the 1- medical and psychiatric condition; and and secluded to address violent or hour timeframe and we solicited, but (4) whether the behavior may stem from aggressive behavior. As an alternative, did not receive, comments providing a condition that can be remedied continuous monitoring may occur data undercutting this requirement. quickly. Such a determination is a through the use of both video and audio In including the 1-hour provision, we medical decision that requires the equipment, with the monitoring considered that hospitals are required to integration of many pieces of occurring in close proximity to the have 24-hour physician coverage. information, and therefore; merits a patient to allow quick intervention Section 482.12(c)(3) requires that the physician’s or other LIP’s attention. when needed. governing body of the hospital must We also considered other options that We agree that this requirement may ensure that a doctor of medicine or may be perceived as less burdensome. incur costs for hospitals, depending on osteopathy is on duty or on call at all We could have drafted regulations that their current practice. However, we times. The interim final with comment remained silent on the timeframe for a believed that the training required by period did not change this requirement physician’s or other LIP’s assessment of the July 2, 1999 interim final rule with or require hiring of new staff or having a restrained or secluded patient. This comment period equipped staff with a physician onsite at all times. When alternative may be feasible for the types alternative methods for handling violent staff are trained in alternatives to or uses of restraint described in or aggressive patient behavior thereby restraint or seclusion, prevalence of use § 482.13(e). In these types of situations, should decline so that restraint or reducing overall use of restraint or we left to the physician’s or other LIP’s seclusion is used only as a last resort. seclusion. discretion the decision of whether We understand that for certain patient We did not require that this immediate, inperson assessment is populations, such as for those who have monitoring be done by a registered required. In an instance when an self mutilating behaviors, a requirement nurse. It could be performed by a armboard is applied to prevent for recurring onsite visits to assess the nursing assistant or other staff member accidental dislodging of an intravenous use of a restraint that is part of the who has completed the required needle, arguably the application of the patient’s treatment plan may not be training. restraint does not represent a significant needed or appropriate. We plan to change in the patient’s status, nor does We considered only requiring address these uses in forthcoming periodic monitoring when the two interpretive guidelines. Additionally, the armboard pose a grave hazard to the interventions are used simultaneously. we reiterate that uses of restraint that patient’s health or safety. In contrast, a However, we concluded that the occur in conjunction with an acute care patient’s attempt to self-extubate could instances meriting dual use of restraint need do not trigger the need for warrant immediate physician attention, or seclusion would be so rare and evaluation of the patient by a physician depending on the patient and whether extreme that they would indicate a need or other LIP within one hour. These this behavior represents a marked for greater staff vigilance. Restraint and uses may include, for example, a patient change in status. However, we believed seclusion can actually increase the who is attempting self-extubation or that requiring an inperson assessment patient’s agitation, and staff should be tearing at lines whose behavior cannot within 1 hour for the variety of restraint available to help the patient regain self be handled through less restrictive uses under § 482.13(e) was not feasible control, thus ending one intervention or means. because of the wide range of both as quickly as possible. Leaving a In establishing this requirement, we circumstances covered by that standard. distressed patient alone for half an hour considered onsite physician-only On the other hand, § 482.13(f) is more or longer, not understanding what is assessment within half an hour, which focused. We considered whether happening to him or her, does not is the policy in one State’s mental immediate attention was necessary facilitate the patient’s recovery of his or health system. However, we believed when restraint or seclusion was used to her self-control. We concluded that that this timeframe would not be manage a patient’s violent or aggressive uninterrupted monitoring assures that if reasonable in rural or remote areas, and behavior. We recognized that the types the patient becomes more distressed by therefore; we did not impose this of behavior that warrant the patient’s the intervention, staff can assist quickly. requirement. placement in seclusion or the d. One-Hour Evaluation We also considered less prescriptive application of restraint often create a (§ 482.13(f)(3)(ii)(C)) approaches. For example, we could situation in which both the patient and have drafted regulations that remained staff are at risk for injury. The patient The interim final rule with comment silent on this point. However, various who is resisting staff restraint in this period requires face-to-face assessment, sources of information, including the situation is unlike the noncombative by a physician or other LIP within one press indicated that the patient is at patient who had an armboard applied. hour of the initiation of the high risk for injury when being This patient has transitioned from intervention, of a patient who has been restrained or secluded in an effort to seemingly calm behavior into a state at restrained or secluded to manage his or manage his or her violent or aggressive which an extreme measure has been her violent or aggressive behavior. We behavior. (See ‘‘Deadly Restraint: A undertaken to protect him or her. As considered whether this requirement Hartford Courant Investigative Report,’’ discussed in the preamble to the interim was impossible to fulfill because of the with articles from October 11 through final rule with comment period, we lack of available personnel, geographic 15, 1998). Often patients are medically concluded that quick, medical barriers, and costs associated with this complex, with concomitant medical and involvement is warranted to assure degree of coverage. We also considered psychiatric symptoms and conditions. safety and to develop a plan to avert or whether a required onsite evaluation by When staff must resort to restraint or diminish further conflict. We believed a physician or LIP is too costly or seclusion to protect the patient or that the maximum timeframe of 1 hour

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61808 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

established by this rule is a reasonable Dated: September 24, 2002. Year Number of one. Deaths Thomas A. Scully, We also considered permitting a staff Administrator, Centers for Medicare and August 1999—December Medicaid Services. member to perform a patient assessment 1999 1 ...... 14 through telephone consultation with a 2000 ...... 34 Dated: September 26, 2002. physician or other LIP. Given the 2001 ...... 22 Tommy G. Thompson, complexity of the patient population, January 2002–March 2002 2 .... 5 Secretary of Health and Human Services. we did not select this option. Physicians Total from August 1999– [FR Doc. 02–24857 Filed 9–27–02; 9:51 am] and LIPs are extensively trained in March 2002 ...... 75 BILLING CODE 4120–01–P assessment of symptoms and behaviors, 1 in physical examination and The interim final rule with comment period was published on July 2, 1999 and effective formulation of diagnoses and resulting on August 2, 1999. Therefore, no data on DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND treatment strategies. Staff who are onsite deaths related to restraint or seclusion use HUMAN SERVICES may have widely disparate assessment was submitted by providers before August skills. Some hospitals may staff patient 1999. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 2 The latest data available is through March care areas with licensed practical nurses 2002. Services or other available staff. We are not persuaded that these staff members have 3. Effects on the Medicare and Medicaid 42 CFR Parts 482, 483, and 484 the physical and psychiatric assessment Programs skills that correspond to the medical [CMS–3160–FC] complexity of a patient in crisis. We did not expect the Accordingly, we opted not to permit implementation of the new Patients’ RIN 0938–AM00 patient assessment through telephone Rights CoP to generate significant costs Medicare and Medicaid Programs; consultation. to the Medicare or Medicaid programs. We did not believe that there would be Conditions of Participation: 2. Effect on Beneficiaries any additional costs to the survey and Immunization Standards for Hospitals, certification program as compliance Long-Term Care Facilities, and Home The implementation of the Patients’ with this new CoP either would be Health Agencies Rights CoP served to protect not only Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, reviewed through a routine, AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & but all patients receiving care in any of nonaccredited hospital survey, a Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. the 6,166 Medicare- and Medicaid- validation survey or as part of a ACTION: Final rule with comment period. participating hospitals (that is, acute complaint survey. SUMMARY: The provisions of this final care, psychiatric, rehabilitation, long- C. Conclusion term care, children’s, and alcohol-drug) rule will remove the Federal barrier including small rural hospitals. Our goal The Patients’ Rights CoP introduced related to the requirement for a is to safeguard against the mistreatment new Federal requirements that in many physician to order influenza and of all patients in these facilities instances reflected existing State, pneumococcal immunizations in including, but not limited to— (1) accreditation or professional standards. Medicare and Medicaid participating Deaths due to inappropriate restraint or These new Federal requirements are set hospitals, long-term care facilities, and seclusion use; (2) violation of patients’ forth in six standards to ensure home health agencies. This final rule will affect vaccine-preventable diseases privacy and confidentiality in various minimum protections of each patient’s and will help improve adult vaccination aspects of the healthcare delivery physical and emotional health and process; and (3) systematic frustration of coverage rates. It will facilitate the safety. These standards address the delivery of appropriate vaccinations in the patients’ efforts to acquire his or her patients’ right to— medical records. Patients benefit from a timely manner, increase the levels of • Be notified of his or her rights; the hospitals’ focus on patients’ rights. vaccination coverage, and decrease the Through these protections, patient care • Exercise his or her rights in regard morbidity and mortality rate of can be delivered in an atmosphere of to his or her care; influenza and pneumococcal diseases. respect for an individual patient’s • Privacy and safety; DATES: Effective date: These regulations comfort, dignity, and privacy. The are effective on October 2, 2002. • Confidentiality of and access to his interim final rule with comment period Comment date: Comments will be or her medical records; emphasizes the importance of staff considered if we receive them at the training, adequate monitoring and • Freedom from restraints used in appropriate address, as provided below, assessment, and prompt evaluation of the provision of acute medical and no later than 5 p.m. on December 2, restrained or secluded patients. As these postsurgical care unless clinically 2002. factors, lack of training, evaluation, necessary; and ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer monitoring, and assessment were • Freedom from restraint and to file code CMS–3160–FC. Because of involved in the deaths reported by the seclusion use to manage violent or staff and resource limitations, we cannot media, we believed that implementation aggressive behavior unless clinically accept comments by facsimile (FAX) of the Patients’ Rights CoP would lead necessary. transmission or e-mail. to a reduction in the number of Mail written comments (one original restraint- and seclusion-related injuries (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance and three copies) to the following and deaths in hospitals. The following Programs No. 93.773, Medicare— address only: Centers for Medicare & chart represents the data that we have Hospital Insurance and No. 93.778, Medicaid Services, Department of received from providers regarding Medical Assistance Program) Health and Human Services, Attention: deaths that may have been related to CMS–3160–FC, P.O. Box 8013, restraint or seclusion use: Baltimore, MD 21244–8013.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61809

Please allow sufficient time for mailed as Federal Depository Libraries and at and other illness, for an average savings comments to be received timely in the many other public and academic of $117 per vaccinated member. (‘‘The event of delivery delays. libraries throughout the country that costly toll of vaccine-preventable If you prefer, you may deliver (by receive the Federal Register. disease.’’ Business and Health; hand or courier) your written comments This Federal Register document is Montvale; 1995; (13)(3)16; Leavenworth, (one original and three copies) to one of also available from the Federal Register Geoffrey.) the following addresses: Room 445–G, online database through GPO Access, a Despite the availability of safe and Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 service of the U.S. Government Printing effective vaccines and substantial Independence Avenue, SW., Office. The Web site address is: http:// progress in reducing vaccine- Washington, DC 20201, or Room C5–14– www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html. preventable diseases, improving the delivery of the vaccines is vital to 03, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, I. Background MD 21244–1850. (Because access to the further reduce and eliminate vaccine- interior of the HHH Building is not A. Conditions of Participation: preventable causes of morbidity and readily available to persons without Immunization Standards for Hospitals, mortality. The administration of Federal Government identification, Long-Term Care Facilities, and Home influenza and pneumococcal commenters are encouraged to leave Health Agencies polysaccharide vaccines per standing orders, governed by the physician- their comments in the CMS drop slots 1. Influenza and Related Conditions located in the main lobby of the approved policies and procedures of the building. A stamp-in clock is available Influenza and pneumonia combined facility or agency, after assessments for for commenters wishing to retain a represent the fifth leading cause of contraindications, is the most death in the elderly. The 1999 RAND proof of filing by stamping in and consistently effective method for report prepared for the Centers for retaining an extra copy of the comments increasing adult vaccination rates and Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), being filed.) Comments mailed to the the least burdensome to implement. ‘‘Interventions that Increase the addresses indicated as appropriate for Influenza vaccine is the primary Utilization of Medicare-Funded hand or courier delivery may be delayed method for preventing influenza and its Preventive Services for Persons Age 65 and could be considered late. more severe complications. The and Older,’’ states that ‘‘influenza and For information on viewing public Advisory Committee on Immunization consequent respiratory diseases are comments, see the beginning of the Practices (ACIP) reported in 2002 that common causes of morbidity and the primary target group for influenza SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. mortality in the United States each year, vaccination includes persons who are at FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with 20,000 to 40,000 deaths reported high risk for serious complications from Anita Panicker, RN, MS, LCSW, (410) for each influenza epidemic. Over 90 influenza, including approximately 35 786–5646. Jeannie Miller, RN, (410) percent of these deaths occur among million persons who are more than 65 786–3164. those age 65 or older.’’ The report also years of age, and approximately 33 to 39 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: states that influenza vaccination ‘‘has million persons less than 65 who have been shown to be efficacious in the Inspection of Public Comments chronic underlying medical conditions. elderly, decreasing hospitalizations by Beginning with the 2000 to 2001 Comments received timely will be 27 percent to 57 percent and deaths by influenza season, the ACIP has added available for public inspection as they 27 percent to 30 percent.’’ (http:// persons aged 50 to 64 years to the are received, generally beginning www.cms.hhs.gov/healthyaging/2a.asp.) primary target group for annual approximately three weeks after The Center for Health Research, a part influenza vaccination. This age group publication of a document, at the of the Kaiser Permanente managed care was added because a substantial headquarters of the Centers for Medicare organization, studied the cost- proportion of persons aged 50 to 64 & Medicaid Services, 7500 Security effectiveness of influenza vaccination years (estimated at between 24 percent Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244, over nine flu seasons in its northwest and 32 percent of the total population) Monday through Friday of each week region in a study published in 1993. The have one or more chronic medical from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an study examined experiences of some conditions that place them at high risk appointment to view public comments, 69,000 elderly members of the health for influenza-related hospitalization and call (410) 786–7197. maintenance organization who death. Rates of influenza-related excess experienced 3,105 outpatient Copies hospitalization among adults younger pneumonia and influenza episodes, 894 than age 65 years old with one or more To order copies of the Federal hospitalizations, and 113 pneumonia high-risk conditions have been Register containing this document, send and influenza deaths. The estimated estimated at 392 to 635 per 100,000 your request to: New Orders, cost of providing a vaccination was persons compared with 13 to 23 per Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box $7.11; average medical care costs for 100,000 among those without high-risk 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. outpatient and inpatient episodes were conditions. There are minimal adverse Specify the date of the issue requested $106 and $5,730, respectively, for high- reactions or side effects related to and enclose a check or money order risk elderly patients, and $141 and influenza vaccines because, as the payable to the Superintendent of $4,477 for non-high-risk elderly Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Documents, or enclose your Visa or patients. A similar study examined the (MMWR) states, ‘‘inactivated influenza Master Card number and expiration cost-effectiveness of vaccinating elderly vaccine contains noninfectious killed date. Credit card orders can also be members of a Minnesota health plan viruses and cannot cause influenza.’’ placed by calling the order desk at (202) against influenza over three seasons The most frequent side effect of 512–1800 (or toll-free at 1–888–293– beginning in 1990. The plan, Group vaccination is soreness at the 6498) or by faxing to (202) 512–2250. Health Inc. of Minneapolis, vaccinated vaccination site that lasts less than 2 The cost for each copy is $10. As an 45 percent to 58 percent of its members days. Fever, malaise, myalgia, and other alternative, you can view and over age 64. Vaccinated individuals had systemic symptoms can occur but recent photocopy the Federal Register lower hospitalization rates for flu, placebo-controlled trials demonstrate document at most libraries designated pneumonia, congestive heart failure, that among older persons and healthy

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61810 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

young adults, administration of split- is critical and the need to use Immunization of high-risk persons virus influenza vaccine is not associated transportation to reach a health-care could prevent up to half of these deaths. with higher rates of such systemic provider is a barrier to receiving As of 1993, Medicare began reimbursing symptoms when compared with placebo preventive services. This barrier may be providers for influenza vaccine and its injections. The potential benefits of eliminated by offering vaccines in such administration (http://cms.hhs.gov/ influenza vaccination in preventing convenient locations as homes, where preventiveservices/2a.asp). However, serious illness, hospitalization, and HHAs already provide other services. only 23 percent of one of the highest- death greatly outweigh the vaccine 2. Why a Change in the Conditions of risk groups, persons aged 65 years and reactions. (‘‘Prevention and control of Participation Is Needed older, had received vaccination against influenza: recommendations of the pneumococcal disease. Section 4107 of Advisory Committee on Immunization The Conditions of Participation the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 Practices (ACIP).’’ MMWR 51; RR03, (CoPs) are Federal requirements that ‘‘extended the influenza and (April 12, 2002) (‘‘ACIP establish basic health and safety pneumococcal vaccination campaign Recommendations’’)). The availability of standards that providers of health care conducted by CMS in conjunction with safe and effective vaccines and services, such as hospitals and LTCFs, CDC and the National Coalition for substantial progress in the direction of must meet in order to participate in the Adult Immunization through fiscal year reducing vaccine-preventable diseases Medicare and Medicaid programs. 2002, authorizing $8 million for each has not produced the expected outcome, However, the protection afforded by the fiscal year from 1998 to 2002.’’ Even due to the lack of proper delivery in a Medicare and Medicaid CoPs apply to with these changes in Medicare timely manner to the targeted all patients regardless of payer source. reimbursements, the rates of populations. Although the goal of the changes to the immunization did not improve as CoPs is to increase adult The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid anticipated. A tragic example of these immunizations, the changes brought national trends occurred in Texas. In Services and the Centers for Disease about by this rule could also be used by Control and Prevention (CDC) recognize January 1997, a local health department hospitals, HHAs, and LTCFs to alerted the Texas Department of Health the major impact of both influenza and implement immunization policies to pneumococcal disease on the residents to three laboratory-confirmed improve flu and pneumonia Streptococcal pneumoniae infections at of long-term care facilities, and the immunization rates for children and effectiveness of vaccines in reducing a Northeast Texas nursing home with 90 adolescents. residents. Pneumococcal vaccine had health care costs by preventing illness The provisions of the final rule will been administered to only 10 (11 and hospitalization, and have remove the Federal barrier related to the percent) of the residents before the collaborated to improve immunization physician’s order requirement for coverage through standing orders. The influenza and pneumococcal outbreak. The remaining nursing home goal is to immunize at least 90 percent immunizations in Medicare and residents were promptly vaccinated and of the institutionalized population to Medicaid participating hospitals, long- given antibiotics to prevent further meet our Healthy People 2010 objectives term care facilities (LTCFs), and HHAs. cases. However, two of the three through a national quality improvement Preventing morbidity and mortality due patients with laboratory-confirmed program and to promote standing orders to severe influenza and its infections died. A decade of use has for immunization programs to ensure complications is one of the goals of this confirmed the efficacy and safety of the that all nursing facility residents are regulation. During the influenza season, current vaccine against pneumococcal assessed for and offered influenza and hospitalization rates for high-risk disease. Moreover, the vaccine is pneumococcal vaccinations. (For more populations increase two to five-fold, inexpensive, and Medicare reimburses information on our Healthy People 2010 depending on the age group. Influenza- its cost. immunization goals and health associated mortality is a major concern In summary, immunizations save objectives for the nation, in general, for persons with chronic diseases; this lives and can help avoid needless please see http://www.health.gov/ mortality increase is most marked in suffering and unnecessary costs caused healthypeople.) Standing orders persons 65 years of age or older, with by complications from various programs authorize licensed more than 90 percent of the deaths infectious diseases, and, as many family practitioners, where allowed by State attributed to pneumonia and influenza members and health care workers know, law, to administer vaccinations, after occurring in persons of this age group. they can prevent the infection of others. assessment for contraindications, (‘‘Prevention and Control of Influenza However, despite the availability of safe according to a physician-approved Indications for Influenza Vaccine.’’ and effective vaccines, substantial facility or agency policy without the Disease Prevention News, Vol. 57, No. portions of susceptible adults are not need for a physician’s order. One of the 20, September 20, 1997.) The proportion being immunized. Our report in 2000 on key findings of the 1999 RAND report is of elderly persons in the U.S. the 1999 data indicate that 35 percent of that organizational changes are effective population is increasing, and age and its the population age 65 or older has in improving the delivery of preventive associated chronic diseases can increase received the pneumococcal vaccine and services. Standing orders are a type of the severity of influenza illness. Unless 45 percent of the population age 65 or organizational change that allow control measures are more vigorously older has been immunized against the appropriate non-physician staff to offer implemented, the number of deaths flu (http://cms.hhs.gov/ vaccinations, after assessment for from influenza and its complications is preventiveservices/2d.asp). To reduce contraindications, without an expected to increase. the morbidity and mortality rates, individual physician order, according to According to the article, each year, delivering appropriate vaccinations in a the facility or agency policy. The ACIP more people die of pneumococcal timely manner is vital. Maintaining high recommends implementing standing pneumonia alone than die of breast levels of vaccination coverage and low orders in nursing homes and hospitals. cancer and AIDS combined. According rates of vaccine-preventable diseases is We have included home health agencies to the CDC, an estimated 40,000 deaths the goal of this final rule. Standing (HHAs) in this rule as providing annually in the United States are orders will decrease vaccine- vaccines in settings accessible to adults attributed to pneumococcal infection. preventable diseases and improve adult

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61811

vaccination rates because they are the even though we wish to emphasize its Gerontology; Washington; Sep 2000; most consistently effective method for importance here. Assessment of possible Vol. 55A; 9; M522–M526; Fiona increasing adult vaccination rates and contraindications must be carried out Lawson; Vicki Baker; Dick Au; Janet E. are easy to implement. before vaccines are administered. McElhaney). The main barrier to The report on ‘‘Use of Standing Inactivated influenza vaccine should vaccination was the requirement for a Orders Programs to Increase Adult not be administered, for example, to physician’s order; other issues were that Vaccination Rates’’ (MMWR 2000/49 persons known to have anaphylactic most of the medical staff did not view RR01 15–26, March 24, 2000) (Standing hypersensitivity to eggs, or to other vaccination as a priority, or were Orders Report)), briefly reviews the components of the influenza vaccine, concerned that vaccination might not be evidence on the effectiveness of without first consulting a physician. effective or might complicate the standing orders programs, describes Prophylactic use of antiviral agents is an patient’s course of treatment while in standards for program implementation, option for preventing influenza among the hospital. Because an educational and recommends initiating these these persons. However, persons who program was predicted to be ineffective programs to improve immunization have a history of anaphylactic for changing in-hospital practices of the coverage in several traditional and hypersensitivity to vaccine components attending staff, an influenza nontraditional settings. The report states but who are also at high risk for immunization program using a standing that in recent years, a rapid emergence complications from influenza can order under the principal investigator of antimicrobial resistance among benefit from the vaccine after for the study was designed. The purpose pneumococci, especially to penicillin, appropriate allergy evaluation and of the study was to increase vaccination has occurred. Increasing pneumococcal desensitization. Information regarding rates in this very high-risk group of vaccination rates could help prevent vaccine components can be found in hospitalized older adults. The result invasive pneumococcal disease caused package inserts from each manufacturer. after implementation of the inpatient by vaccine-type, multidrug-resistant Similarly, persons with acute febrile immunization program was an increase pneumococci. Outbreaks of illness usually should not be vaccinated of 22 percent in the immunization rate. pneumococcal disease caused by a until their symptoms have abated. The study also found that in spite of single drug-resistant pneumococcal However, minor illnesses with or many unvaccinated patients indicating serotype have occurred in institutional without fever do not contraindicate the that they would be vaccinated after settings, including nursing homes. The use of the influenza vaccine, discharge, only 1 percent were same MMWR report states that in 1999, particularly among children with mild vaccinated in the community after because of concerns about upper respiratory tract infection or discharge from the hospital. pneumococcal antimicrobial resistance allergic rhinitis (ACIP Specific recommendations for and underuse of pneumococcal vaccine, Recommendations). The Standing hospital-based immunization were first the American Medical Association and Orders Report states that standing published by ACIP in the 1980s—for several partner organizations issued a orders protocols should also specify that influenza vaccine in 1986, and for Quality Care Alert that supports ACIP’s vaccines be administered by healthcare pneumococcal vaccine in 1989. These recommendations for pneumococcal professionals trained to (a) screen recommendations were included in the vaccination. patients for contraindications to Standards of Adult Immunization vaccination, (b) administer vaccines, Practice that were issued by the II. Provisions of the Final Rule and (c) monitor patients for adverse National Coalition for Adult A. Conditions of Participation: events, in accordance with State and Immunization in 1990, and appeared in Immunization Standards for Hospitals, local regulations. the second edition of the American College of Physicians’ Guide for Adult Long-Term Care Facilities, and Home 1. Hospitals Health Agencies Immunization (1990). Soon thereafter, We are changing the current hospital-based influenza and The provisions of the final rule will requirements in the first sentence of our pneumococcal vaccination was remove the Federal barrier related to the condition of participation for hospitals, recommended in the National Vaccine physician’s order requirement for at 42 CFR. 482.23(c)(2), to read ‘‘All Advisory Committee’s report on adult influenza and pneumococcal orders for drugs and biologicals must be immunization and in a critical report immunizations in Medicare and in writing and signed by the practitioner published by the General Accounting Medicaid participating hospitals, LTCFs or practitioners responsible for the care Office. Subsequently, this strategy was and HHAs, that have such a of the patient as specified under included in the action plan for adult requirement. In developing a facility or § 482.12(c) with the exception of immunizations developed by the CDC agency policy for immunizing patients/ influenza and pneumococcal and CMS, and was later endorsed by the residents, there must be input from the polysaccharide vaccines, which may be Task Force on Community Preventive medical director or a physician. We administered per physician-approved Services. It also was emphasized in a discuss examples of core aspects of hospital policy after an assessment for comprehensive report prepared for CMS facility policy under the direction of the contraindications.’’ by the RAND Corporation to provide medical director or a physician below. The September 2000 issue of the evidence-based recommendations for However, this policy is not limited to Journals of Gerontology includes an increasing the use of Medicare-funded these examples, and the specific article that refers to a study that preventive-care services. (‘‘Hospital- circumstances of each beneficiary must reviewed hospitals’ data on influenza Based Influenza and Pneumococcal be taken into account. vaccination rates among hospitalized Vaccination: Sutton’s Law Applied to The most basic and vital aspect of older adults that showed that in- Prevention,’’ David S. Fedson, MD; facility policy must be patient hospital influenza vaccination rates for Peter Houck, MD; Dale Bratzler, DO, assessment. Patient assessment is a older adults were well below 5 percent MPH, Infection Control and Hospital mandatory element of professional (‘‘Standing Orders for Influenza Epidemiology, Volume 21(11) (692– practice standards for any procedure Vaccination Increased Vaccination Rates 699), November 2000.) (Fedson). performed. This requirement, therefore, in Inpatient Settings Compared with The most remarkable example of is not an exception, or a new practice Community Rates.’’ The Journals of success with hospital-based

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61812 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

immunization is the program that was intervention effective in sustaining individually. We will consider all conducted at the Minneapolis Veterans successful vaccination efforts. comments we receive by the date and Affairs Medical Center since 1984. This time specified in the DATES section of 3. Home Health Agencies hospital-wide program initially focused this preamble, and, when we proceed on influenza vaccination of outpatients We are changing the first sentence of with a subsequent document, we will and used a combination of the current requirements in the CoPs at respond to the comments in the administrative, organizational, and § 484.18(c) for HHAs to read ‘‘drugs and preamble to that document. patient oriented interventions. No treatments are administered by agency IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking specific attempts were made to involve staff only as ordered by the physician, physicians. Instead, the program was with the exception of influenza and We ordinarily publish a notice of implemented by nurses according to a pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines, proposed rulemaking in the Federal hospital policy that allowed them to which may be administered per agency Register and invite public comment on vaccinate patients without a signed policy developed in consultation with a the proposed rule. The notice of physician’s order. By 1987, the program physician, and after an assessment for proposed rulemaking includes a was vaccinating 60 percent of the contraindications.’’ HHA staff must reference to the legal authority under hospital’s elderly outpatients; by the include the immunization information which the rule is proposed, and the late 1990s, almost 90 percent were on the patient’s plan of care, although terms and substance of the proposed regularly receiving influenza vaccine, a physician’s order is not required for rule or a description of the subjects and most of them through the hospital’s influenza and pneumoccal vaccines. issues involved. This procedure can be program. Providing vaccines in settings readily waived, however, if an agency finds Among successful programs for accessible to adults who are most in good cause that a notice-and-comment hospital-based influenza and need of the services is critical. For many procedure is impracticable, pneumococcal vaccinations, a standing adults, the need to use transportation to unnecessary, or contrary to the public order is probably the most important reach a healthcare provider is a barrier interest, and incorporates a statement of feature. The ACIP has specifically to receiving preventive services. This the finding and its reasons in the rule recommended that standing orders be barrier may be eliminated by offering issued. used to increase adult vaccination rates preventive services (for example, The delay in publishing this rule in all settings. Furthermore, none of the administration of vaccines) in would be extremely detrimental to the successful programs described thus far convenient locations such as the health of beneficiaries, as epidemics of in the literature has depended on active patient’s home. Eliminating the need for influenza typically occur during the physician participation. Instead, nurses making an appointment in advance and winter months and are responsible for or pharmacists have been responsible avoiding the waiting time often an average of approximately 20,000 to for their implementation. (Fedson, 692– associated with a clinic or office visit 40,000 deaths per year in the United 699). are factors that also might increase the States. Influenza viruses also can cause opportunities for some adults to receive pandemics, during which rates of illness 2. Long-Term Care Facilities needed vaccinations. (‘‘Adult and death from influenza-related We are changing our current Immunization Programs in complications can increase regulations in the Conditions of Nontraditional Settings: Quality dramatically. Rates of infection are Participation for LTCFs at § 483.40 (b)(3) Standards and Guidance for Program highest among children, but rates of to read ‘‘the physician must sign and Evaluation; A Report of the National serious illness and death are highest date all orders with the exception of Vaccine Advisory Committee.’’ MMWR among persons older than 65 years of orders for the administration of 49 (RR01)1–13. March 24, 2000.) age and persons of any age who have influenza and pneumococcal The 1999 RAND report states that the medical conditions that place them at polysaccharide vaccines, which may be proportion of the U.S. population over increased risk for complications from administered per physician-approved age 65 has increased from 5 percent in influenza and pneumonia. Vaccines are facility policy after an assessment for 1900 to 13 percent in 1997. This change the most effective means to protect contraindications.’’ in demographics, combined with an against many complications related to There were 1,590,763 individuals increase in average life expectancy, has influenza and pneumonia. The ACIP over 65 years of age in LTCFs in the highlighted the importance of recommendations for 2002 to 2003 to United States in 1990, and the number preventive care services for older decrease the risk of influenza state that is estimated to grow to 2.9 million by individuals. According to an October the optimal time for influenza 2020. (‘‘Increasing Pneumococcal 1997 JAMA article, vaccination of vaccinations is October through Vaccination Rates Among Residents of elderly people against pneumococcal November. Therefore, it is imperative Long-Term Care Facilities: Provider- bacteremia is one of the few that this rule is published as a final rule Based Improvement Strategies interventions that have been found to immediately and the immunization Implemented by Peer-Review both improve health and save medical process be implemented without delay Organizations in Four Western States.’’ costs. (‘‘Cost-effectiveness of this year so that influenza-related Kurt B. Stevenson, MD; John W. Vaccination Against Pneumococcal complications can be prevented. The McMahon, Sr, MD; Jan Harris, MSHA, Bacteremia Among Elderly People.’’ goal of CMS and CDC, to immunize at CHE; J. Richard Hillman, MD; Steven D. JAMA; Chicago; Oct 22–Oct 29, 1997; least 90 percent of the adult population Helgerson, MD, MPH. Infection Control 278;16; Jane E Sisk; Alan J Moskowitz; to meet the Healthy People 2010 and Hospital Epidemiology, Volume 21 William Whang; Jean D Lin; et al.) objectives, can be attained earlier if the (11) (705–710) November 2000). barrier requiring a physician’s order is (Stevenson). A substantial increase in III. Response to Comments removed as soon as possible. Even vaccination rates among such a large Because of the large number of items though pneumococcal vaccines can be population will prevent a significant of correspondence we normally receive administered throughout the year the number of cases of influenza and on Federal Register documents percentage of patients and or residents pneumococcal bacteremia and related published for comment, we are not able immunized remains low. Therefore, this deaths. Standing orders appear to be one to acknowledge or respond to them final rule will be a vehicle to improve

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61813

coverage and will be consistent with the of $100 million and will not be remove the barriers that may have Healthy People 2010 objectives. economically significant. impacted the flexibility of State law in The RFA requires agencies to analyze implementing immunization related V. Waiver of Effective Date options for regulatory relief of small requirements. We believe that a continued delay in businesses. For purposes of the RFA, implementation of this final rule would small entities include small businesses, B. Anticipated Effects of the greatly hinder increased immunizations nonprofit organizations, and Immunization Standards of beneficiaries in the affected facilities government agencies. Most hospitals 1. Effects on Hospitals, LTCFs, and before the onset of this year’s flu season. and most other providers and suppliers HHAs As a result, we have concluded that, in are small entities, either by nonprofit We expect that these providers will this instance, a notice-and-comment status or by having revenues of $6 to benefit from the implementation of this period, and a further delay in this rule’s $29 million in any one year. For rule, as prevention of influenza and effective date is unnecessary and purposes of the RFA, all hospitals, pneumonia will lower hospitalization contrary to the public interest. We find, LTCFs, and HHAs, are considered to be rates, resulting in cost reductions. on this basis, that there is good cause for small entities. Individuals and States are waiving the notice-and-comment period not included in the definition of a small 2. Effects on Other Providers entity. For these reasons, we are not and for establishing this immediate We do not expect the provisions of preparing analyses for either the RFA or effective date under 5 U.S.C. section this final rule to affect other providers. 808(2). section 1102(b) of the Act because we have determined, and we certify, that 3. Effects on the Medicare and Medicaid VI. Collection of Information this rule will not have a significant Programs Requirements economic impact on a substantial While it is not possible at this point number of small entities or a significant This document does not impose to determine definitively the additional impact on the operations of a substantial information collection and costs to the Medicare and Medicaid number of small rural hospitals. recordkeeping requirements. programs from increased immunizations Consequently, this document does not In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act requires us to prepare a regulatory resulting from this rule, we believe that, need to be reviewed by the Office of due to the low cost for the Management and Budget under the impact analysis if a rule may have a significant impact on the operations of immunizations, any budget impact to authority of the Paperwork Reduction these programs would be negligible. Act of 1995. a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This analysis must conform to Moreover, increased immunizations VII. Regulatory Impact the provisions of section 604 of the may help reduce the estimated $12 billion dollars in direct and indirect A. Overall Impact RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a small rural hospital costs to society annually during severe We have examined the impact of this as a hospital that is located outside of influenza epidemics. Moderate rule as required by Executive Order a Metropolitan Statistical Area and has epidemics cause more than 20,000 to 12866 (September 1993, Regulatory fewer than 100 beds. This regulation 40,000 hospitalizations and estimated Planning and Review), the Regulatory does not have any impact on small rural direct costs of up to $1 billion per year. Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 16, hospitals that would be burdensome; (‘‘It Pays to Immunize Adults.’’ Therese 1980, Pub. L. 96–354), section 1102(b) of instead rural hospitals will benefit from M. Droste. Business and Health; the Social Security Act, the Unfunded the implementation of the rule, as the Montvale. Sep. 1998; 16; 8–11.) Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. overall cost associated with treating According to the 1997 JAMA article, the 104–4), and Executive Order 13132. influenza and pneumococcal disease first pneumococcal polysaccharide Executive Order 12866 directs will be reduced. vaccine was marketed in the United agencies to assess all costs and benefits Section 202 of the Unfunded States almost 20 years ago, and two of available regulatory alternatives and, Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also Federal studies have assessed its cost- if regulation is necessary, to select requires that agencies assess anticipated effectiveness in preventing regulatory approaches that maximize costs and benefits before issuing any pneumococcal pneumonia in elderly net benefits (including potential rule that may result in expenditure in people (JAMA; Oct 22–29, 1997; economic, environmental, public health any one year by State, local, or tribal 278:1333–1339). In both analyses, and safety effects, distributive impacts, governments, in the aggregate, or by the vaccination was found to be cost- and equity). A regulatory impact private sector, of $110 million. This rule effective, that is, a reasonable analysis (RIA) must be prepared for will not have any effect on the investment for the health benefits major rules with economically governments mentioned or on private gained. This article also states that even significant effects ($100 million or more sector costs. though savings cost is not the in any one year). This rule removes the Executive Order 13132 establishes appropriate criterion for assessing an barrier for an individual physician’s certain requirements that an agency intervention, the issue is whether the order to be necessary to administer must meet when it promulgates a investment in an intervention is worth influenza and pneumococcal proposed rule (and subsequent final the health benefits to be gained. Based polysaccharide vaccines and is a rule) that imposes substantial direct on other interventions, policymakers requirement that has benefits in requirement costs on State and local have generally considered costs up to improving patient and resident health governments, preempts State law, or $50,000 or even $100,000 to be worth an and in reducing health care spending. otherwise has Federalism implications. extra year of healthy life. In that light, While it is not possible at this point to This final rule will not have any effect even worst-case estimates for determine definitively the additional on State or local governments. The costs pneumococcal vaccination through age costs to the Medicare and Medicaid related to the influenza and 84 years would be deemed cost- programs from increased immunizations pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines effective. resulting from this rule, we believe that are currently a covered benefit for In 2001, Medicare payments for flu the impact will be below the threshold beneficiaries. In fact, this rule will and pneumococcal immunizations

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61814 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

totaled $145,885,773. This figure 42 CFR Part 483 which may be administered per represents Medicare payments for such Grant programs-health, Health physician-approved facility policy after immunizations furnished in all settings, facilities, Health professions, Health an assessment for contraindications. including, but not limited to, hospitals, records, Medicaid, Medicare, Nursing * * * * * nursing homes, and HHAs. homes, Nutrition, Reporting and Immunization experts working under recordkeeping requirements, Safety. PART 484—HOME HEALTH SERVICES contract to CMS estimate that 1. The authority citation for part 484 implementation of this rule will 42 CFR Part 484 continues to read as follows: increase immunization rates by 10 Health facilities, Health professions, percent. Therefore, we generally Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and estimate that broad implementation of requirements. standing orders as allowed by this rule 1395hh) unless otherwise indicated. will increase Medicare immunization For the reasons set forth in the 2. In § 484.18 the first sentence of expenditures by $14,588,577 above the preamble, the Centers for Medicare & paragraph (c) is revised to read as 2001 expenditure. Medicaid Services amends 42 CFR follows: These cost-effectiveness results chapter IV as set forth below: § 484.18 Condition of participation: provide a compelling case for clinical PART 482—CONDITIONS OF Acceptance of patients, plan of care, and and public policy to more forcefully PARTICIPATION FOR HOSPITALS medical supervision. promote pneumococcal vaccination for * * * * * elderly people in the United States. 1. The authority citation for part 482 (c) Standard: Conformance with They thus add support on economic continues to read as follows: physician orders. Drugs and treatments grounds to public and private efforts Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the are administered by agency staff only as already under way. (JAMA; Oct 22–29; Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and ordered by the physician with the 1997; 278:16) 1395hh). exception of influenza and C. Alternatives Considered Subpart C—Basic Hospital Functions pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines, which may be administered per agency 1. Immunization Standards for 2. In § 482.23, the first sentence of policy developed in consultation with a Hospitals, Long-Term Care Facilities, paragraph (c)(2) is revised to read as physician, and after an assessment for and Home Health Agencies follows: contraindications. * * * An alternative would be to keep the (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance present rules, as they are written. The § 482.23 Condition of participation: Nursing services. Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance current regulations, however, inhibit Program) our ability to increase the rate of * * * * * (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance immunizations and to accomplish our (c) * * * Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital goal to immunize at least 90 percent of (2) All orders for drugs and Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, the institutionalized population. biologicals must be in writing and Medicare—Supplementary Medical signed by the practitioner or Insurance Program) Another alternative would be to Dated: July 23, 2002. educate providers on the value of practitioners responsible for the care of Thomas A. Scully, influenza and pneumococcal vaccines the patient as specified under while maintaining the Federal barrier § 482.12(c) with the exception of Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. requiring a physician’s order for every influenza and pneumococcal vaccine given in these provider types. polysaccharide vaccines, which may be Approved: August 28, 2002. Studies previously referred to, however, administered per physician-approved Tommy G. Thompson, show that this has not been very hospital policy after an assessment for Secretary. effective in improving immunization contraindications. * * * [FR Doc. 02–25096 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] rates. * * * * * BILLING CODE 4120–01–P D. Conclusion PART 483—REQUIREMENTS FOR STATES AND LONG-TERM CARE Increasing the utilization of Medicare- FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES funded preventive services is the goal of COMMISSION both CMS and CDC, and this final rule 1. The authority citation for part 483 will facilitate the delivery of appropriate continues to read as follows: 47 CFR Part 25 vaccinations in a timely manner, [IB Docket 99–67; RM 9165; FCC 02–134] increase the levels of vaccination rate, Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and and decrease the morbidity and 1395hh). Petition of the National mortality rate of influenza and Telecommunications and Information pneumococcal diseases. Subpart B—Requirements for Long- Administration To Amend the In accordance with the provisions of Term Care Facilities Commission’s Rules To Establish Executive Order 12866, this regulation Emission Limits for Mobile and was reviewed by the Office of 2. In § 483.40, paragraph (b)(3) is Portable Earth Stations Operating in Management and Budget. revised to read as follows: the 1610–1660.5 MHz Band List of Subjects § 483.40 Physician services. AGENCY: Federal Communications * * * * * 42 CFR Part 482 Commission. (b) * * * ACTION: Final rule. Grant programs-health, Hospitals, (3) Sign and date all orders with the Medicaid, Medicare, Reporting and exception of influenza and SUMMARY: In this document the recordkeeping requirements. pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines, Commission adopts a new rule section,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61815

that specifies limits on the permissible including the use of automated referring to a ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small strength of out-of-band emissions from collection techniques or other forms of organization,’’ or ‘‘small governmental mobile earth stations in order to prevent information technology. jurisdiction.’’ The term ‘‘small interference with use of GPS or similar Public and agency comments on the business’’ has the same meaning as the satellite radionavigation services for request for approval of the information term ‘‘small business concern’’ under airplane guidance during approach to collection requirements are due the Small Business Act. A ‘‘small landing. December 2, 2002. All comments business concern’’ is one which: (1) Is DATES: Effective November 1, 2002. regarding the requests for approval of independently owned and operated; (2) the information collection should be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: is not dominant in its field of operation; submitted to Judy Boley Herman, William Bell at (202) 418–0741 and (3) satisfies any additional criteria Federal Communications Commission, (Internet: [email protected]) or Marcus Wolf established by the Small Business Room 1–C804, 445 12th Street, SW., at (202) 418–0736 (Internet: Administration (SBA). Washington, DC 20554, or via the [email protected]), International Bureau, For satellite telecommunications Federal Communications Commission, Internet to [email protected]. In carriers and resellers, the SBA Washington, DC 20554. addition, comments on the emergency request for approval of the information established a small business size SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a collections should be submitted to standard that excludes companies with summary of the Commission’s Report Jeanette Thornton, OMB Desk Officer, annual receipts in excess of $12.5 and Order in IB Docket No. 99–67, FCC Room 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, million. Ten companies are currently 02–134, adopted May 2, 2002 and NW., Washington, DC 20503, or via the released on May 14, 2002. In a Notice licensed for operation of 1.6 GHz mobile Internet [email protected]. of Proposed Rulemaking adopted in earth stations subject to the rule 1999, 64 FR 16687 (April 6, 1999), the Final Regulatory Flexibility requirements we are adopting in this Commission proposed to adopt a new order. We have ascertained from The Regulatory Flexibility Act of published data that four of those rule section specifying limits on the 1980, as amended (‘‘RFA’’), requires a companies are not small entities permissible strength out-of-band regulatory flexibility analysis to be according to the SBA’s definition, but emissions from mobile earth stations in prepared for notice-and-comment we do not have sufficient information to order to prevent interference with use of rulemaking proceedings, unless the GPS of similar satellite radionavigation agency certifies that ‘‘the rule will not, determine which, if any, of the other six services for airplane guidance during if promulgated, have a significant are small entities. We anticipate issuing approach to landing. After considering economic impact on a substantial several licenses for 2 GHz mobile earth relevant public comments, the number of small entities.’’ As required stations subject to the requirements we Commission has decided to adopt the by the RFA, the original Notice of are adopting here. We do not know how proposed new rule section. The Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding many of those licenses will be held by complete text of this decision is included an Initial Regulatory small entities, however, as we do not yet available for inspection and copying Flexibility Analysis (‘‘IRFA’’). The know exactly how many 2 GHz mobile- during normal business hours in the Commission invited written public earth-station licenses will be issued or FCC Reference Center (Room), 445 12th comment on the rulemaking proposal who will receive them. Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, and and on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory D. Description of Projected Reporting, also may be purchased from the Flexibility Analysis is also included in Commission’s copy contractor, compliance with the RFA. Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance International Transcription Service, Inc. Requirements for Small Entities (ITS, Inc.), 1231 20th Street, NW., A. Need for and Objectives of This Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857–3800. Report and Order In this Report and Order, the Commission prescribes limits on the Paperwork Reduction The purpose of this Report and Order is to adopt a rule specifying limits on permissible strength of emissions in the This Report and Order requires either the permissible strength of emissions 1559–1610 MHz frequency band that new or modified information collections produced by mobile earth stations may be generated by mobile earth subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act outside their assigned frequency bands, stations with assigned transmission of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. It in order to prevent interference with frequencies between 1610 MHz and will be submitted to the Office of aircraft reception of satellite 1660.5 MHz or between 1990 MHz and Management and Budget (OMB) for radionavigation signals in the 1559– 2025 MHz. Those licensed by the review under the emergency processing 1610 MHz band. Commission to operate, or supervise provisions of the PRA. The Commission operation of, such mobile earth stations invites the public and other Federal B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised will be obliged to ensure that the by Public Comments in Response to the agencies to comment on information equipment covered by their licenses IRFA collection(s) required by this Report and performs in compliance with the new Order. Comments should address: (a) None of the comments filed in this emission restrictions. Some licensees Whether the new or modified collection proceeding discussed the IRFA. may find it necessary to alter, replace, of information is necessary for the or decommission equipment currently proper performance of the functions of C. Description and Estimate of the in service in order to comply. We do not the Commission, including whether the Number of Small Entities To Which the information shall have practical utility; New Rule Will Apply know, nor do the comments filed in this (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s The RFA directs agencies to provide proceeding indicate, how much expense burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance a description of, and when feasible, an the pertinent companies may incur to the quality, utility, and clarity of the estimate of the number of, small achieve compliance with the new information collected; and (d) ways to ‘‘entities’’ that may be affected by the emission limits. The rule we are minimize the burden of the collection of rules they adopt. The RFA generally adopting here does not impose reporting information on the respondents, defines the term ‘‘small entity’’ as or recordkeeping requirements.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61816 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Federal Communications Commission. (d) As of January 1, 2005 and from Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Marlene H. Dortch, then on, the e.i.r.p. density of emissions Significant Alternatives Considered Secretary. from mobile earth stations placed in service on or before July 21, 2002 with The RFA requires an agency to Rule changes describe any significant alternatives that assigned uplink frequencies between it has considered that might reduce For the reasons discussed in the 1610 MHz and 1660.5 MHz (except economic impact on small entities, such preamble, the Federal Communications Standard A Inmarsat terminals used as as: establishing different compliance or Commission amends 47 CFR part 25 as Global Maritime Distress and Safety follows: System ship earth stations) shall not reporting requirements or timetables ¥ that take into account the resources exceed 70 dBW/MHz, averaged over PART 25—SATELLITE 20 milliseconds, in the 1559–1605 MHz available to small entities; clarifying, COMMUNICATIONS consolidating, or simplifying such band or a level in the 1605–1610 MHz 1. The authority citation for part 25 band determined by linear interpolation requirements for small entities; using ¥ continues to read as follows: from 70 dBW/MHz at 1605 MHz to performance rather than design ¥ standards; or completely or partially 10 dBW/MHz at 1610 MHz, and the Authority: 47 U.S.C. 701–744. Interprets or e.i.r.p. of discrete emissions of less than exempting small entities from new applies Sections 4, 301, 302, 303, 307, 309 700 Hz bandwidth from such stations requirements. and 332 of the Communications Act, as ¥ We have not considered exempting amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154, 301, 302, shall not exceed 80 dBW, averaged small entities from the emission limits 303, 307, 309 and 332, unless otherwise over 20 milliseconds, in the 1559–1605 we are adopting here or prescribing noted. MHz band. (e) The e.i.r.p. density of emissions more lenient requirements or § 25.200 [Removed] compliance timetables for small entities, from mobile earth stations with assigned 2. Section 25.200 is removed. as we do not believe that such measures uplink frequencies between 1990 MHz and 2025 MHz shall not exceed ¥70 could be effected without thwarting § 25.213 [Removed and reserved] fulfillment of our regulatory objective of dBW/MHz, averaged over 20 3. Section 25.213 is amended by milliseconds, in frequencies between preventing interference. We have taken removing and reserving paragraph (b). steps, however, to minimize adverse 1559 MHz and 1610 MHz. The e.i.r.p. of 4. Add § 25.216 to read as follows: impact on affected licensees. Most discrete emissions of less than 700 Hz bandwidth from such stations shall not notably, in the interest of minimizing § 25.216 Limits on emissions from mobile ¥ consequent equipment obsolescence, we earth stations for protection of aeronautical exceed 80 dBW, averaged over 20 have decided to exempt equipment radionavigation-satellite service. milliseconds, in frequencies between currently in service from full (a) The e.i.r.p. density of emissions 1559 MHz and 1605 MHz. compliance until January 1, 2005. from mobile earth stations placed in (f) Mobile earth stations placed in Report to Congress: The Commission service on or before July 21, 2002 with service after July 21, 2002 with assigned will send a copy of this Report and assigned uplink frequencies between uplink frequencies in the 1610–1660.5 Order, including a copy of this Final 1610 MHz and 1660.5 MHz shall not MHz band shall suppress the power Regulatory Flexibility Analysis exceed ¥70 dBW/MHz, averaged over density of emissions in the 1605–1610 (‘‘FRFA’’), in a report to Congress any 20 millisecond interval, in the band MHz band to an extent determined by linear interpolation from ¥70 dBW/ pursuant to the Congressional Review 1559–1587.42 MHz. The e.i.r.p. of ¥ Act. The Commission will also send a discrete emissions of less than 700 Hz MHz at 1605 MHz to 10 dBW/MHz at copy of this Report and Order and FRFA bandwidth generated by such stations 1610 MHz. to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the shall not exceed ¥80 dBW, averaged Note to § 25.216: Operation of mobile earth SBA, and a copy of the Report and over 20 milliseconds, in that band. stations is also subject to all pertinent Order and FRFA (or a summary thereof) (b) The e.i.r.p. density of emissions emissions limits specified in other sections of will be published in the Federal from mobile earth stations placed in the Commission’s rules. See §§ 25.202(f) and Register. service on or before July 21, 2002 with 25.213(a)(1). assigned uplink frequencies between [FR Doc. 02–24892 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Ordering Clauses 1610 MHz and 1626.5 MHz shall not BILLING CODE 6712–01–P It is ordered that, pursuant to sections exceed ¥64 dBW/MHz, averaged over 4(i), 7(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and 20 milliseconds, in the 1587.42–1605 303(r) of the Communications Act of MHz band. The e.i.r.p. of discrete FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), emissions of less than 700 Hz COMMISSION 157(a), 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 307, bandwidth generated by such stations 309(a), 310, part 25 of the Commission’s shall not exceed ¥74 dBW, averaged 47 CFR Part 73 rules is amended, as specified in the over 20 milliseconds, in the 1587.42– rule changes, effective November 1, 1605 MHz band. [MM Docket No. 00–39; FCC 02–253] 2002. (c) The e.i.r.p. density of emissions Conversion to Digital Television It is further ordered that the from mobile earth stations placed in Commission’s Consumer Information service after July 21, 2002 with assigned AGENCY: Federal Communications Bureau, Reference Information Center, uplink frequencies between 1610 MHz Commission. ¥ shall send a copy of this Report and and 1660.5 MHz shall not exceed 70 ACTION: Final rule; denial. Order the Final Regulatory Flexibility dBW/MHz, averaged over 20 Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for milliseconds, in the 1559–1605 MHz SUMMARY: This item denies a Petition for Advocacy of the Small Business band. The e.i.r.p. of discrete emissions Reconsideration, filed by Diversified Administration. of less than 700 Hz bandwidth from Broadcasting, Inc., of the Memorandum such stations shall not exceed ¥80 Opinion and Order in this proceeding, List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25 dBW, averaged over 20 milliseconds, in which addressed a number of issues Satellite communications. the 1559–1605 MHz band. related to the conversion of the nation’s

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61817

broadcast television system from analog 90 days or we would subsequently 309(l) of the Communications Act, to digital television (‘‘DTV’’). This item dismiss both applications. which Diversified claims was intended affirms the decision made in the In the MO&O, we revised the to resolve exclusivity only among Memorandum Opinion and Order that procedures for determining priority competing analog television certain NTSC applications filed prior to between conflicting DTV expansion applications. According to Diversified, July 1, 1997, must be protected by later- applications and NTSC applications. We that provision was not intended to filed DTV area expansion applications. noted that in the Broadcast Auctions address processing of subsequently filed Report and Order, 63 FR 48615 DTV expansion applications, and ADDRESSES: 445 12th Street SW., (September 11, 1998), we had found Washington, DC 20554. Congress did not intend that DTV that, by application of Section 309(l) of expansion applications be treated as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim the Communications Act, pending secondary to analog station Matthews, Policy Division, Media NTSC application groups on file prior to applications. In its Opposition, CTF Bureau, Federal Communications July 1, 1997, are entitled to compete in argues that Diversified’s application Commission, (202) 418–2120. an auction that does not include must be dismissed as a result of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: applications filed on or after July 1, Commission’s decision in the MO&O Diversified Broadcasting, Inc., licensee 1997. Pursuant to that statutory according priority to NTSC applications of WCJB(TV), Gainesville, Florida directive, we concluded that we may filed prior to July 1, 1997. (‘‘Diversified’’) filed a Petition for not find DTV expansion applications We decline to revise our Reconsideration of the Memorandum (all of which were filed after June 30, determination that Section 309(l) of the Opinion and Order (‘‘MO&O’’) in MM 1997) to be MX with NTSC application Communications Act entitles pending Docket No. 00–39, 66 FR 65122 groups on file prior to July 1, 1997. This NTSC application groups on file prior to (December 18, 2001), which addressed a also is the case when an NTSC July 1, 1997, to compete in an auction number of issues related to the application that was cut-off as part of a that does not include applications filed conversion of the nation’s broadcast group of NTSC applications filed before on or after July 1, 1997. Section 309(l) television system from analog to digital July 1, 1997, has become a singleton provides: television (‘‘DTV’’). Specifically, because other applications in the group With respect to competing applications for Diversified objects to the determination have been dismissed. We concluded in initial licenses or construction permits for in the MO&O that certain NTSC the MO&O that NTSC applications in commercial radio or television stations that applications filed prior to July 1, 1997, these two categories—NTSC application were filed with the Commission before July groups on file prior to July 1, 1997, and 1, 1997, the Commission shall— must be protected by later-filed DTV (2) treat the persons filing such area expansion applications. any singletons remaining from such a group—should be protected against DTV applications as the only persons eligible to be Community Television of Florida, Inc. qualified bidders for purposes of such expansion applications. DTV expansion (‘‘CTF’’) filed an Opposition to proceeding* * * applicants are permitted to file minor Diversified’s Petition. For the reasons amendments to resolve conflicts with Statutory construction must begin discussed below, the Commission NTSC applications in these categories. with the language employed by the denies Diversified’s Petition. Diversified requests that we statute and the assumption that the The Report and Order and Further reconsider and reverse our decision that ordinary meaning of the language Notice of Proposed Rule Making pending DTV expansion applications accurately expresses the legislative (‘‘Report and Order’’), 66 FR 10001 filed on or prior to January 18, 2001, purpose. The language of Section (February 13, 2001), in this proceeding must protect certain NTSC applications 309(l)(2) is unambiguous that, where addressed the procedures to be used in filed prior to July 1, 1997. Diversified competing applications were filed with processing mutually-exclusive argues that we should reinstate our the Commission before July 1, 1997, applications filed by licensees seeking initial decision (in the Report and ‘‘the Commission shall * * * treat the to expand or ‘‘maximize’’ their DTV Order) and treat these DTV expansion persons filing such applications as the allotments (referred to herein as applications as MX with these NTSC only persons eligible to be qualified ‘‘expansion applications’’). In the Report applications so that the parties may bidders.’’ The Conference Report and Order, we gave processing and work together to resolve interference confirms that ‘‘[t]he Commission shall protection priority to then pending DTV issues. According to Diversified, under limit the class of eligible applicants who expansion applications, filed on or prior the determination in the Report and may be considered qualified bidders to January 18, 2001, over previously Order, its DTV expansion application * * * to the persons who filed filed NTSC applications except those for WCJB(TV) would have been MX applications with the Commission NTSC applications that fell into one of with CTF’s competing NTSC application before that date [July 1, 1997].’’ three categories: post-auction for Marianna, Florida, and the parties In implementing section 309(l) the applications, applications proposed for then would have had 90 days within Commission determined, first, that it grant in pending settlements, and which to negotiate a resolution to the would resolve by competitive bidding singleton applications cut off from interference conflict. Under the revised any mutually exclusive application further filings. We stated that these decision in the MO&O, however, the group not resolved by a settlement applications must have been accepted NTSC application for Marianna will agreement and, second, that pending for filing in order to be protected from take priority, as it was filed prior to July NTSC applications submitted for filing DTV expansion applications. When a 1, 1997, and was cut-off as part of a by September 20, 1996 constituted pre- pending DTV application conflicts with group of two competing NTSC July 1st competing applications within an NTSC application in one of these applications filed before July 1, 1997. the meaning of section 309(l) even if the categories, we stated that we would treat Diversified argues that this processing related freeze area waiver had not been the applications as mutually exclusive change puts DTV applicants at a severe processed. Except for the circumstance (‘‘MX’’) and follow the procedures disadvantage despite the importance of in which only one application (and adopted in the Report and Order for MX DTV to the future of television waiver request) was ever submitted for applications—that is, we required that broadcasting. Diversified also argues a particular allotment, the Commission parties resolve their MX conflict within that we incorrectly interpreted Section determined that it was precluded by the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61818 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

unambiguous language of subsection (2) 1997. Elsewhere in the statute Congress Electronic Access from soliciting additional potentially did expressly provide for different An electronic copy of this document mutually exclusive applications, despite treatment of digital stations when, for may be downloaded by using a its earlier explicit pledge to provide the example, in Section 309(j)(2), it computer, modem and suitable opportunity for the filing of competing expressly excluded certain digital communications software from the applications with respect to any analog stations from our competitive bidding Government Printing Office’s Electronic television application accepted for authority. Congress made no provision Bulletin Board Service at 202–512– filing. This interpretation was upheld in for disparate treatment of DTV 1661. Internet users may also reach the Orion Communications, Ltd v. FCC, 221 expansion applications under Section Office of the Federal Register Web site: F.3d 196 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (Table). 309(l), however, and the unambiguous http://www.archives.gov/ Consistent with the determination to language of that provision compels the federal_register; and Government resolve competing NTSC applications result we reached in the MO&O. by competitive bidding and the Printing Office Web page: http:// The Petition for Reconsideration filed www.access.gpo.gov. resulting obligation to insulate such January 17, 2002, by Diversified applicants from having to compete for Broadcasting, Inc. is denied. Summary of Changes the construction permit against post- Title 49 of the Code of Federal June 30, 1997 applicants, the List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Regulations (CFR), chapter III, Commission may not require NTSC Television broadcasting. subchapter B, contains the Federal applications within the scope of section Federal Communications Commission. Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 309(l) to resolve any interference (FMCSRs) for truck and bus safety. This conflicts with pending DTV expansion Marlene H. Dortch, final rule corrects inaccurate references, applicants or face dismissal or Secretary. citations, and technical errors resulting otherwise direct that the rights of this [FR Doc. 02–25071 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] from statutory changes in laws category of broadcast applicants are BILLING CODE 6712–01–P secondary to those of DTV expansion governing interstate commerce. It also applicants. To do so would vitiate makes other editorial revisions for clarity. completely the special protections DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Congress expressly extended to In the § 360.3(f) table, a filing fee has ‘‘[c]ompeting applications * * * for been added for applications involving Federal Motor Carrier Safety the merger, transfer, or lease of commercial radio or television stations Administration filed with the Commission before July 1, operating rights of motor passenger and 1997.’’ Congress, although clearly aware property carriers, property brokers, and 49 CFR Parts 350, 360, 365, 372, 382, household goods freight forwarders in 1997 of the impending transition to 383, 386, 387, 388, 390, 391, and 393 DTV, did not offer any guidance either under 49 U.S.C. 10321 and 10926. The in the statutory language or in the Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; ICC Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) Conference Report as to how the Technical Amendments sunsetted the Interstate Commerce Commission is to accommodate the Commission (ICC) and transferred the competing spectrum needs of this group AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety ICC’s registration and insurance of applicants and of DTV expansion Administration (FMCSA), DOT. functions to the Secretary of applicants. Even without such express ACTION: Final rule. Transportation, who delegated these guidance, however, the Commission functions to the Federal Highway must devise a solution faithfully SUMMARY: The FMCSA is amending the Administration (FHWA) in 1996 and effectuating the express protections Federal Motor Carrier Safety redelegated them to FMCSA in 2000. afforded this category of competing Regulations (FMCSRs) to update Filing fees related to these functions commercial broadcast applications. obsolete references and make certain were initially assessed under ICC Notwithstanding Diversified’s grammatical corrections for clarity. In regulations codified in 49 CFR part contention, the Commission’s original addition, we are correcting an error in 1002. In February 1999, FHWA adopted procedure, requiring the dismissal of the final rule on Brake Performance its own filing fee and fee collection certain NTSC applicants within the Requirements for Commercial Motor regulations in a new part 360 (64 FR scope of section 309(l), contravened Vehicles published on August 9, 2002 in 7134, February 12, 1999). The preamble Congress’s manifest intent regarding the Federal Register. FMCSA is not to this rule stated that ‘‘(i)n this these particular applicants. Its repeal in making any substantive changes to its rulemaking proceeding the FHWA is the MO&O was therefore compelled by regulations by these technical adopting the ICC’s fee regulations the unambiguous language of section amendments. related to the recently transferred motor 309(l). EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is carrier functions without any Diversified has advanced no argument effective October 2, 2002. substantive changes.’’ However, the rule that leads us to a different conclusion. inadvertently omitted the fee for ADDRESSES: Ms. Janet Nunn, Office of Diversified claims that Section 309(l) transfers of operating authority codified Policy Plans and Regulation (MC–PRR), was intended to resolve mutual at 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). Both FHWA 202–366–2797, U.S. Department of exclusivity among analog television and FMCSA have assessed this fee since Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier applications only, and that it was not 1996. Therefore, restoring the transfer Safety Administration, 400 Seventh intended to determine priority among fee to the fee table will impose no new competing analog and DTV expansion Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. burdens on the public. applications. Nothing in the statutory Office hours are from 7:30 a.m. to 5 We are also amending part 360 by text suggests that DTV expansion p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, revising § 360.3(g)(2) to clarify that a applications were intended to be treated except Federal holidays. credit card may be required in situations differently under Section 309(l), or that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: involving dishonored checks. they were intended to be treated as MX Janet Nunn, (202) 366–2797. In part 365, references to water with applications filed prior to July 1, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: carriers have been removed because the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61819

ICCTA did not transfer to the Secretary Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. consultation of Federal program and authority to register water carriers. The 601–612) activities do not apply to this action. ICCTA also required the Secretary to These technical amendments will not Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 register all freight forwarders, not just have an economically significant effect U.S.C. chapter 35) household goods freight forwarders. We on a substantial number of small entities This final rule does not contain any have changed part 365 to reflect that (i.e., motor carriers), and therefore an fact. We have also changed § 365.105(b) information collections that are subject economic analysis of this rule is not to review by the Office of Management to add a reference to FMCSA’s do-it- required. yourself Web site as a means of and Budget under the Paperwork obtaining OP–1 application forms. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Reduction Act. 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) In § 387.39, we have modified two National Environmental Policy Act motor carrier financial responsibility This rule does not impose a Federal The FMCSA has analyzed this action forms to correct numerous obsolete mandate resulting in increased for the purpose of the National references. These forms have been expenditures either by State, local, and Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 approved by the Office of Management tribal governments, in the aggregate, or U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined and Budget under control number 2126– by the private sector, of $100 million or that this action does not have any effect 0008. Their current expiration date is more (as adjusted for inflation) in any on the quality of the environment. June 30, 2003. one year; nor does it significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement In § 390.27, the Virgin Islands has Fairness Act been included in the table. In addition, Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice This final rule is exempt from two new notes have been added to Reform) congressional review under 5 U.S.C. direct Canadian and Mexican carriers This action meets applicable 801, because these amendments merely where to obtain information. standards in section 3 of Executive update obsolete references and make In § 391.41(a), a footnote has been Order 12988 to minimize litigation, minor editorial corrections to existing added acknowledging a reciprocity eliminate ambiguity, and reduce regulations where applicable. agreement between the United States burden. and Canada that provides for a valid List of Subjects Canadian commercial driver’s license Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 49 CFR Part 350 issued by a Canadian Province or Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks) Grant programs—transportation, Territory to be proof of medical fitness Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor to drive commercial motor vehicles This rule is not an economically vehicle safety, Reporting and (CMVs) in the United States, except in significant rule and does not concern an recordkeeping requirements. certain limited circumstances. environmental risk to health or safety 49 CFR Part 360 Finally, a correction has been made to that may disproportionately affect a final rule published on August 9, 2002 children under Executive Order 13045. Administrative practice and (67 FR 51770), pertaining to brake Executive Order 12630 (Taking of procedure, Insurance, Motor carriers. performance requirements for CMVs. Private Property) 49 CFR Part 365 Administrative Procedure Act This rule will not effect a taking of Administrative practice and private property or otherwise have procedure, Brokers, Buses, Freight This final rule was issued without taking implications as specified in forwarders, Motor carriers, Moving of using the notice and comment Executive Order 12630, governmental household goods. procedures contained at 5 U.S.C. 553(b), Actions and Interference with 49 CFR Part 372 because these technical amendments Constitutionally Protected Property merely correct and clarify existing Rights. Agricultural commodities, buses, regulations. They do not impose any Cooperatives, Freight forwarders, Motor new requirements on the regulated Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) carriers, Moving of household goods, industry and are not substantive This final rule will not have Seafood. changes. For the same reasons, good federalism implications, as defined in 49 CFR Part 382 cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) to Executive Order 13132, to warrant the Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Drug dispense with the 30-day delay in the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. testing, Highway safety, Motor carriers, effective date requirement and the It does not have substantial direct Penalties, Safety, Transportation. FMCSA is making the rule effective effects on the States, on the relationship upon publication in the Federal between the national government and 49 CFR Part 383 Register. the States, or on the distribution of Administrative practice and Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory power and responsibilities among the procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Planning and Review) and DOT various levels of governments. Nothing Highway safety, Motor carriers. Regulatory Policies and Procedures in this document directly preempts any State law or regulations. 49 CFR Part 386 The FMCSA has determined that this Executive Order 12372 Administrative practice and action is not a significant regulatory (Intergovernmental Review) procedure, Hazardous materials action under Executive Order 12866 or transportation, Highway safety, Motor within the meaning of Department of Catalog of Federal Domestic carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Penalties. Transportation regulatory policies and Assistance Program Number 20.217, procedures. Therefore, this document Motor Carrier Safety. The regulations 49 CFR Part 387 was not reviewed by the Office of implementing Executive Order 12372 Buses, Freight, Freight forwarders, Management and Budget. regarding intergovernmental Hazardous materials transportation,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61820 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

Highway safety, Insurance, PART 350—COMMERCIAL MOTOR supports the activities identified in Intergovernmental relations, Motor CARRIER SAFETY ASSISTANCE § 350.201(1) and (t).’’ carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Moving of PROGRAM * * * * * household goods, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surety 1. Revise the authority citation for PART 360—FEES FOR MOTOR bonds. part 350 to read as follows: CARRIER REGISTRATION AND INSURANCE 49 CFR Part 388 Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13902, 31100–31104, 31108, 31136, 31140–31141, 31161, 31310– Highway safety, Intergovernmental 31311, 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. 5. The authority citation for part 360 relations, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle continues to read as follows: § 350.201 [Amended] safety. Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 49 U.S.C. 2. Amend § 350.201 as follows: 49 CFR Part 390 13908(c) and 14504(c)(2); and 49 CFR 1.73. a. Amend paragraph (m) by removing Highway safety, Intermodal ‘‘title’’ and add, in its place, ‘‘title 23’’; § 360.3 [Amended] transportation, Motor carriers, Motor b. Amend paragraph (t)(1) by 6. Amend § 360.3 as follows: vehicle safety, Reporting and removing ‘‘parts 356 and’’ and add, in a. Amend § 360.3(a)(2) by inserting ‘‘, recordkeeping requirements. its place, ‘‘part’’. Insurance Compliance Division’’ before 49 CFR Part 391 ‘‘(MC–ECI)’’; § 350.211 [Amended] b. Amend paragraph (a)(2)(iii) Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Highway 3. Amend § 350.211 by revising the introductory text by removing ‘‘Office of safety, Motor carriers, Reporting and phrase ‘‘Ensure that’’ in paragraph (15) Data Analysis and Information Systems, recordkeeping requirements, Safety, to read ‘‘the State will ensure that’’. Licensing and Insurance Division’’ and Transportation. add, in its place, ‘‘Office of Enforcement § 350.213 [Amended] 49 CFR Part 393 and Compliance, Insurance Division 4. Amend § 350.213(b) introductory (MC–ECI)’’; Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor text by revising the last sentence to read c. Amend § 360.3(f) by adding new vehicle safety. as follows: paragraph (8) under Part I of the table The Amendments to read as follows: § 350.213 What must a State CVSP For the reasons set forth in the include? § 360.3 Filing fees. preamble, FMCSA amends Title 49 of * * * * * * * * * * the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter (b) * * * The narrative section must (f) Schedule of filing fees. III, subchapter B, as set forth below. include a description of how the State * * * * *

Type of proceeding Fee

Part I: Licensing:

******* (8) ...... An application involving the merger, transfer, or lease of the operating rights of motor 300 passenger and property carriers, property brokers, and household goods freight for- warders under 49 U.S.C. 10321 and 10926.

d. Amend § 360.3(g)(2) by revising the a. Amend § 365.105(a) by removing a. Amend paragraph (e) introductory phrase ‘‘or a money order’’ to read ‘‘, ‘‘of household goods’’ immediately text by removing ‘‘household goods’’ money order, or credit card’’. following ‘‘Form OP–1(FF) for freight before ‘‘freight forwarder’’; and by forwarders’’; removing ‘‘, water contract carrier’’; PART 365—RULES GOVERNING b. Revise § 365.105(b) to read as b. Remove paragraph (f) of § 365.107; APPLICATIONS FOR OPERATING follows: c. Redesignate paragraph (g) as AUTHORITY paragraph (f); § 365.105 Starting the application process; d. Amend newly designated 7. The authority citation for part 365 Form OP–1. paragraph (f) by removing ‘‘and water.’’ continues to read as follows: * * * * * e. Redesignate the note at the end of Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553 and 559; 16 U.S.C. (b) Obtain forms at a FMCSA Division § 365.107 as paragraph (g). 1456; 49 U.S.C. 13101, 13301, 13901–13906, Office in each State or at one of the f. Amend newly designated paragraph 14708, 31138, and 31144; and 49 CFR 1.73. FMCSA Service Centers. Addresses and (g) by inserting ‘‘and’’ after ‘‘Form OP– phone numbers for the Division Offices 1 MX for Mexican property carriers’’; § 365.101 [Amended] and Service Centers can be found at: removing ‘‘, and Form OP–(W) for water 8. Amend § 365.101 as follows: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/aboutus/ carriers’’; and removing the last a. Amend § 365.101(b) by removing fieldoffices. The forms and information sentence. the words ‘‘household goods.’’ about filing procedures can be b. Amend § 365.101 by removing and downloaded at: http:// § 365.109 [Amended] reserving paragraph (c). www.fmcsa.dot.gov/factsfigs/formspubs; 11. Amend § 365.109(a)(7) by c. Amend § 365.101(g) by removing and from the do-it-yourself website at: removing ‘‘on file with the FMCSA the words ‘‘and water.’’ http://www.diy.dot.gov. and.’’ § 365.105 [Amended] § 365.107 [Amended] § 365.401 [Amended] 9. Amend § 365.105 as follows: 10. Amend § 365.107 as follows: 12. Amend § 365.401 as follows:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61821

a. Remove ‘‘water carriers,’’; Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13504 and 13506; and PART 386—RULES OF PRACTICE FOR b. Remove ‘‘Interstate Commerce 49 CFR 1.73. MOTOR CARRIER, BROKER, FREIGHT Commission’’ and add, in its place, FORWARDER, AND HAZARDOUS § 372.303 [Amended] ‘‘FMCSA’’; MATERIALS PROCEEDINGS c. Remove ‘‘1002.2(f)(25)’’ and add, in 18. Amend § 372. 303 by revising the its place, ‘‘360.3(f)(8).’’ heading as set forth below: 25. The authority catation for part 386 § 365.403 [Amended] continues to read as follows: § 372.303 Terminal areas of motor carriers 13. Amend § 365.403 as follows: and freight forwarders at unincorporated Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, chapters 5, 51, a. Amend § 365.403(b)(1) by removing communities served. 59, 131–141, 145–149, 311, 313, and 315; sec. ‘‘and water’’; 206, Pub. L. 106–159, 113 Stat. 1763; and 49 b. Amend § 365.403(b)(2) by removing PART 377—PAYMENT OF CFR 1.45 and 1.73. ‘‘household goods.’’ TRANSPORTATION CHARGES § 386.2 [Amended] § 365.405 [Amended] 19. The authority citation for part 377 26. Amend § 386.2 in the definition of 14. Amend § 365.405 as follows: continues to read as follows: Civil forfeiture proceedings by removing a. Revise § 365.405(a)(1) to read as ‘‘FMCSA’’ and adding, in its place, follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13101, 13301, 13701, 13702, 13706, 13707; and 14101; and 49 CFR ‘‘ICC’’. § 365.405 Applications. 1.73 § 386.22 [Amended] (a) Procedural requirements. (1) At least 10 days before consummation, an § 377.215 [Amended] 27. Amend § 386.22 by removing in the first sentence ‘‘has filed an election original and two copies of a properly 20. Amend § 377.215 by removing not to contest under § 386.15(a), or’’. completed Form OP–FC–1 and any from the heading of paragraph (c) the attachments (see paragraph (b)(1)(viii) of word ‘‘House’’ and add, in its place, § 386.71 [Amended] this section) must be filed with the ‘‘Household’’ Federal Motor Carrier Safety 28. Amend § 386.71 by removing Administration, Licensing Division PART 382—CONTROLLED ‘‘13502’’ and add, in its place, ‘‘31502’’. (MC–RIS), 400 Seventh Street, SW., SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE § 386.82 [Amended] Room 8214, Washington, DC 20590. AND TESTING * * * * * 29. Amend § 386.82(a)(4) by removing b. Amend § 365.405(a)(2) by removing 21. The authority citation for part 382 ‘‘386.72(b)(3)’’ and add, in its place, the words ‘‘tarriffs (if applicable),’’; by continues to read as follows: ‘‘386.72(b)(1)’’ removing ‘‘1312’’; and by removing the sentence ‘‘In addition, contract carriers Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31301 Appendix B to Part 386 [Amended] must comply with the FMCSA’s et seq., 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. regulations concerning contracts at 49 30. Amend paragraph (f) of appendix CFR part 1053.’’; § 382.305 [Amended] B to part 386 by removing ‘‘$27,500’’ and by adding, in its place ‘‘$10,000’’. c. Amend § 365.405(b)(1)(ii) by 22. Amend § 382.305(i)(3) by removing ‘‘that portion of’’. removing the word ‘‘testing’’ PART 387—MINIMUM LEVELS OF § 365.411 [Amended] immediately after the words ‘‘shall be’’ FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR and adding, in its place, ‘‘tested.’’ 15. Amend § 365.411(b) by removing MOTOR CARRIERS ‘‘Office of the Secretary, Case Control § 382.401 [Amended] Branch, Interstate Commerce 31. The authority citation for part 387 Commission, Washington, DC 20423’’ 22a. Amend § 382.401(d) by removing continues to read as follows: and add, in its place, ‘FMCSA Licensing the word ‘‘employee’s’’ and adding in Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13101, 13301, 13906, Division (MC–RIS), 400 Seventh Street, its place ‘‘employer’s’’ 14701, 31138, and 31139; and 49 CFR 1.73. SW., Room 8214, Washington, DC 20590’’’ PART 383—COMMERCIAL DRIVER’S § 387.9 [Amended] LICENSE STANDARDS; § 365.413 [Amended] REQUIREMENTS AND PENALTIES 32. In § 387.9, amend the table under the heading ‘‘Schedule of Limits— 16. Revise the heading of § 365.413 as Public Liability,’’ column 1, in set forth below: 23. Revise the authority citation for paragraphs (1) through (3), by removing part 383 to read as follows: § 365.413 Procedures for changing the ‘‘10,000’’ and add, in its place, name or business form of a motor carrier, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et ‘‘10,001’’. freight forwarder, or property broker. seq., 31502; Sec. 214 of Pub. L. 106–159, 113 Stat. 1766; and 49 CFR 1.73. § 387.39 [Amended] PART 372—EXEMPTIONS, COMMERCIAL ZONES, AND § 383.3 [AMENDED] 33. In § 387.39, revise the form titled TERMINAL AREAS ‘‘Endorsement For Motor Carrier 24. Amend § 383.3(f)(3)(i)(A) by Policies of Insurance for Public Liability 17. The authority citation for part 372 removing ‘‘383.21(b))’’ and add, in its Under Section 18 of the Bus Regulatory continues to read as follows: place, ‘‘383.21’’. Reform Act of 1982’’ to read as follows:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61822 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

34. In § 387.39, revise the form titled Regulatory Reform Act of 1982’’ to read ‘‘Motor Carrier Public Liability Surety as follows: Bond Under Section 18 of the Bus

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 ER02OC02.001 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61823

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 ER02OC02.002 61824 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

§ 387.303 [Amended] 1999, recognizing that a Canadian DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 35. Amend § 387.303, paragraph (b)(2) commercial driver’s license is proof of table, column 1, in paragraphs (a) medical fitness to drive. Therefore, Canadian National Oceanic and Atmospheric through (c), by removing ‘‘10,000’’ and commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers are Administration add, in its place, ‘‘10,001’’. no longer required to have in their possession a medical examiner’s certificate if the driver 50 CFR Parts 600 and 660 PART 388—COOPERATIVE has been issued, and possesses, a valid [Docket No. 020904208 2208–01; I.D. AGREEMENTS WITH STATES commercial driver’s license issued by a 082702B] Canadian Province or Territory. However, 36. The authority citation for part 388 Canadian drivers who are insulin-using RIN 0648–AP85 continues to read as follows: diabetics, who have epilepsy, or who are Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113 and 502; 49 CFR hearing impaired as defined in Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 1.73. § 391.41(b)(11) are not qualified to drive Fisheries Off West Coast States and in 37. In part 388, remove ‘‘Regional CMVs in the United States. Furthermore, the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast Director of Motor Carriers’’ wherever it Canadian drivers who do not meet the Groundfish Fishery; Groundfish appears and add, in its place, ‘‘Field medical fitness provisions of the Canadian Fishery Management Measures; Administrator’’. National Safety Code for Motor Carriers but Corrections who have been issued a waiver by one of the PART 390—FEDERAL MOTOR AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Canadian Provinces or Territories are not Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS; qualified to drive CMVs in the United States. GENERAL Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), § 391.49 [Amended] Commerce. 38. The authority citation for part 390 ACTION: Correction to emergency rule continues to read as follows: 42. Amend § 391.49(a) by removing latitude/longitude coordinates for the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13301, 13902, 31132– ‘‘State Director’’ and adding, in its Darkblotched Rockfish Conservation 31133, 31136, 31502, 31504; sec. 204, Pub. L. place, ‘‘Division Administrator’’. Area (DBCA) in the Pacific Coast 104–88, 109 Stat. 803, 941 (49 U.S.C. 701 groundfish fishery. note); sec. 217, Pub. L. 105–159, 113 Stat. § 391.65 [Amended] 1748, 1767; and 49 CFR 1.73. 43. Amend § 391.65(a)(2)(vii), in the SUMMARY: This document contains § 390.27 [Amended] certificate, under (Signature of Driver), corrections to DBCA latitude/longitude by removing ‘‘391.3(c)’’ and adding, in coordinates implemented by emergency 39. In § 390.27: rulemaking in the Pacific Coast a. Amend the table, in the middle its place, ‘‘390.5’’. groundfish fishery and published on column, under the heading Territory September 13, 2002. included, in the territory covered by the PART 393—PARTS AND Eastern Service Center, by inserting ACCESSORIES NECESSARY FOR DATES: Effective September 10, 2002, ‘‘Virgin Islands,’’ before WV; SAFE OPERATION through March 12, 2003. b. Amend § 390.27 by adding notes 1 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and 2 at the end of the table to read as 44. The authority citation for part 393 Carrie Nordeen (Northwest Region, follows: continues to read as follows: NMFS); phone: 206–526–6140; fax: 206– 526–6736; e-mail: § 390.27 Locations of motor carrier safety Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1041(b) of Pub. L. [email protected],. service centers. 102–240, 105 Stat. 1914, 49 U.S.C. 31136, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An * * * * * and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. emergency rule was recommended by Note 1: Canadian carriers, for information § 393.48 [Amended] the Pacific Fishery Management Council regarding proper service center, contact a 45. Amend § 393.48(c)(2) by removing (Pacific Council) in consultation with FMCSA division (State office in AK, ME, MI, Pacific Coast Treaty Tribes and the MT, NY, ND, VT, or WA. the authority citation following States of Washington, Oregon, and paragraph (c)(2). Note 2: Mexican carriers, for information California at its June 17 - 21, 2002, regarding proper service center, contact a § 393.52 [Amended] meeting in Foster City, California. This FMCSA division (State) office in AZ, CA, emergency rule established the DBCA to NM, or TX. 46. Remove ‘‘53.5’’ and add, in its protect darkblotched rockfish, an place, ‘‘43.5’’ in § 393.52(d)—Vehicle overfished species, while allowing PART 391—QUALIFICATIONS OF brake performance table, in second limited entry trawl harvest of healthy DRIVERS column, under heading ‘‘Braking force groundfish stocks outside of the DBCA. as a percentage of gross vehicle or The specifications and management 40. The authority citation for part 391 combination weight.’’ measures for the current fishing year continues to read as follows: (January 1 - December 31, 2002) were § 393.86 [Amended] Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 504, 31133, initially published in the Federal 31136, and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73. 47. Amend § 393.86(b)(3), in the Register as an emergency rule for § 391.41 [Amended] heading, by removing ‘‘(g)’’ and adding, January 1 - February 28, 2002 (67 FR 41. Amend § 391.41(a) by adding a in its place, ‘‘(b)’’. 1540, January 11, 2002), and as a proposed rule for all of 2002 (67 FR footnote at the end to read as follows: Issued on: September 25, 2002. 1555, January 11, 2002), then finalized § 391.41 Physical qualifications for Allan M. Fisher, effective March 1, 2002 (67 FR 10490, drivers. Associate Administrator for Administration March 7, 2002). The final rule was (a) * * * and Chief Financial Officer. subsequently amended at 67 FR 15338, * * * * * [FR Doc. 02–24728 Filed 9–27–02; 3:15 pm] April 1, 2002, at 67 FR 18117, April 15, The United States and Canada entered into BILLING CODE 4910–EX–M 2002, at 67 FR 30604, May 7, 2002, at a Reciprocity Agreement, effective March 30, 67 FR 40870, June 14, 2002, at 67 FR

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:28 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61825

44778, July 5, 2002, at 67 FR 48571, July 45°47.19’ N. lat., 124°35.58’ W. long.; 47°52.00’ N. lat., 125°16.50’ W. long.; 25, 2002, at 67 FR 50835, August 6, 45°41.75’ N. lat., 124°28.32’ W. long.; 47°49.00’ N. lat., 125°11.00’ W. long.; 2002, at 67 FR 55166, August, 28, 2002, 45°34.16’ N lat., 124°24.24’ W. long., 47°46.00’ N. lat., 125°6.00’ W. long.; and at 67 FR 57973, September 13, 45°27.10’ N. lat., 124°21.74’ W. long., 47°44.50’ N. lat., 125°7.50’ W. long.; 2002. 45°17.15’ N. lat.; 124°17.85’ W. long., 47°42.00’ N. lat., 125°6.00’ W. long.; The new emergency rule in the Pacific 44°59.52’ N. lat., 124°19.34’ W. long., 47°38.00’ N. lat., 125°7.00’ W. long.; Coast groundfish fishery (67 FR 57973, 44°49.31’ N. lat.; 124°29.97’ W. long., 47°30.00’ N. lat., 125°0.00’ W. long.; September 13, 2002) published latitude/ 44°45.64’ N. lat., 124°33.89’ W. long.; 47°28.00’ N. lat., 124°58.50’ W. long.; longitude coordinates for the DBCA in 44°33.00’ N. lat., 124°36.88’ W. long.; 47°23.00’ N. lat., 124°51.00’ W. long.; the hundredths of a degree instead of in 44°28.21’ N. lat., 124°44.72’ W. long.; 47°17.00’ N. lat., 124°53.00’ W. long.; degrees and minutes. For consistency 44°13.17’ N. lat., 124°56.36’ W. long.; 47°15.00’ N. lat., 125°0.00’ W. long.; sake and at the request of the United 43°56.34’ N. lat., 124°55.74’ W. long.; 47°8.00’ N. lat., 124°59.00’ W. long.; States Coast Guard, this document re- 43°56.47’ N. lat., 124°34.61’ W. long.; 47°1.00’ N. lat., 125°0.00’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° publishes latitude/longitude coordinates 43 42.73’ N. lat., 124 32.41’ W. long.; 46 55.00’ N. lat., 125 2.00’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° for the DBCA in degrees and minutes. 43 30.93’ N. lat., 124 34.43’ W. long.; 46 51.00’ N. lat., 124 57.00’ W. long.; 43°17.45’ N. lat., 124°41.16’ W. long.; 46°41.00’ N. lat., 124°51.00’ W. long.; Corrections 43°7.04’ N. lat., 124°41.25’ W. long.; 46°34.00’ N. lat., 124°38.00’ W. long.; In the FR Doc. 02–23383 in the issue 43°3.45’ N. lat., 124°44.36’ W. long.; 46°30.50’ N. lat., 124°41.00’ W. long.; of Friday, September 13, 2002 (67 FR 43°3.90’ N. lat., 124°50.81’ W. long.; 46°33.00’ N. lat., 124°32.00’ W. long.; 57973) make the following corrections: 42°55.70’ N. lat., 124°52.79’ W. long.; 46°29.00’ N. lat., 124°32.00’ W. long.; 1. On pages 57975 - 57976, section IV 42°54.12’ N. lat., 124°47.36’ W. long.; 46°20.00’ N. lat., 124°39.00’ W. long.; (A) (22) is corrected to read as follows: 42°44.00’ N. lat., 124°42.38’ W. long.; 46°16.00’ N. lat., 124°37.00’ W. long.; (22) Darkblotched Rockfish 42°38.23’ N. lat., 124°41.25’ W. long.; 46°15.50’ N. lat., 124°27.00’ W. long.; Conservation Area. There is hereby 42°33.03’ N. lat., 124°42.38’ W. long.; 46°13.17’ N. lat., 124°37.87’ W. long.; established a Darkblotched Rockfish 42°31.90’ N. lat., 124°42.04’ W. long.; 46°13.17’ N. lat., 124°38.75’ W. long.; ° ° Conservation Area (DBCA). The DBCA 42 30.09’ N. lat., 124 42.67’ W. long.; 46°10.50’ N. lat., 124°42.00’ W. long.; ° ° extends south from the U.S./Canada 42 28.28’ N. lat., 124 47.08’ W. long.; 46°6.21’ N. lat., 124°41.85’ W. long.; ° ° border (48°30’ N. lat.) to 40°10’ N. lat. 42 25.22’ N. lat., 124 43.51’ W. long.; 46°3.02’ N. lat., 124°50.28’ W. long.; ° ° The DBCA is defined along its eastern 42 19.23’ N. lat., 124 37.92’ W. long.; 45°57.00’ N. lat., 124°45.52’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° boundary by straight lines connecting 42 16.29’ N. lat., 124 36.11’ W. long.; 45 43.44’ N. lat., 124 46.03’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° all of the following points in the order 42 5.66’ N. lat., 124 34.92’ W. long.; 45 35.82’ N. lat., 124 45.72’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° stated: 42 0.00’ N. lat., 124 35.27’ W. long.; 45 35.70’ N. lat., 124 42.89’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° 48°14.00’ N. lat., 125°36.00’ W. long.; 42 0.16’ N. lat., 124 34.70’ W. long.; 45 24.45’ N. lat., 124 38.21’ W. long.; ° ° ° ° 48°8.00’ N. lat., 125°38.00’ W. long.; 41 47.04’ N. lat., 124 27.65’ W. long.; 45 11.68’ N. lat., 124 39.38’ W. long.; ° ° 47°57.00’ N. lat., 125°30.00’ W. long.; 41 32.92’ N. lat., 124 28.79’ W. long.; 44°57.94’ N. lat., 124°37.02’ W. long.; ° ° 48°20.00’ N. lat., 125°18.00’ W. long.; 41 10.12’ N. lat., 124 20.50’ W. long.; 44°44.28’ N. lat., 124°50.79’ W. long.; ° ° 48°20.00’ N. lat., 125°3.00’ W. long.; 40 51.37’ N. lat., 124 23.39’ W. long.; 44°32.63’ N. lat., 124°54.21’ W. long.; ° ° 48°23.00’ N. lat., 124°50.00’ W. long.; 40 40.73’ N. lat., 124 30.37’ W. long.; 44°23.20’ N. lat., 124°49.87’ W. long.; 48°17.00’ N. lat., 124°56.50’ W. long.; 40°36.05’ N. lat., 124°37.09’ W. long.; 44°13.18’ N. lat., 124°58.81’ W. long.; 48°6.00’ N. lat., 125°0.00’ W. long.; 40°32.64’ N. lat., 124°38.48’ W. long.; 43°57.92’ N. lat., 124°58.29’ W. long.; 48°9.00’ N. lat., 125°18.00’ W. long.; 40°23.30’ N. lat., 124°31.60’ W. long.; 43°50.12’ N. lat., 124°53.36’ W. long.; 48°6.00’ N. lat., 125°18.00’ W. long.; 40°23.93’ N. lat., 124°28.05’ W. long.; 43°49.53’ N. lat., 124°43.96’ W. long.; 47°59.00’ N. lat., 125°16.00’ W. long.; 40°21.99’ N. lat., 124°24.01’ W. long.; 43°42.76’ N. lat., 124°41.40’ W. long.; 47°49.00’ N. lat., 125°3.00’ W. long.; 40°21.10’ N. lat., 124°27.87’ W. long.; 43°24.00’ N. lat., 124°42.61’ W. long.; 47°42.00’ N. lat., 125°4.50’ W. long.; 40°18.67’ N. lat., 124°25.99’ W. long.; 43°19.74’ N. lat., 124°45.12’ W. long.; 47°31.00’ N. lat., 124°54.00’ W. long.; 40°19.05’ N. lat., 124°22.53’ W. long.; 43°19.63’ N. lat., 124°52.95’ W. long.; 47°24.00’ N. lat., 124°46.00’ W. long.; 40°15.02’ N. lat., 124°25.76’ W. long.; 43°17.41’ N. lat., 124°53.02’ W. long.; 47°18.50’ N. lat., 124°45.00’ W. long.; 40°16.55’ N. lat., 124°34.01’ W. long.; 42°49.15’ N. lat., 124°54.93’ W. long.; 47°8.50’ N. lat., 124°56.00’ W. long.; and 42°46.74’ N. lat., 124°53.39’ W. long.; 47°0.50’ N. lat., 124°54.50’ W. long.; 40°10.03’ N. lat., 124°21.12’ W. long. 42°43.76’ N. lat., 124°51.64’ W. long.; 47°1.00’ N. lat., 124°58.50’ W. long.; The DBCA is defined along its 42°45.41’ N. lat., 124°49.35’ W. long.; 46°57.00’ N. lat., 124°54.50’ W. long.; western boundary by straight lines 42°43.92’ N. lat., 124°45.92’ W. long.; 47°0.00’ N. lat., 124°49.00’ W. long.; connecting all of the following points in 42°38.87’ N. lat., 124°43.38’ W. long.; 46°54.00’ N. lat., 124°48.00’ W. long.; the order stated: 42°34.78’ N. lat., 124°46.56’ W. long.; 46°54.50’ N. lat., 124°52.50’ W. long.; 48°15.00’ N. lat., 125°42.50’ W. long.; 42°31.47’ N. lat., 124°46.89’ W. long.; 46°41.50’ N. lat., 124°43.00’ W. long.; 48°13.00’ N. lat., 125°39.00’ W. long.; 42°31.00’ N. lat., 124°44.28’ W. long.; 46°34.50’ N. lat., 124°28.50’ W. long.; 48°8.50’ N. lat., 125°45.00’ W. long.; 42°29.22’ N. lat., 124°46.93’ W. long.; 46°29.00’ N. lat., 124°30.00’ W. long.; 48°6.00’ N. lat., 125°46.50’ W. long.; 42°28.39’ N. lat., 124°49.94’ W. long.; 46°20.00’ N. lat., 124°36.50’ W. long.; 48°3.50’ N. lat., 125°37.00’ W. long.; 42°26.28’ N. lat., 124°47.60’ W. long.; 46°18.00’ N. lat., 124°38.00’ W. long.; 48°1.50’ N. lat., 125°40.00’ W. long.; 42°19.58’ N. lat., 124°43.21’ W. long.; 46°17.00’ N. lat., 124°35.50’ W. long.; 47°57.00’ N. lat., 125°37.00’ W. long.; 42°13.75’ N. lat., 124°40.06’ W. long.; 46°17.00’ N. lat., 124°22.50’ W. long.; 47°55.50’ N. lat., 125°28.50’ W. long.; 42°5.12’ N. lat., 124°39.06’ W. long.; 46°16.00’ N. lat., 124°20.00’ W. long.; 47°58.00’ N. lat., 125°25.00’ W. long.; 41°59.99’ N. lat., 124°37.72’ W. long.; 46°12.00’ N. lat., 124°35.00’ W. long.; 48°0.50’ N. lat., 125°24.50’ W. long.; 41°59.33’ N. lat., 124°37.68’ W. long.; 46°10.50’ N. lat., 124°39.00’ W. long.; 48°3.50’ N. lat., 125°21.00’ W. long.; 41°47.93’ N. lat., 124°31.79’ W. long.; 46°8.91’ N. lat., 124°39.11’ W. long.; 48°2.00’ N. lat., 125°19.50’ W. long.; 41°21.35’ N. lat., 124°30.35’ W. long.; 46°0.97’ N. lat., 124°38.56’ W. long.; 48°0.00’ N. lat., 125°21.00’ W. long.; 41°7.11’ N. lat., 124°25.25’ W. long.; 45°57.05’ N. lat., 124°36.42’ W. long.; 47°58.00’ N. lat., 125°20.00’ W. long.; 41°7.12’ N. lat., 124°25.05’ W. long.; 45°54.29’ N. lat., 124°40.02’ W. long.; 47°58.00’ N. lat., 125°18.00’ W. long.; 40°57.37’ N. lat., 124°30.25’ W. long.;

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:36 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61826 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

40°41.03’ N. lat., 124°33.21’ W. long.; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: fishing allowance will soon be reached. 40°33.70’ N. lat., 124°42.50’ W. long.; Mary Furuness, 907–586–7228. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting ° ° 40 22.72’ N. lat., 124 32.06’ W. long.; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS directed fishing for pollock in Statistical 40°16.97’ N. lat., 124°31.51’ W. long.; manages the groundfish fishery in the Area 630. 40°18.68’ N. lat., 124°50.44’ W. long.; GOA exclusive economic zone Maximum retainable bycatch amounts and according to the Fishery Management may be found in the regulations at 40°10.11’ N. lat., 124°28.25’ W. long. Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of § 679.20(e) and (f). The DBCA is closed to limited entry Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North Classification groundfish trawl fishing. Fishing with Pacific Fishery Management Council limited entry groundfish trawl gear is under authority of the Magnuson- This action responds to the best prohibited within the DBCA. It is Stevens Fishery Conservation and available information recently obtained unlawful to take and retain, possess, or Management Act. Regulations governing from the fishery. The Assistant land groundfish taken with limited fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, entry groundfish trawl gear in the with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 finds good cause to waive the DBCA. Limited entry groundfish trawl CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. requirement to provide prior notice and vessels may transit through the DBCA, Within any fishing year, underage or opportunity for public comment with or without groundfish on board, overage of a seasonal allowance may be pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 provided all groundfish trawl gear is added to or subtracted from subsequent U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is stowed either: (1) below deck; or (2) if seasonal allowances in a manner to be contrary to the public interest. This the gear cannot readily be moved, in a determined by the Administrator, requirement is contrary to the public secured and covered manner, detached Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional interest as it would delay the closure of from all towing lines, so that it is Administrator), provided that the sum the fishery, lead to exceeding the TAC, rendered unusable for fishing. For the of the revised seasonal allowances does and therefore reduce the public’s ability month of September 2002, all not exceed 30 percent of the annual to use and enjoy the fishery prohibitions that apply to the DBCA TAC apportionment for the Central and resource.The Assistant Administrator also apply to all waters inshore of the Western Regulatory Areas in the GOA for Fisheries, NOAA, also finds good DBCA. These restrictions do not apply (§ 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(C)). For 2002, 30 cause to waive the 30–day delay in the to Pacific whiting vessels using mid- percent of the annual TAC for the effective date of this action under 5 water trawl gear to fish for their sector’s Central and Western Regulatory Areas is U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based primary whiting season allocation, as 15,187 mt. For 2002, the Regional upon the reasons provided above for defined at 660.323(a)(3). Administrator has determined that waiver of prior notice and opportunity Dated: September 26, 2002. within each area for which a seasonal for public comment.This action is required by § 679.20 and is exempt from William T. Hogarth, allowance is established, any overage or review under Executive Order 12866. Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, underage of harvest from the previous National Marine Fisheries Service. season(s) shall be subtracted from or Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. [FR Doc. 02–25077 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] added to the seasonal allowance of the Dated: September 26, 2002. following season provided that the BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Virginia M. Fay, resulting sum of seasonal allowances in Acting Director, Office of Sustainable the Central and Western Regulatory Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Areas does not exceed 15,187 mt in any DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [FR Doc. 02–25065 Filed 9–27–02; 4:12 pm] single season. The D season allowance National Oceanic and Atmospheric of the pollock TAC in Statistical Area BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Administration 630 is 3,803 metric tons (mt) as established by an emergency rule DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 50 CFR Part 679 implementing 2002 harvest specifications and associated National Oceanic and Atmospheric [Docket No. 011218304–1304–01; I.D. management measures for the 092402C] Administration groundfish fisheries off Alaska (67 FR Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 956, January 8, 2002 and 67 FR 34860, 50 CFR Part 679 Zone Off Alaska; Pollock in Statistical May 16, 2002). The C season allowance [Docket No. 011218304–1304–01; I.D. Area 630 of the Gulf of Alaska in Statistical Area 630 was exceeded by 2,855 mt, therefore the Regional 092602C] AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Administrator, in accordance with Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic § 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(C), is reducing the D Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), season pollock TAC in Statistical Area Commerce. Pacific Cod in the Bering Sea and 630 by 2,855 mt to 948 mt. Aleutian Islands Management Area ACTION: Closure. In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), (BSAI) the Regional Administrator has SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed determined that the D season allowance AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries fishing for pollock in Statistical Area of the pollock TAC in Statistical Area Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 630 in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This 630 will soon be reached. Therefore, the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), action is necessary to prevent exceeding Regional Administrator is establishing a Commerce. the D season allowance of the pollock directed fishing allowance of 908 mt, ACTION: Reallocation. total allowable catch (TAC) for and is setting aside the remaining 40 mt Statistical Area 630. as bycatch to support other anticipated SUMMARY: NMFS is reallocating the DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local groundfish fisheries. In accordance with projected unused amount of Pacific cod time (A.l.t.), October 2, 2002, until 2400 § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional from vessels using trawl and jig gear to hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2002. Administrator finds that this directed vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61827

in the BSAI. These actions are necessary will not harvest 3,400 mt of their Pacific Dated: September 26, 2002. to allow the 2002 total allowable catch cod allocation by the end of the year. Virginia M. Fay, (TAC) of Pacific cod to be harvested. Therefore, in accordance with Acting Director, Office of Sustainable DATES: Effective September 27, 2002, § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(C), NMFS is Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. until 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31, reallocating the unused amount of 3,400 [FR Doc. 02–25064 Filed 9–27–02; 4:12 pm] 2002. mt of Pacific cod allocated to vessels BILLING CODE 3510–22–S using jig gear to vessels using hook-and- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: line or pot gear. Mary Furuness, 907–586–7228. In accordance with DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(C)(1), 200 mt of the manages the groundfish fishery in the combined reallocation of unused Pacific National Oceanic and Atmospheric BSAI exclusive economic zone cod from trawl and jig gear is Administration according to the Fishery Management apportioned to catcher vessels using Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the hook-and-line gear. In accordance with 50 CFR Part 679 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(C)(2), the remaining (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific combined reallocation of unused Pacific [Docket No. 011218304–1304–01; I.D. 092702A] Fishery Management Council under cod from trawl and jig gear, 7,200 mt, authority of the Magnuson-Stevens is apportioned so that catcher/processor Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Fishery Conservation and Management vessels using hook-and-line gear will Act. Regulations governing fishing by Zone Off Alaska; Atka Mackerel in the receive 95 percent and vessels using pot Central Aleutian District U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP gear will receive 5 percent of the appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 reallocation. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries and 50 CFR part 679. The harvest specifications for Pacific Service (NMFS), NationalOceanic and The emergency rule implementing the cod established by the emergency rule Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2002 harvest specifications and implementing 2002 harvest Commerce. associated management measures for the specifications and associated ACTION: Closure. groundfish fisheries off Alaska (67 FR management measures for the 956, January 8, 2002, and 67 FR 34860, groundfish fisheries off Alaska (67 FR SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed May 16, 2002) established the amount of 956, January 8, 2002, and 67 FR 34860, fishing for Atka mackerel in the Central the 2002 BSAI Pacific cod TAC as May 16, 2002) are revised as follows: Aleutian District of the Bering Sea and 185,000 metric tons (mt) after 300 mt to vessels using jig gear, 81,920 Aleutian Islands management area subtraction of the community mt to catcher processor vessels using (BSAI). This action is necessary to development quota (CDQ) reserves and hook-and-line gear, 482 mt to catcher prevent exceeding the 2002 Atka apportionment of the reserve. Pursuant vessels using hook-and-line gear, 17,535 mackerel total allowable catch (TAC) in to § 679.20(a)(7)(i)(A), 3,700 mt was mt to pot gear, 40,475 mt to trawl this area. allocated to vessels using jig gear, catcher/processors, and 42,475 mt to DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local 94,350 mt to vessels using hook-and- trawl catcher vessels. time (A.l.t.) September 27, 2002, until line or pot gear, and 86,950 mt to 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2002. vessels using trawl gear. The share of Classification the Pacific cod TAC allocated to trawl This action responds to the best FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: gear was further allocated 50 percent to available information recently obtained Mary Furuness, 907–586–7228. catcher vessels and 50 percent to from the fishery. The Assistant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS catcher/processor vessels Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, manages the groundfish fishery in the (§ 679.20(a)(7)(i)(B)). The share of the finds good cause to waive the BSAI exclusive economic zone Pacific cod TAC allocated to hook-and- requirement to provide prior notice and according to the Fishery Management line or pot gear was further allocated (i) opportunity for public comment Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the 80 percent to catcher/processor vessels pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area using hook-and-line gear; (ii) 0.3 percent U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is (FMP) prepared by the North Pacific to catcher vessels using hook-and-line contrary to the public interest. This Fishery Management Council under gear; (iii) 18.3 percent to vessels using requirement is contrary to the public authority of the Magnuson-Stevens pot gear; and (iv) 1.4 percent to catcher interest as it would delay the Fishery Conservation and Management vessels less than 60 ft length overall implementation of these measures in a Act. Regulations governing fishing by (18.3 m) that use either hook-and-line or timely fashion in order to allow full U.S. vessels in accordance with the FMP pot gear (§ 679.20(a)(7)(i)(C)). utilization of the Pacific cod TAC, and appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600 As of September 7, 2002, the therefore reduce the public’s ability to and 50 CFR part 679. Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS use and enjoy the fishery resource. The 2002 Atka mackerel TAC in the (Regional Administrator), has The Assistant Administrator for Central Aleutian District of the BSAI is determined that trawl catcher/ Fisheries, NOAA, also finds good cause 22,015 metric tons (mt) as established processors will not be able to harvest to waive the 30–day delay in the by an emergency rule implementing 3,000 mt and trawl catcher vessels will effective date of this action under 5 2002 harvest specifications and not be able to harvest 1,000 mt of Pacific U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based associated management measures for the cod allocated to those vessels under upon the reasons provided above for groundfish fisheries off Alaska (67 FR § 679.20(a)(7)(i)(B). Therefore, in waiver of prior notice and opportunity 956, January 8, 2002, and 67 FR 34860, accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(C), for public comment. May 16, 2002). NMFS apportions 4,000 mt of Pacific This action is taken under 50 CFR In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), cod from trawl gear to vessels using 679.20 and is exempt from OMB review the Administrator, Alaska Region, hook-and-line or pot gear. under Executive Order 12866. NMFS (Regional Administrator), has The Regional Administrator also has Authority: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et determined that the 2002 Atka mackerel determined that vessels using jig gear seq. TAC in the Central Aleutian District

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61828 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

will be reached. Therefore, the Regional Classification to waive the 30–day delay in the Administrator is establishing a directed This action responds to the best effective date of this action under 5 fishing allowance of 21,615 mt, and is available information recently obtained U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based setting aside the remaining 400 mt as from the fishery. The Assistant upon the reasons provided above for bycatch to support other anticipated Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, waiver of prior notice and opportunity groundfish fisheries. In accordance with finds good cause to waive the for public comment. § 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional requirement to provide prior notice and This action is required by section Administrator finds that this directed opportunity for public comment 679.20 and is exempt from review under fishing allowance will soon be reached. pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 Executive Order 12866. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is Authority: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et directed fishing for Atka mackerel in the contrary to the public interest. This seq. Central Aleutian District of the BSAI. requirement is contrary to the public interest as it would delay the closure of Dated: September 27, 2002. Maximum retainable bycatch amounts the fishery, lead to exceeding the TAC, John H. Dunnigan, may be found in the regulations at and therefore reduce the public’s ability Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, § 679.20(e) and (f). to use and enjoy the fishery resource. National Marine Fisheries Service. The Assistant Administrator for [FR Doc. 02–25063 Filed 9–27–02; 4:12 pm] Fisheries, NOAA, also finds good cause BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

VerDate Sep<04>2002 20:02 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM 02OCR1 61829

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 191

Wednesday, October 2, 2002

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER tax returns. Generally, receipts reported 4. Firms in this industry do not contains notices to the public of the proposed to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) normally consider billings that are issuance of rules and regulations. The include a firm’s gross receipts from the reimbursed to other firms as their own purpose of these notices is to give interested sale of goods and services. The income, preferring instead to count only persons an opportunity to participate in the petitioners, however, believe that rule making prior to the adoption of the final receipts that are retained for their own rules. receipts collected for payment to the use; and, actual transportation and lodging 5. Federal Government agencies providers that are reimbursed by a tour which engage in the collection of SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION operator should not be included in the calculation of average annual receipts statistics and other industry analysts 13 CFR Part 121 for purposes of determining the size of typically represent receipts of the industry’s firms on an adjusted receipts RIN 3245–AE98 a tour operator. SBA has evaluated this issue and basis. Small Business Size Standards; Tour agrees that certain types of receipts SBA’s review of information obtained Operators should be excluded from the calculation on the Tour Operators industry finds of size for firms in this industry. Related that these characteristics exist in the AGENCY: U.S. Small Business to this issue is whether the current size industry. The prevalence of these Administration (SBA). standard is appropriate if a significant characteristics supports the proposal to ACTION: Proposed rule. proportion of receipts is excluded from exclude funds received in trust for a firm’s gross receipts. Based on a SUMMARY: The Small Business unaffiliated third parties from the review of industry data discussed Administration (SBA) proposes to calculation of a tour operator’s receipts below, SBA believes the current size modify the way average annual receipts for size standard purposes. The standard is appropriate if size is are calculated for firms in the Tour following discussion summarizes these measured on an adjusted basis rather Operators industry (North American findings: than by gross receipts. Industry Classification System (NAICS) Accordingly, SBA proposes a revision 1. Agent-Like Relationship 561520). This would exclude funds to the size standard for the Tour received in trust for unaffiliated third Operators industry by excluding funds The North American Industry parties from the calculation of a tour received in trust for unaffiliated third Classification System Manual (1997) operator’s receipts. SBA would retain parties while retaining the size standard states that this industry encompasses the size standard figure of $6.0 million. of $6 million in average annual receipts. establishments primarily engaged in DATES: Comments must be received on arranging and assembling tours. The or before November 1, 2002. Calculation of Average Annual Receipts tours are sold through travel agencies or ADDRESSES: Comments to Gary M. SBA reviews requests to exclude tour operators. These firms act as agents, Jackson, Assistant Administrator for receipts of certain business activities on ensuring that transportation, Size Standards, 409 3rd Street, SW., a case-by-case basis. The structure of accommodation and facility providers, Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416; this review is consistent with past and lecturers (for whom the funds are or via email to proposed rules on this issue (e.g., freight collected) are paid. Therefore, the [email protected]. Upon forwarders, 65 FR 48601, dated August dominant activity in this industry request, SBA will make all public 9, 2000, and conference management involves a broker or agent-like comments available. planners, 60 FR 57982, dated January relationship with the tour operator FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 31, 1996). These reviews identify and passing through funds from customers Robert Ray, Office of Size Standards, evaluate five industry characteristics to providers. (202) 205–6618. under which it might be appropriate to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SBA has exclude certain funds received and later 2. Pass-Through Funds Are a Significant received requests from tour operators transmitted to an unaffiliated third party Proportion of Total Receipts and an industry association to review as follows: It is a normal practice in this industry the size standard for the Tour Operators 1. A broker or agent-like relationship for the client’s bill to include charges of industry (NAICS 561520). These exists between a firm and a third party organizations request that SBA exclude provider which is a dominant or crucial the various providers of services and from the calculation of a tour operator’s activity of firms in the industry; facilities which are temporarily held in average annual receipts monies passed 2. The pass-through funds associated trust by the tour operator for remittance through to suppliers of travel with the broker or agent-like to the third party providers. The charges components (i.e., meals; ground, air, relationship are a significant proportion by the other providers are incorporated and rail transportation; lodging; and of the firm’s total receipts; in the bill to the customer or client. sightseeing and entertainment). These 3. Consistent with the normal Moreover, these remitted funds are monies typically account for a majority business practice of firms in the typically much larger in size than the of a tour operator’s receipts. industry, a firm’s income remaining tour operator’s own earnings for Under SBA’s Small Business Size after the pass-through funds are arranging the tour. Estimates of these Regulations (13 CFR 121.104), the remitted to a third party is typically pass-through funds range from 80 receipts of a firm are based on derived from a standard commission or percent to 95 percent of total revenues information reported on a firm’s Federal fee; received by tour operators.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:08 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61830 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

3. Remaining Income Is Derived From a amount paid the suppliers would be average characteristics of the Standard Commission or Fee attributable to the tour operator. All comparison group, then the anchor size The tour operator earns income as the other sources of income, such as selling standard is considered appropriate for balance after compensating service merchandise, must also be included in the industry. If the specific industry’s providers. This arrangement effectively the calculation of a tour operator’s characteristics are significantly different receipts. from the average characteristics of the involves a commission or fee for putting comparison group, a size standard together the tour. Size Standard for the Tour Operators higher or, in rare cases, a size standard Industry 4. Firms in This Industry Only Count lower than the anchor size standard may Receipts Retained for Their Own Use The changed definition of receipts be considered appropriate. The larger would effectively increase the current Firms in this industry do not consider the differences between the specific $6.0 million size standard. A firm with industry’s characteristics and the funds collected for third parties as their receipts exclusive of pass-throughs to own funds. As discussed above, the role comparison group, the larger the third parties of $6.0 million would be difference between the appropriate of tour operator is to set up the tour, equivalent to a firm with gross billings linking customers with the necessary industry size standard and the anchor of $30 million (assuming 80 percent of size standard. Only when all or most of services for a successful tour including billings were paid to third parties). the industry characteristics are facilitating the bill, fees, and services Accordingly, SBA believes it is significantly smaller than the average associated with transportation, necessary to review the size standard characteristics of the comparison group, accommodation, food servicing, and along with its proposal to allow or other industry specific considerations guide information that are paid on exclusions for pass-through funds. The strongly suggest the anchor size behalf of the customer. Furthermore, following discussion describes SBA’s standard would be an unreasonably some states, such as California, place size standards methodology and the high size standard for the industry restrictions on a tour operator’s use of evaluation of data on the Tour Operators under review, will SBA adopt a size funds collected and owed to providers. industry, as well as other industries for standard below the anchor size This information indicates that charges comparison purposes. standard. for a tour are mostly not those of the Size Standards Methodology In 13 CFR 121.102 (a) and (b), tour operator. evaluation factors are listed which are 5. Federal Agencies and Industry Industry Analysis: The Small the primary factors describing the Analysts Typically Represent Receipts Business Act requires that size structural characteristics of an of These Firms on an Adjusted Receipts standards vary by industry to the extent industry—average firm size, distribution necessary to reflect differing industry Basis of firms by size, start-up costs, and characteristics (Section 3(a)(3)). SBA has industry concentration. The analysis Data from the U.S. Bureau of the in place two ‘‘base or anchor size also often examines a fifth factor—the Census (Census Bureau) addressing how standards’’ that apply to most possible impact of a size standard to count receipts in this industry show industries—500 employees for revision on SBA’s programs. The SBA firm receipts as the ‘‘DIFFERENCE manufacturing industries and $6 million generally considers these five factors to between the selling price of their tours for nonmanufacturing industries. SBA be the most important evaluation factors and the amount paid to suppliers’ (see established 500 employees as the anchor in establishing or revising a size Census Form SV–7305). This adjusted size standard for the manufacturing standard for an industry. However, it receipts basis is equivalent to reporting industries at SBA’s inception in 1953 will also consider and evaluate other receipts on a commission or fee basis. and shortly thereafter established a $1 information that it believes relevant to Thus, the Census Bureau recognizes that million size standard for the the decision on a size standard as the the normal arrangement in this industry nonmanufacturing industries. The situation warrants for a particular is to handle money for others, retaining receipts-based anchor size standard for industry. Public comments submitted a fraction on an adjusted receipts basis the nonmanufacturing industries has on proposed size standards are also an equivalent to a commission or fee. been periodically adjusted for inflation important source of additional Similarly, the credit reporting firm of so that, currently, the anchor size information that SBA closely reviews Dun and Bradstreet also reports receipts standard for the nonmanufacturing before making a final decision on a size for firms in this industry by using industries is $6 million. Anchor size standard. Below is a brief description of adjusted income, not gross billings. standards are presumed to be each of the five evaluation factors. Based on these findings, SBA believes appropriate for an industry unless its 1. Average firm size is simply total that it is appropriate to exclude amounts characteristics indicate that larger firms industry receipts (or number of collected on behalf of third parties when have a much greater significance within employees) divided by the number of calculating receipts of businesses in the that industry than for the typical firms in the industry. If the average firm Tour Operators industry, as SBA industry with an anchor size standard. size of an industry is significantly presently does for real estate agencies, When evaluating a size standard, the higher than the average firm size of a travel agencies, freight forwarders, characteristics of the specific industry comparison industry group, this fact conference management planners, and under review are compared to the would be viewed as supporting a size advertising agencies. More specifically, characteristics of a group of industries, standard higher than the anchor size any charges for transportation, food referred to as a comparison group. A standard. Conversely, if the industry’s servicing, lodging and other direct fees comparison group is a large number of average firm size is similar to, or associated with tours for which the tour industries grouped together to represent significantly lower than that of the operator holds money in trust for an the typical industry. It can be comprised comparison industry group, it would be unaffiliated third party, and to which of all industries, all manufacturing a basis to adopt the anchor size standard the tour operator does not have a claim industries, all industries with receipt- or, in rare cases, a lower size standard. of right, would be excluded from gross based size standards, or some other 2. The distribution of firms by size receipts. Only the difference between logical grouping. If the characteristics of examines the proportion of industry the selling price of the tour and the a specific industry are similar to the receipts, employment or other economic

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61831

activity accounted for by firms of costs per establishment than that of the that industry. If small businesses receive different sizes in an industry. If the average of the comparison group is ample assistance through these preponderance of an industry’s likely to have higher start-up costs that programs, or if the financial assistance economic activity is by smaller firms, would tend to support a size standard is provided mainly to small businesses this tends to support adoption of the higher than the anchor size standard. much lower than the size standard, a anchor size standard. The opposite is Conversely, if the industry showed the change to the size standard (especially, the case for an industry in which the same, or somewhat lower nonpayroll if it is already above the anchor size distribution of firms indicates that costs per establishment when compared standard) may not be appropriate. economic activity is concentrated to the comparison group of anchor size among the largest firms in an industry. standard industries, the anchor size Evaluation of Industry Size Standard In this rule, the SBA is comparing the standard would be considered the Industry Structure Considerations: size of firm within an industry to the appropriate size standard. The two tables below show the size of firm in the comparison group at 4. Industry competition is assessed by characteristics for the Tour Operators which predetermined percentages of measuring the proportion or share of industry and for the comparison group. receipts are generated by firms smaller industry receipts obtained by firms that (The data for the Tour Operators than a particular size firm. For example, are among the largest firms in an Industry is based on Census data using for tour operators, 50 percent of total industry. In this rule, the SBA compared adjusted receipts in which pass-through industry receipts are generated by firms the proportion of industry receipts receipts are excluded.) The comparison of $4.4 million in adjusted receipts and generated by the four largest firms in the group is comprised of all industries less. This contrasts with the comparison industry—generally referred to as the with a $6 million receipts-based size group (composed of industries having a ‘‘four-firm concentration ratio—with the standards (referred to as the average four-firm concentration ratio of $6 million size standard) in which firms nonmanufacturing anchor group). Since industries in the comparison groups. If of $5.8 million or less in receipts on SBA’s size standards analysis is a significant proportion of economic average generated 50 percent of total assessing whether the tour operators activity within the industry is industry receipts. Viewed in isolation, size standard should be higher than the concentrated among a few relatively this somewhat (but not significantly) nonmanufacturing anchor size standard, large producers, SBA tends to set a size lower figure for tour operators suggests this is the most logical set of industries standard higher than the anchor size that a nonmanufacturer anchor size to group together for the industry standard of $6.0 million may be standard to assist firms in a broader size analysis. The data on this comparison warranted. Other size distribution range to compete with firms that are group provide an additional perspective comparisons in the industry analysis larger and more dominant in the on the size of firms in related industries include 40 percent, 60 percent and 70 industry. In general, however, SBA does and their industry structure. SBA percent, as well as the 50 percent not consider this to be an important examined economic data on these comparison discussed above. factor in assessing a size standard if the 3. Start-up costs affect a firm’s initial four-firm concentration ratio falls below industries from a special tabulation of size because entrants into an industry 40 percent for an industry under review. the 1997 Economic Census prepared must have sufficient capital to start and 5. Competition for Federal under contract by the U.S. Bureau of the maintain a viable business. To the procurements and SBA Financial Census, SBA internal loan data bases, extent that firms entering into an Assistance. SBA also evaluates the and Federal contract award data for industry have greater financial possible impact of a size standard on its fiscal years 1999–2000 from the Federal requirements than firms in other programs to determine whether small Procurement Data Center. industries, the SBA is justified in businesses defined under the existing Table 1 below examines the size considering a higher size standard. In size standard are receiving a reasonable distribution of firms. For this factor, lieu of direct data on start-up costs, SBA level of assistance. This assessment SBA is evaluating the size of firm that is using a proxy measure to assess the most often focuses on the proportion or accounts for predetermined percentages financial burden for entry-level firms. share of Federal contract dollars of total industry receipts (40 percent, 50 SBA is using nonpayroll costs per awarded to small businesses in the percent, 60 percent and 70 percent). establishment as a proxy measure for industry in question. In general, the (The size of firm in the Tour Operators start-up costs. This is derived by first lower the share of Federal contract Industry using Census data derived for calculating the percent of receipts in an dollars awarded to small businesses in the SBA, is based on adjusted receipts industry that are either retained or an industry which receives significant in which pass-through revenues are expended on costs other than payroll Federal procurement revenues, the excluded.) The table shows firms up to costs. (The figure comprising the greater is the justification for a size a specific size that, along with smaller numerator of this percentage is mostly standard higher than the existing one. firms, accounts for a specific percentage composed of capitalization costs, As another factor to evaluate the of total industry receipts. For example, overhead costs, materials costs, and the impact of a size standard on SBA tour operators of $2.7 million or less in costs of goods sold or inventoried.) This programs, the volume of guaranteed receipts obtained 40 percent of total percentage is then applied to the loans within an industry and the size of industry receipts. This contrasts with average receipts of an establishment (a firms obtaining loans in its financial the nonmanufacturing anchor group in business entity operating at a single assistance programs is sometimes which firms of $3.2 million or less in location) to arrive at nonpayroll costs assessed to determine whether the receipts obtained 40 percent of total per establishment. An industry with a current size standard may restrict the industry receipts in the average significantly higher level of nonpayroll level of financial assistance to firms in industry.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61832 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1.—SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF FIRMS IN THE TOUR OPERATORS INDUSTRY AND THE NONMANUFACTURING ANCHOR GROUP [Data in millions of dollars]

Size of firm at Size of firm at Size of firm at Size of firm at Category 40 percent 50 percent 60 percent 70 percent

Tour Operators ...... $2.7 $4.4 $8.2 $17.2 Nonmanufacturing Anchor Group ...... $3.2 $5.8 $11.8 $28.0

These data indicate that $6.0 million operator’s figures are about 75 percent Table 2 lists three other evaluation (exclusive of pass-through receipts) is to 85 percent of the averages for the factors for the Tour Operators industry an appropriate size standard for the nonmanufacturer anchor group of and the comparison group. These industry of tour operators. At a given industries. These relatively small include comparisons of average firm coverage level, using pass-through differences between the characteristics size, start-up costs (as measured by excluded receipts for tour operators, the of the Tour Operators industry and nonpayroll receipts per establishment), size of firm for the Tour Operators nonmanufacturer anchor group are not and the four-firm concentration ratio. industry is moderately lower than the sufficient, however, to warrant a size comparison group. Generally, the tour standard lower than $6 million.

TABLE 2.—INDUSTRY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TOUR OPERATORS INDUSTRY AND THE NONMANUFACTURING ANCHOR GROUP

Average firm size Non-payroll re- ceipts per es- Four-firm con- Category Receipts tablishment centration ratio (millions) Employees (million)

Tour Operators ...... $0.86 12.0 $0.49 7.2% Nonmanufacturing Anchor Group ...... $0.95 10.6 $0.56 14.4%

For tour operators, average firm size SBA estimates is less than $1 million in size standards established by the SBA in receipts (exclusion of pass through receipts using adjusted receipts as a Administrator. The SBA considers as receipts) is only slightly lower than the measure. As a result of the terrorist part of its evaluation of a size standard nonmanufacturing anchor group while attacks of September 11, 95 tour whether a business concern at or below its average firm size in employees is operators obtained Economic Injury a size standard would be considered slightly higher. These differences with Disaster Assistance loans (EIDL) dominant in its field of operation. This the comparison group are insignificant amounting to $8.6 million. SBA assessment generally considers the and support a size standard at the declined, however, 11 EIDL applications market share of firms at the proposed or nonmanufacturer anchor level of $6.0 from tour operators due to their final size standard, or other factors that million. Its nonpayroll receipts per exceeding the current size standard may show whether a firm can exercise establishment indicator is only slightly based on average annual receipts, but a major controlling influence on a smaller than the comparison group without the exclusion for pass-through national basis in which significant while its four-firm concentration ratio is revenues proposed in this rule. In the numbers of business concerns are low, indicating that the industry is not case of Federal procurements to tour engaged. dominated by large businesses, similar operators, there were no Federal SBA has determined that no firm at or to the general pattern of the procurements in either FY 1999 or FY below this size standard for the Tour nonmanufacturing anchor group. The 2000. Given the low incidence of Operators industry would be of a latter two factors support the other lending activity in these two programs sufficient size to dominate its field of factors in indicating that the and the absence of Federal procurement operation. The largest firm at the size nonmanufacturer anchor size standard for tour services, no special standard level generates less than 0.2 is appropriate for tour operators. consideration beyond the industry percent of total industry receipts. This Overall, all of the industry factors analysis is needed on the tour operators level of market share effectively reviewed support an anchor size size standard. precludes any ability for a firm at or standard of $6 million. Overview: Based on a review of the below the size standard from exerting a SBA Program Considerations: SBA evaluation factors, SBA is proposing a controlling effect on this industry. also reviews its size standards from the $6 million adjusted receipts size Alternative Size Standards: SBA relationship with its programs. Tour standard. All of the five industry considered as an alternative size operators have received SBA financial evaluation factors support a size standard the $3 million size standard assistance in two programs. Under standard at the size of the presently proposed for the related SBA’s 7(a) loan program, tour operators nonmanufacturing anchor size standard. Travel Agencies industry (see 67 FR obtained 18 loans for $3 million in fiscal Dominant in Field of Operation: 11881, date March 15, 2002). That size year (FY) 1999, 25 loans for $4.3 million Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act standard uses adjusted receipts to in FY 2000, and 17 loans for $1.3 defines a small concern as one that is (1) measure the size of a travel agency. As million in FY 2001. All but three of independently owned and operated, (2) discussed above, all evaluation factors these loans were to Tour Operators with not dominant in its field of operation pointed to a size standard at the fewer than 20 employees, a size that and (3) within detailed definitions or nonmanufacturer anchor size standard

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:08 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61833

of $6 million. SBA’s policy is to adopt Regulatory Impact Analysis with the approval of the SBA a size standard below $6 million for a Administrator (see 13 CFR 121.801). i. Is There a Need for the Regulatory The benefits of a size standard nonmanufacturing industry in rare cases Action? and only when all or most of the increase to a more appropriate level industry characteristics are significantly SBA is chartered to aid and assist would accrue to three groups: (1) smaller than the average characteristics small businesses through a variety of Businesses that benefit by gaining small of the comparison group, or other financial, procurement, business business status from the higher size industry specific considerations development, and advocacy programs. standards that also use small business assistance programs; (2) growing small strongly suggest the anchor size To effectively assist intended businesses that may exceed the current standard would be an unreasonably beneficiaries of these programs, SBA size standards in the near future and high size standard for the industry must establish distinct definitions of which businesses are deemed small who will retain small business status under review. In comparison to a travel from the higher size standard; and (3) agency, tour operators generate most of businesses. The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)) delegates to the SBA Federal agencies that award contracts their receipts from packaging tours, Administrator the responsibility for under procurement programs that which have significantly higher receipts establishing small business definitions. require small business status. Although per transaction than ticketing travel It also requires that small business there may be some procurements that accommodations by travel agencies. definitions vary to reflect industry are awarded tour operators, SBA’s Tour packages for clients quite often are differences. The supplementary research for the last two completed made for 40 to 60 individuals and information to this proposed rule fiscal years was unable to find any involve a combination of travel, lodging, explains the approach SBA follows Federal contracting activity in this entertainment and other tourist when analyzing a size standard for a industry. activities. Thus, SBA considers a $3 particular industry. Based on that Newly defined small businesses million size standard too low for the analysis, SBA believes that a change in would benefit from the SBA’s 7(a) Tour Operators industry. the way receipts are measured for Guaranteed Loan Program. SBA estimates that three loans totaling The SBA welcomes public comments businesses in the Tour Operators industry is needed to better reflect their approximately $0.6 million in new on its size standard for the Tour Federal loan guarantees would be made size and activities. Operators industry. Comments on to these newly defined small businesses. alternatives, including the option of ii. What Are the Potential Benefits and This represents 21 percent (the retaining the size standard at $6 million Costs of This Regulatory Action? percentage increase in coverage of sales measured in gross receipts as discussed in the industry by firms under the The most significant benefit to above, should present the reasons that higher ‘‘real’’ size standard) of the $2.9 businesses obtaining small business would make them preferable to the size million yearly average in loans that status as a result of this rule is eligibility standard. were guaranteed by the SBA in this for Federal small business assistance industry under these two financial Compliance With Executive Orders programs. Under this rule, 238 programs from FY 1999 to FY 2001. 12866, 12988, and 13132, the additional firms generating 21 percent These additional loan guarantees, Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. of sales in the industry will obtain small because of their limited magnitude, will chapter 35), and the Regulatory business status and become eligible for have virtually no impact on the overall Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) these programs. These include SBA’s availability of loans for SBA’s loan financial assistance programs, economic programs, which have averaged about The Office of Management and Budget injury disaster loans and Federal 50,000 loans totaling more than $12 (OMB) has determined that this procurement preference programs for billion per year in recent years. proposed rule is a ‘‘significant’’ small businesses, 8(a) firms, small The newly defined small businesses regulatory action for purposes of disadvantaged businesses, small would also benefit from SBA’s Executive Order 12866. Size standards businesses located in Historically Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) determine which businesses are eligible Underutilized Business Zones Program. Since this program is for Federal small business programs. (HUBZone), women-owned small contingent upon the occurrence and This is not a major rule under the businesses, and veteran-owned and severity of a disaster, no meaningful Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 800. service disabled veteran-owned small estimate of benefits can be projected For the purpose of the Paperwork businesses, as well as those awarded from future disasters. However, for the Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Ch. 35, SBA through full and open competition after terrorist attacks of September 11, SBA has determined that this rule would not application of the HUBZone or small has declined 11 applicants based on impose new reporting or record keeping disadvantaged business price evaluation size. Many of these companies would preference or adjustment. Through the requirements, other than those required likely qualify if pass-through receipts assistance of these programs, small of SBA. For purposes of Executive Order were excluded from a firm’s measure of businesses may benefit by becoming 13132, SBA has determined that this size in this industry. In addition, out of more knowledgeable, stable, and the newly eligible tour operators, eight rule does not have any federalism competitive businesses. implications warranting the preparation more loans would likely be approved. Other Federal agencies also use SBA Based on an analysis of September 11 of a Federalism Assessment. For size standards for a variety of regulatory EIDL assistance, this rule may result in purposes of Executive Order 12988, and program purposes. However, $1.4 million to $2.7 million in SBA has determined that this rule is discussions with industry additional loans. drafted, to the extent practicable, in representatives identified no other uses Federal agencies may benefit from the accordance with the standards set forth of SBA’ tour operators size standard. If higher size standards if the newly in that order. Our Regulatory Impact such a case exists where SBA’s size defined and expanding small businesses Analysis follows. standard is not appropriate, an agency compete for more set-aside may establish its own size standards procurements. However, the last two

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61834 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

fiscal years have seen no Federal in the exercise of their government (IRFA) of this rule on the Tour contracting in the Tour Operators functions. In a few cases, State and local Operators industry addressing the industry and there will be no governments have voluntarily adopted following questions: (1) What is the procurement gains from a higher size SBA’s size standards for their programs need for and objective of the rule, (2) standard in this industry for Federal to eliminate the need to establish an what is SBA’s description and estimate agencies if this pattern continues. administrative mechanism to develop of the number of small entities to which To the extent that up to 238 their own size standards. the rule will apply, (3) what is the additional firms could become active in projected reporting, recordkeeping, and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Federal small business programs, this other compliance requirements of the may entail some additional Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act rule, (4) what are the relevant Federal administrative costs to the Federal (RFA), this rule, if finalized, may have rules which may duplicate, overlap or government associated with additional a significant impact on a substantial conflict with the rule and (5) what bidders for Federal small business number of small entities engaged in the alternatives will allow the Agency to procurement programs, additional firms Tour Operators industry. As described accomplish its regulatory objectives seeking SBA guaranteed lending in the Regulatory Impact Analysis, this while minimizing the impact on small programs, and additional firms eligible rule may impact small entities seeking entities? for enrollment in SBA’s PRO-Net data SBA (7a) Guaranteed Loans or Economic base program. Among businesses in this Impact Disaster Loans, but it is unlikely (1) What Is the Need for and Objective group seeking SBA assistance, there to affect SBA’s procurement preference of the Rule? could be some additional costs programs because of the absence of The revision to the size standard for associated with compliance and Federal contracting. Newly defined tour operators to exclude third party verification of small business status and small businesses would benefit from the reimbursements more accurately protests of small business status. These SBA’s 7(a) Guaranteed Loan Program. measures the magnitude of operations of costs are likely to generate minimal SBA estimates that three additional a tour operator. SBA developed five incremental administrative costs since loans totaling approximately $0.7 criteria to assess whether businesses in administrative mechanisms are million in new Federal loan guarantees an industry should be allowed to currently in place to handle these could be made to these newly defined exclude funds held in trust for third administrative requirements. small businesses. This represents 21 parties. SBA found that tour operators The costs to the Federal Government percent (the percentage increase in act as agents for their clients by may be higher on some Federal coverage of sales in the industry by arranging travel and related activities contracts as a result of this rule. firms under the higher ‘‘real’’ size provided by third parties. Well over a However, any analysis of costs is standard) of the $3.7 million yearly majority of a tour operator’s receipts dependent on contracting in this average in loans that were guaranteed by collected from clients are provided to industry and the last two fiscal years the SBA in this industry under these third party providers. Therefore, a size have had no federal contracting in this two financial programs in FY 1999 and standard allowing for the exclusion of industry. SBA is assuming that this FY 2000. These additional loan third party reimbursements is a better trend will continue and there will be no guarantees, because of their limited measure of a tour operator’s size than contracting activity in this industry in magnitude, will have virtually no gross receipts. the near future. impact on the overall availability of (2) What Is SBA’s Description and SBA believes that there will be no loans for SBA’s loan programs, which Estimate of the Number of Small distributional effects among large and have averaged about 50,000 loans Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply? small businesses, nor will there be any totaling more than $12 billion per year equity or uncertainty considerations as in recent years. Within the Tour Operators industry, a result of this rule. With a small The size standard may also affect 2,722 businesses out of 3,222 (84.5 amount of lending to tour operators small businesses participating in percent) are currently defined as small. discussed above, it is unlikely that they programs of other agencies that use SBA Only a small proportion of businesses in would be denied SBA financial size standards. As a practical matter, this industry utilizes SBA programs, assistance due to a larger pool of eligible however, SBA cannot estimate the almost exclusively in the area of small businesses. Also, there is little or impact of a size standard change on financial assistance. For FY 1999 and no Federal contracting in this industry each and every Federal program that 2000, only 43 loans totaling $7.2 million to affect current businesses. uses its size standards. However, were made under SBA’s 7(a) Program. The revision to the current size discussions with a major tour operators As a result of the terrorist attacks of standard for tour operators is consistent association indicated that there are no September 11, SBA made 95 Economic with SBA’s statutory mandate to assist Federal laws or regulations using SBA’s Injury Disaster Loans totaling $8.6 small business. This regulatory action size standards for defining small tour million. promotes the Administration’s operators. In cases where an SBA size SBA estimates 238 additional tour objectives. One of SBA’s goals in standard is not appropriate, the Small operators would be considered small as support of the Administration’s Business Act and SBA’s regulations a result of this rule based on the U.S. objectives is to help individual small allow Federal agencies to develop Census Bureau’s special tabulation of businesses succeed through fair and different size standards with the the 1997 Economic Census for SBA’s equitable access to capital and credit, approval of the SBA Administrator (13 Office of Size Standards. These Government contracts, and management CFR 121.902). For purposes of a businesses would be eligible to seek and technical assistance. Reviewing and regulatory flexibility analysis, agencies available SBA assistance provided that modifying size standards, when must consult with SBA’s Office of they meet other program requirements. appropriate, ensures that intended Advocacy when developing different Firms becoming eligible for SBA beneficiaries have access to small size standards for their programs. (13 assistance as a result of this rule business programs designed to assist CFR 121.902(b)(4)). cumulatively generate $600 million in them. Size standards do not interfere Immediately below, SBA sets forth an this industry out of a total of $2.8 billion with State, local, and tribal governments initial regulatory flexibility analysis in annual receipts. The small business

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61835

coverage in this industry would increase size standards for defining small tour receipts on their Federal tax returns. To by 21 percent of total industry receipts operators. avoid this inequity, allowing exclusions and by 7.2 percent of the total number for third party reimbursements will treat (5) What Alternatives Will Allow the of tour operators. all tour operators in the same manner Agency To Accomplish Its Regulatory regardless of how they file their Federal (3) What Are the Projected Reporting, Objectives While Minimizing the Impact Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance on Small Entities? tax returns. SBA welcomes comments on other Requirements of the Rule and an SBA considered two alternatives to Estimate of the Classes of Small Entities alternatives that minimize the impact of the proposed rule. First, as discussed in this rule on small businesses and Which Will Be Subject to the the preamble, SBA considered as an achieve the objectives of this rule. Those Requirements? alternative the $3 million size standard comments should describe the A new size standard does not impose proposed for the Travel Agencies alternative and explain why it is any additional reporting, recordkeeping industry that SBA also measures on an preferable to this proposed rule. or compliance requirements on small adjusted receipts basis. However, an entities. Increasing size standards analysis of all of the size standards List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 121 expands access to SBA programs that evaluation factors pointed to a size assist small businesses, but does not standard at the anchor size standard of Administrative practice and impose a regulatory burden as they $6 million. This analysis takes into procedure, Government procurement, neither regulate nor control business consideration the characteristics of all Government property, Grant programs— behavior. tour operators and provides SBA with a business. Loan programs—business, range of sizes that identify the smaller Small businesses. (4) What Are the Relevant Federal Rules segment of businesses in the industry. For the reasons set forth in the Which May Duplicate, Overlap or In light of the meager amount of preamble, part 121 of title 13 of the Conflict With the Rule? financial assistance to currently defined Code of Federal Regulations is proposed This proposed rule overlaps other small tour operators, a size standard to be amended as follows: Federal rules that use SBA’s size higher than $3 million will not limit standards to define a small business. access to credit through SBA’s financial PART 121—SMALL BUSINESS SIZE Under § 3(a)(2)(C) of the Small Business programs for those tour operators. REGULATIONS Act, 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2)(c), unless Second, SBA considered retaining specifically authorized by statute, gross receipts to measure the size of a 1. The authority citation for part 121 Federal agencies must use SBA’s size tour operator and adjusting the size continues to read as follows: standards to define a small business. In standard to a higher level. While Authority: 15 U.S.C. 632(a), 634(b)(6), 1995, SBA published in the Federal possible, SBA believed this action 637(a), 644(c) and 662(5) and Sec. 304, Pub. Register a list of statutory and would harm small businesses. Under L. 103–403, 108 Stat. 4175, 4188. regulatory size standards that identified SBA’s size regulations (13 CFR 121.104), 2. In § 121.201, in the table under the application of SBA’s size standards gross receipts are taken from the Federal ‘‘Small Business Size Standards by as well as other size standards used by tax returns reported to the Internal NAICS Industry,’’ under the heading Federal agencies (60 FR 57988–57991, Revenue Service (IRS). Many tour Subsector 561—Administrative and dated November 24, 1995). SBA is not operators report gross receipts to the Support Services, revise the entry aware of any Federal rule that would IRS. However, some report only 561520 to read as follows: duplicate or conflict with establishing commissions and fees. For this industry, size standards. Furthermore, in two tour operators with the same § 121.201 What size standards has SBA discussions with a major tour operators amount of gross receipts could be identified by North American Industry association, it was not aware of any treated differently for small business Classification System codes? Federal laws or regulations using SBA’s status due solely to how they report * * * * *

SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARDS BY NAICS INDUSTRY

Size standards in NAICS number of em- codes NAICS industry descriptions ployees or million of dollars

*******

Subsector 561—Administrative and Support Services

*******

561520 ..... Tour Operators ...... 10 $6

*******

* * * * * NAICS Industry,’’ footnote 10 is revised 561920—as measured by total revenues, 3. In § 121.201, in the table under to read as follows: but excluding funds received in trust for ‘‘Small Business Size Standards by 10. NAICS codes 488510 (part), an unaffiliated third party, such as 531210, 541810, 561510, 561520, and bookings or sales subject to

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:43 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61836 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

commissions. The commissions regulation at the Department of service (telephone: 703–321–3339); the received are included as revenues. Transportation (DOT) Dockets Office, Government Printing Office’s (GPO) located on the plaza level of the Nassif electronic bulletin board service Hector V. Barreto, Building at the above address. You may (telephone: 202–512–1661); or, if Administrator. review the public docket in person at applicable, the FAA’s Aviation [FR Doc. 02–24919 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] this address between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Rulemaking Advisory Committee BILLING CODE 8025–01–P Monday through Friday, except Federal bulletin board service (telephone: 800– holidays. Also, you may review the 322–2722 or 202–267–5948). public dockets on the Internet at http:/ Internet users may access recently DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION /dms.dot.gov. published rulemaking documents at the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FAA’s web page at http://faa.gov/avr/ Federal Aviation Administration Kenneth Frey, FAA, Systems and arm/index.cfm or the GPO’s web page at Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, Aircraft http://www.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/ 14 CFR Part 25 Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue aces140.html. [Docket No. FAA–2002–13438; Notice No. SW., Renton, WA 98055–4056; You may obtain a copy of this 02–15] telephone 425–227–2673; facsimile document by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office RIN 2120–AH40 425–227–1320, e-mail [email protected], or of Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Trim Systems and Protective Breathing Kathi Ishimaru, FAA, Propulsion/ Independence Avenue, SW., Equipment Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM–112, Washington, DC 20591; or by calling Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 202–267–9680. Communications must AGENCY: Federal Aviation Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue identify the docket number of this Administration (FAA), DOT. SW., Renton, WA 98055–4056; NPRM. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. telephone 425–227–2674; facsimile Any person interested in being placed 425–227–1320, e-mail on the mailing list for future rulemaking SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation [email protected]. documents should request from the Administration proposes to amend the above office a copy of Advisory Circular SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: airworthiness standards for transport 11–2A, ‘‘Notice of Proposed Rulemaking category airplanes concerning trim How Do I Submit Comments to This Distribution System,’’ which describes systems. For trim systems, the minimum NPRM? the application procedure. design standard would be established. The FAA proposes to amend the Interested persons are invited to Background airworthiness standards for transport participate in the making of the proposed action by submitting such What Are the Relevant Airworthiness category airplanes concerning protective Standards in the United States? breathing equipment (PBE). For PBE, the written data, views, or arguments, as In the United States, the airworthiness proposed standard would define design they may desire. Comments relating to standards for type certification of and installation requirements for the environmental, energy, federalism, transport category airplanes are portable and stationary protective or economic impact that might result contained in Title 14, Code of Federal breathing equipment. Adopting these from adopting the proposals in this Regulations (CFR) part 25. proposals would eliminate regulatory document are also invited. Substantive Manufacturers of transport category differences between the airworthiness comments should be accompanied by airplanes must show that each airplane standards of the U.S. and the Joint cost estimates. Comments must identify they produce of a different type design Aviation Requirements of Europe, the regulatory docket number and be complies with the appropriate part 25 without affecting current industry submitted in duplicate to the DOT Rules standards. These standards apply to: design practices. Docket address specified above. All comments received, as well as a • Airplanes manufactured within the DATES: Send your comments on or report summarizing each substantive U.S. for use by U.S.-registered operators, before December 2, 2002. public contact with FAA personnel and ADDRESSES: Address your comments to concerning this proposed rulemaking, • Airplanes manufactured in other Dockets Management System, U.S. will be filed in the docket. The docket countries and imported to the U.S. Department of Transportation Dockets, is available for public inspection before under a bilateral airworthiness Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street and after the comment closing date. agreement. SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001. You We will consider all comments What Are the Relevant Airworthiness must identify the docket number FAA– received on or before the closing date Standards in Europe? 2002–13438 at the beginning of your before taking action on this proposed comments, and you should submit two rulemaking. Comments filed late will be In Europe, the airworthiness copies of your comments. If you wish to considered as far as possible without standards for type certification of receive confirmation that the FAA has incurring expense or delay. The transport category airplanes are received your comments, please include proposals in this document may be contained in Joint Aviation a self-addressed, stamped postcard on changed in light of the comments Requirements (JAR)–25, which are which the following statement is made: received. based on part 25. These were developed ‘‘Comments to Docket No. ____.’’ We by the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) will date-stamp the postcard and mail it How Can I Obtain a Copy of This of Europe to provide a common set of back to you. NPRM? airworthiness standards within the You also may submit comments You may download an electronic European aviation community. Twenty- electronically to the following Internet copy of this document using a modem three European countries accept address: http://dms.dot.gov. and suitable communications software airplanes type certificated to the JAR–25 You may review the public docket from the FAA regulations section of the standards, including airplanes containing comments to this proposed Fedworld electronic bulletin board manufactured in the U.S. that are type

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61837

certificated to JAR–25 standards for this advice to develop better rules in flight deck can inhibit or prevent the export to Europe. less overall time and using fewer FAA flightcrew from performing their duties, resources than previously needed. The which can lead to unsafe conditions. What Is ‘‘Harmonization’’ and How Did committee provides the FAA firsthand Also, the unavailability of sufficient fire It Start? information and insight from interested fighting equipment on the flight deck or Although part 25 and JAR–25 are very parties regarding potential new rules or in accessible compartments can lead to similar, they are not identical in every revisions of existing rules. unsafe conditions. Part 25 and the JAR respect. When airplanes are type There are 64 member organizations on define design and installation certificated to both sets of standards, the the committee, representing a wide requirements for portable and stationary differences between part 25 and JAR–25 range of interests within the aviation protective breathing equipment to can result in substantial additional costs community. Meetings of the committee ensure safe operation if a fire or adverse to manufacturers and operators. These are open to the public, except as environment develops. additional costs, however, frequently do authorized by section 10(d) of the not bring about an increase in safety. In Federal Advisory Committee Act. What Are the Current 14 CFR and JAR many cases, part 25 and JAR–25 may The ARAC establishes working groups Standards? contain different requirements to to develop recommendations for • The current text of 14 CFR accomplish the same safety intent. resolving specific airworthiness issues. 25.677(b) is: Consequently, manufacturers are Tasks assigned to working groups are (b) There must be means adjacent to usually burdened with meeting the published in the Federal Register. the trim control to indicate the direction requirements of both sets of standards, Although working group meetings are of the control movement relative to the although the level of safety is not not generally open to the public, the airplane motion. In addition, there must increased correspondingly. FAA solicits participation in working be clearly visible means to indicate the Recognizing that a common set of groups from interested members of the position of the trim device with respect standards would not only benefit the public who possess knowledge or to the range of adjustment. aviation industry economically, but also experience in the task areas. Working • The current text of JAR–25.677(b) maintain the necessary high level of groups report directly to the ARAC, and (Change 15) is: safety, the FAA and the JAA began an the ARAC must accept a working group (b) There must be means adjacent to effort in 1988 to ‘‘harmonize’’ their proposal before ARAC presents the the trim control to indicate the direction respective aviation standards. The goal proposal to the FAA as an advisory of the control movement relative to the of the harmonization effort is to ensure committee recommendation. aeroplane motion. In addition, there that: The activities of the ARAC will not, must be clearly visible means to • Where possible, standards do not however, circumvent the public indicate the position of the trim device require domestic and foreign parties to rulemaking procedures; nor is the FAA with respect to the range of adjustment. manufacture or operate to different limited to the rule language The indicator must be clearly marked standards for each country involved; ‘‘recommended’’ by ARAC. If the FAA with the range within which it has been and accepts an ARAC recommendation, the demonstrated that take-off is safe for all • The standards adopted are mutually agency proceeds with the normal public centre of gravity position approved for acceptable to the FAA and the foreign rulemaking procedures. Any ARAC take-off. aviation authorities. participation in a rulemaking package is • The current text of 14 CFR 25.1439 The FAA and JAA have identified a fully disclosed in the public docket. is: Section 25.1439 Protective Breathing number of significant regulatory Under this program, the FAA Equipment. differences (SRD) between the wording provides ARAC with an opportunity to (a) If there is a class A, B, or E cargo of part 25 and JAR–25. Both the FAA review, discuss, and comment on the compartment, protective breathing and the JAA consider ‘‘harmonization’’ FAA’s draft NPRM. In the case of this equipment must be installed for the use of the two sets of standards a high rulemaking, ARAC recommended a of appropriate crewmembers. In priority. number of editorial changes to the addition, protective breathing NPRM for §§ 25.677(b) and 25.1439 with equipment must be installed in each What Is ARAC and What Role Does It which we agree, and one change to isolated separate compartment in the Play in Harmonization? NPRM § 25.1439 with which we airplane, including upper and lower After initiating the first steps towards disagree. The ARAC recommended lobe galleys, in which crewmember harmonization, the FAA and JAA soon change and the FAA reason for occupancy is permitted during flight for realized that traditional methods of disagreeing are described below in the the maximum number of crewmembers rulemaking and accommodating Discussion of the Proposal. expected to be in the area during any different administrative procedures was Discussion of the Proposal operation. neither sufficient nor adequate to make (b) For protective breathing appreciable progress towards fulfilling What Is the Underlying Safety Issue equipment required by paragraph (a) of the goal of harmonization. The FAA Addressed by the Current Standards? this section or by any operating rule of then identified the Aviation Rulemaking • For § 25.677(b) this chapter, the following apply: Advisory Committee (ARAC) as an ideal This requirement for § 25.677(b) (1) The equipment must be designed vehicle for assisting in resolving establishes the minimum design to protect the flight crew from smoke, harmonization issues, and, in 1992, the standard for trim indication systems. carbon dioxide, and other harmful gases FAA tasked ARAC to undertake the The intent of this standard is to provide while on flight deck duty and while entire harmonization effort. the flightcrew with accurate direction combating fires in cargo compartments The FAA had formally established and position indication in relation to (2) The equipment must include— ARAC in 1991 (56 FR 2190, January 22, the airplane motion when the trim (i) Masks covering the eyes, nose, and 1991), to provide advice and system is in operation. mouth; or recommendations concerning the full • For § 25.1439 (ii) Masks covering the nose and range of the FAA’s safety-related For § 25.1439, smoke, excessive mouth, plus accessory equipment to rulemaking activity. The FAA sought carbon dioxide, or toxic gases on the cover the eyes.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61838 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

(3) The equipment, while in use, must must allow corrective glasses to be volume of 30 liters per minute BTPD allow the flight crew to use the radio worn. (body temperature). Part 25 includes equipment and to communicate with (5) Each dispensing equipment must interpretive material for a 15-minute each other, while at their assigned duty supply protective oxygen of 15 minutes duration using demand or continuous stations. duration at a pressure altitude of 8000 flow systems, and defines BTPD. The (4) The part of the equipment feet with a respiratory minute volume of JAR refers to ACJ 25.1439(b)(5) for the protecting the eyes may not cause any 30 liters per minute BTPD. The interpretive material, which describes appreciable adverse effect on vision and equipment and system must be designed the 15-minute duration using a demand must allow corrective glasses to be to prevent any leakage to the inside of system. worn. the mask and any significant increase in • The current text of ACJ (5) The equipment must supply the oxygen content of the local ambient 25.1439(b)(5) is: ACJ 25.1439(b)(5) protective oxygen of 15 minutes atmosphere. (See ACJ 25.1439 (b)(5).) Protective Breathing Equipment duration per crewmember at a pressure (6) The equipment must meet the (Interpretative Material And Acceptable altitude of 8,000 feet with a respiratory requirements of JAR 25.1441. Means Of Compliance) See JAR 25.1439(b)(5) minute volume of 30 liters per minute What Are the Differences in the BTPD. If a demand oxygen system is 1. If a demand system is used, a Standards and What Do Those supply of 300 litres of free oxygen at 70° used, a supply of 300 liters of free Differences Result In? oxygen at 70°F. and 760mm Hg. and 760 mm Hg pressure is considered • pressure is considered to be of 15- For § 25.677(b) to be of 15 minutes duration at the minute duration at the prescribed The JAR imposes one additional prescribed altitude and minute volume. altitude and minute volume. If a requirement not found in part 25. The (Interpretative Material.) 2. Any other system such as a continuous flow protective breathing JAR adds a requirement to clearly mark continuous flow system is acceptable system is used (including a mask with a range on the trim indication system provided that it does not result in any a standard rebreather bag) a flow rate of where take-off is safe for all center of significant increase in the oxygen 60 liters per minute at 8,000 feet (45 gravity positions. • content of the local ambient atmosphere liters per minute at sea level) and a For § 25.1439 Paragraph (a): Section 25.1439 above that which would result from the supply of 600 liters of free oxygen at 70° requires Protective Breathing Equipment use of a demand oxygen system. F. and 760 mm. Hg. pressure is (PBE) if there is a class A, B, or E cargo (Interpretative Material.) considered to be of 15-minute duration compartment. It also requires PBE in 3. A system with safety over-pressure at the prescribed altitude and minute each isolated separate compartment would be an acceptable means of volume. BTPD refers to body where crewmember occupancy is preventing leakage. (Acceptable Means temperature conditions (that is, 37° C., permitted during flight for the of Compliance.) at ambient pressure, dry). maximum number of crewmembers 4. A continuous flow system of the (6) The equipment must meet the expected to occupy that area during any closed circuit rebreather type is an requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of operation. JAR 25.1439 requires PBE to acceptable system (Acceptable Means of § 25.1441. be available for use in any compartment Compliance.). • The current text of JAR 25.1439 that is accessible in flight, regardless of The JAR includes additional design (Change 15) is: JAR 25.1439 Protective compartment classification, or isolation. requirements to prevent internal leakage Breathing Equipment. Paragraph (b): Section 25.1439 and and to prevent increased oxygen content (a) Protective breathing equipment the JAR are essentially the same, with of the local atmosphere due to external must be installed for use of appropriate both regulations referring to paragraph leakage. crew members. Such equipment must be (a) and the operating regulations. Paragraph (b)(6): The JAR specifies located so as to be available for use in Paragraph (b)(1): Section 25.1439 that the equipment must meet all compartments accessible in flight. specifies that the equipment must be paragraphs of § 25.1441 (not just (b) and (b) For protective breathing designed to protect the flightcrew while (c) as in part 25). equipment required by JAR 25.1439 (a) on duty and while combating fires in Note: § 25.1441 and JAR 25.1441 are not or by the National Operating cargo compartments. The JAR specifies identical, but are essentially the same. Regulations, the following apply: protection for the appropriate (1) The equipment must be designed crewmember (not just flightcrew) and What, If Any, Are the Differences in the to protect the appropriate crew member does not limit the fire combating to Means of Compliance? from smoke, carbon dioxide, and other cargo compartments. • For § 25.677(b) harmful gases while on flight deck duty Paragraph (b)(2): There are no The JAR means of compliance or while combating fires. differences between the regulations. requires the applicant to mark safe take- (2) The equipment must include— Paragraph (b)(3): Section 25.1439 and off limits on the trim indication system. (i) Masks covering the eyes, nose and the JAR list essentially the same Currently, part 25 does not have this mouth, or requirements for communication to requirement. (ii) Masks covering the nose and other crewmembers and allowing use of • For § 25.1439 mouth, plus accessory equipment to radio equipment. The only difference is There is no difference in the means of cover the eyes. that the JAR clarifies that the standard compliance for the stationary type of (3) Equipment, including portable applies to both stationary and portable PBE. All aircraft are equipped with a equipment, while in use must allow equipment. demand oxygen system for the communication with other crew Paragraph (b)(4): There are no flightcrew, consisting of a high pressure members. Equipment available at flight differences between the regulations. gaseous oxygen supply (minimum of crew assigned duty stations must enable Paragraph (b)(5): Both part 25 and the 300 liters of free oxygen per person), the flight crew to use radio equipment. JAR state that the equipment must pressure/flow regulation, distribution (4) The part of the equipment supply protective oxygen of 15-minute tubing, and masks (or mask and goggle protecting the eyes may not cause any duration per crewmember at a pressure combination if separate) that meet TSO– appreciable adverse effect on vision and of 8,000 feet with a respiratory minute C99 and JTSO–C99.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61839

The means of compliance for the would be a new minimum design What Is the Effect of the Proposed quantity and location of portable type standard for trim systems. Standard Relative to Current Industry PBE is slightly different. The JAA • For § 25.1439 Practice? certified aircraft have at least one PBE • The proposed regulation clearly For § 25.677(b) installed in/near the flight deck and in/ The proposed standard would near each compartment accessible in defines design and compliance criteria for stationary and portable protective maintain the same level of safety as flight. Some, but not all, FAA certified current industry practice. Most aircraft have portable PBE installed on breathing equipment in one harmonized standard. It incorporates the more airplanes certified under current the flight deck. The FAA certified requirements already mark safe take-off aircraft have PBE installed in/near each stringent portions of the existing part 25 and JAR requirements. limits on trim indication systems to class A, B, and E cargo compartments show compliance to JAR 25.677. (as defined by § 25.857). Also, PBE is What Is the Effect of the Proposed • For § 25.1439 installed in/near each isolated separate Standard Relative to the Current The current industry practice is to compartment for the maximum number Regulations? install PBE in accordance with the more of crewmembers expected to be in the stringent requirements of § 25.1439 or • area. These compartments include, but For § 25.677(b) JAR 25.1439, depending on which are not limited to, upper and lower lobe The proposed standard would certification standards are being used, galleys. The JAA certified aircraft may increase the level of safety by adding a and the applicable operational not be equipped with as many PBE as new requirement to § 25.677 to mark standards. Airlines and OEMs typically there may be crewmembers in isolated safe take-off limits on the trim configure the aircraft at the time of compartments. indication system. design with more PBE than is required Of course those compartments or • For § 25.1439 by either § 25.1439 or JAR 25.1439, to areas with special conditions against facilitate approval for operation under them are not discussed in this proposal. This standard has been changed to applicable operating rules. The The requirements and means of include the more stringent requirements proposed revision to the standard would compliance are documented separately. of § 25.1439 and JAR 25.1439. Paragraph maintain the same level of safety if the What Is the Proposed Action? (a) of the existing JAR requires airplane’s operational requirements protective breathing equipment to be • require more portable PBE than part 25 For § 25.677(b) installed for fire fighting use in all and JAR–25. If the airplane’s operational The proposed action would adopt the compartments accessible in flight, not requirements are less stringent than more stringent JAR requirement, which just specific cargo compartments. § 25.1439, then the proposed standard adds the requirement to mark the safe Paragraph (a) of the existing § 25.1439 would increase the level of safety for take-off limits on the trim indication requires portable protective breathing aircraft only certified to part 25. The system. equipment for each crewmember in proposed standard would increase the • For § 25.1439 isolated compartments; the JAR requires level of safety for aircraft that are only The proposed action is to merge the the equipment for use of the appropriate certified to JAR–25 if the airplane is not requirements of both part 25 and JAR crewmembers. Paragraphs (b)(5) and equipped with enough PBE for the standards, and to develop a baseline set (b)(6) of the existing JAR 25.1439 are maximum number of crewmembers of standards and an acceptable means of more stringent than the existing expected to be in isolated compliance that would satisfy all § 25.1439. The JAR paragraphs include compartments. authorities. The merged standard would additional leakage and design combine the requirements of § 25.1439 What Other Options Have Been requirements above the existing Considered and Why Were They Not and JAR 25.1439 into one harmonized § 25.1439. standard and eliminate the need for ACJ Selected? 25.1439(b)(5). The harmonization would The proposed standard may increase • For § 25.677(b) be accomplished by enveloping (taking the safety of aircraft only certified to No other option was considered the most stringent requirement of) the part 25 or the JAR’s. For some because this would be a simple change two standards and adding some of the configurations, the revised part 25 to the current standard. The change will interpretive material from the ACJ. The regulation would require additional harmonize § 25.677 to JAR 25.677. result would be a common standard that portable PBE to be installed by the • For § 25.1439 is easy to understand. airframe Original Equipment Enveloping (taking the most stringent The ARAC working group comments Manufacturers (OEMs). Most operating requirement of each) § 25.1439, JAR that a small part 25 airplane with a standards, such as § 121.337 and JAR– 25.1439, § 121.337, and JAR–OPS 1.780 Class A baggage compartment is not OPS 1.780, require additional portable into one harmonized § 25.1439 and JAR required to have a PBE installed. The PBE above what is required for type- 25.1439 was considered. This option FAA does not agree. If a small part 25 design certification. Some operating was not selected since it would include airplane is equipped with a Class A standards, such as 14 CFR part 91, may some operational requirements and baggage compartment, then part 25 not require as many portable PBE as would likely drive changes to § 121.337 requires installation of a PBE, even if § 25.1439 and JAR 25.1439. An increase and JAR–OPS 1.780. Changes to these part 91 does not require the PBE. in safety would come from the situation requirements would take considerable where the airplane’s applicable How Does This Proposed Standard effort and would be beyond the scope of operational requirements are the same the ARAC tasking statement. Address the Underlying Safety Issue? as, or less than, the current § 25.1439. • For § 25.677(b) An increase in safety would also exist Who Would Be Affected by the Proposed The proposed change to § 25.677(b) if an airplane is only certificated to Change? would be an additional requirement to JAR–25 and does not have PBE equal to • For § 25.677(b) mark the safe take-off limits on the trim the number of crewmembers expected to This change would affect new type system. The adoption of this change be in the isolated compartments. certificate applicants.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61840 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

• For § 25.1439 Regulatory Policies and Procedures. efficient way to harmonize these Airlines typically purchase portable Further, this proposed rule would not sections. PBE and flightcrew masks and provide have a significant economic impact on The FAA estimates that there are them to the airframe OEMs for a substantial number of small entities, minimal costs associated with this installation. The proposed change to the would reduce barriers to international proposal. A review of current standard would require additional trade, and would not impose an manufacturers of transport category portable PBE to be installed on some Unfunded Mandate on state, local, or aircraft certificated under part 25 has aircraft. Additional units would tribal governments, or on the private revealed that all such future aircraft are increase the airlines’ procurement costs sector. expected to be certificated under part 25 and the airplane manufacturer’s Because there are minimal costs of both 14 CFR and the JAR. Since installation cost. associated with this proposed rule, it future certificated transport category does not warrant the preparation of a aircraft are expected to meet the existing Is Existing FAA Advisory Material full economic evaluation for placement requirements of 14 CFR § 25.1439 and Adequate? in the docket. The DOT Order 2100.5 section 25.1439 of the JAR, and this rule • For 21 25.677(b) prescribes policies and procedures for simply adopts the more stringent There is no advisory material for this simplication, analysis, and review of requirements of each section, rule and no advisory material is regulations. If it is determined that the manufacturers would incur minimal proposed. expected impact is so minimal that the costs resulting from this proposal. In • For § 25.1439 proposed rule does not warrant a full fact, manufacturers are expected to No advisory material would be evaluation, a statement to that effect and receive cost-savings by a reduction in needed. The text of the proposed the basis for it is included in the the FAA/JAA certification requirements standard incorporates the interpretive proposed regulation. Accordingly, for new aircraft. Most operating rules, material (paragraphs 1 and 2) and the because the OEMs are already meeting such as § 121.337 require additional acceptable means of compliance the higher standard, the FAA has portable PBE above what is required for (paragraph 4) of ACJ 25.1439(b)(5). The determined that the expected impact of type-design certification. In addition, remainder of ACJ 25.1439(b)(5) would this proposed rule is so minimal that the most airlines and OEMs typically be eliminated. proposed rule does not warrant a full configure the airplane, at the time of What Regulatory Analyses and evaluation below. design, with more PBE than is required Assessments Has the FAA Conducted? A review of current manufacturers of by § 25.1439. The current industry transport category aircraft certificated practice is to install PBE in accordance Regulatory Evaluation Summary under part 25 has revealed that all such with the more stringent requirements of Proposed changes to Federal future aircraft are expected to be both JAR–25 and part 25 and the regulations must undergo several certificated under both 14 CFR part 25 applicable operational rules. economic analyses. First, Executive and JAR–25. Since future certificated • For §§ 25.677(b) and 25.1439 Order 12866 directs that each Federal transport category aircraft are expected Manufacturers are expected to receive agency shall propose or adopt a to meet the existing JAR requirement certification cost-savings with a single regulation only upon a reasoned and these proposed rules simply adopts FAA/JAA certification requirement for determination that the benefits of the the same JAR requirement, new aircraft. The FAA, however, has not intended regulation justify its costs. manufacturers would incur minimal attempted to quantify the cost savings Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act costs resulting from this proposal. for this specific proposal, beyond noting of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the • For § 25.677(b) that, while they may be minimal, they economic effect of regulatory changes This proposal would harmonize part contribute to a large potential on small entities. Third, the Trade 25 to the JAR by adding an additional harmonization savings. Agreements Act prohibits agencies from requirement to § 25.677(b). The new The agency concludes that, since setting standards that create § 25.677(b) would require a clearly there is consensus among potentially unnecessary obstacles to the foreign visible means to indicate the position of affected airplane manufacturers that the commerce of the United States. In the trim device with respect to the range benefits of harmonization exceed the developing U.S. standards, this Trade of adjustment. The ARAC working cost, further analysis is not required. Agreements Act also requires the group states the proposed change will The FAA requests comments with consideration of international standards not increase manufacturing or operating supporting documentation in regard to and, where appropriate, that they be the costs and current industry practice the conclusions contained in this basis of U.S. standards. And fourth, the already mark safe take-off limits on trim section. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 indication systems to show compliance Initial Regulatory Flexibility requires agencies to prepare a written to JAR 25.677(b) on most airplanes Determination assessment of the costs, benefits, and certified under § 25.677(b). other effects of proposed or final rules • For § 25.1439 The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) that include a Federal mandate likely to This proposal would combine the of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, result in the expenditure by State, local, requirements of § 25.1439 and JAR establishes ‘‘as a principle of regulatory or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 25.1439, and the advisory material for issuance that agencies shall endeavor, or by the private sector of $100 million paragraph 25.1439(b)(5) of the JAR into consistent with the objective of the rule or more annually (adjusted for one rule. This rule would apply to the and of applicable statutes, to fit inflation). design and installation of stationary and regulatory and informational In conducting these analyses, the FAA portable protective breathing requirements to the scale of the has determined that this proposal has equipment. The FAA has concluded business, organizations, and benefits, but minimal costs, and that it that, for the reasons previously governmental jurisdictions subject to is not ‘‘a significant regulatory action’’ discussed in the preamble, the adoption regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, as defined in the Executive Order 12866 of this harmonized standard into the the RFA requires agencies to solicit and nor ‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s JAR and 14 CFR part 25 is the most consider flexible regulatory proposals

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61841

and to explain the rationale for their appropriate, that they be the basis for Environmental Analysis actions. U.S. standards. FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA Agencies must perform a review to In accordance with the above statute, actions that may be categorically determine whether a proposed or final the FAA has assessed the potential excluded from preparation of a National rule will have a significant impact on a effect of the proposed rule and has Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) substantial number of small entities. If determined that it is consistent with the environmental impact statement. In the determination is that the rule will, statutes requirements by using European accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, the Agency must prepare a regulatory international standards as the basis for appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this flexibility analysis as described in the U.S. standards. proposed rulemaking action qualifies for RFA. a categorical exclusion. However, if an agency determines that Unfunded Mandates Reform Act a proposed or final rule is not expected Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Energy Impact to have a significant economic impact Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), codified The energy impact of the proposed on a substantial number of small in 2 U.S.C. 1532–1538, 1571, enacted as rule has been assessed in accordance entities, section 605(b) of the RFA Public Law 104–4 on March 22, 1995, with the Energy Policy and provides that the head of the agency requires each Federal agency, to the Conservation Act (EPCA) and Public may so certify and a regulatory extent permitted by law, to prepare a Law 94–163, as amended (43 U.S.C. flexibility analysis is not required. The written assessment of the effects of any 6362), and FAA Order 1053.1. It has certification must include a statement Federal mandate in a proposed or final been determined that it is not a major providing the factual basis for this agency rule that may result in the regulatory action under the provisions determination, and the reasoning should expenditure by State, local, and tribal of the EPCA. be clear. governments, in the aggregate, or by the The FAA considers that this proposed private sector, of $100 million or more Regulations Affecting Intrastate rule would not have a significant impact (adjusted annually for inflation) in any Aviation in Alaska on a substantial number of small entities one year. This proposed rule does not Section 1205 of the FAA for two reasons: contain a Federal intergovernmental or Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat. First, the net effect of the proposed private sector mandate that exceeds 3213) requires the Administrator, when rule is minimum regulatory cost relief. $100 million in any year; therefore, the modifying regulations in Title 14 of the The proposed rule would require that requirements of the Act do not apply. CFR in a manner affecting intrastate new transport category aircraft What Other Assessments Has the FAA aviation in Alaska, to consider the manufacturers meet just the ‘‘more Conducted? extent to which Alaska is not served by stringent’’ European certification transportation modes other than requirement, rather than both the Executive Order 13132, Federalism aviation, and to establish such United States and European standards. The FAA has analyzed this proposed regulatory distinctions as he or she Airplane manufacturers already meet or rule and the principles and criteria of considers appropriate. Because this expect to meet this standard as well as Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The proposed rule would apply to the the existing 14 CFR part 25 requirement. FAA has determined that this action certification of future designs of Second, all U.S. transport-aircraft would not have a substantial direct transport category airplanes and their category manufacturers exceed the effect on the States, on the relationship subsequent operation, it could, if Small Business Administration small- between the national Government and adopted, affect intrastate aviation in entity criteria of 1,500 employees for the States, or on the distribution of Alaska. The FAA therefore specifically aircraft manufacturers. The current U.S. power and responsibilities among the requests comments on whether there is part 25 airplane manufacturers include: various levels of government. Therefore, justification for applying the proposed Boeing, Cessna Aircraft, Gulfstream the FAA has determined that this notice rule differently to intrastate operations Aerospace, Learjet (owned by of proposed rulemaking would not have in Alaska. Bombardier), Lockheed Martin, federalism implications. McDonnell Douglas (a wholly-owned Plain Language subsidiary of The Boeing Company), Paperwork Reduction Act In response to the June 1, 1998, Raytheon Aircraft, and Sabreliner The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Presidential memorandum regarding the Corporation. (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the issue of plain language, the FAA re- Given that this proposed rule is FAA consider the impact of paperwork examined the writing style currently minimally cost-relieving and that there and other information collection used in the development of regulations. are no small entity manufacturers of burdens imposed on the public. We The memorandum requires Federal part 25 airplanes, the FAA certifies that have determined that there are no new agencies to communicate clearly with this proposed rule would not have a information collection requirements the public. We are interested in your significant impact on a substantial associated with this proposed rule. comments on whether the style of this number of small entities. document is clear, and in any other International Compatibility suggestions you might have to improve International Trade Impact Assessment In keeping with U.S. obligations the clarity of FAA communications that The Trade Agreement Act of 1979, 19 under the Convention on International affect you. You can get more U.S.C. et seq., prohibits Federal agencies Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to information about the Presidential from engaging in any standards or comply with International Civil memorandum and the plain language related activities that create unnecessary Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards initiative at http:// obstacles to the foreign commerce of the and Recommended Practices to the www.plainlanguage.gov. United States. Legitimate domestic maximum extent practicable. The FAA objectives, such as safety, are not determined that there are no ICAO List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 considered unnecessary obstacles. The Standards and Recommended Practices Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting statute also requires consideration of that correspond to this proposed and record keeping requirements, international standards and, where regulation. Safety, Transportation.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61842 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

The Proposed Amendment (3) Equipment, including portable SUMMARY: This action withdraws a In consideration of the foregoing, the equipment, must allow communication notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) Federal Aviation Administration with other crewmembers while in use. that proposed a new airworthiness proposes to amend part 25 of Title 14, Equipment available at flightcrew directive (AD) for Marathon Power Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: assigned duty stations must also enable Technologies Company (Marathon) the flightcrew to use radio equipment. batteries. That action would have PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS (4) The part of the equipment required visually inspecting screws STANDARDS: TRANSPORT protecting the eyes shall not cause any installed on Marathon batteries and CATEGORY AIRPLANES appreciable adverse effect on vision and replacing certain unairworthy screws. must allow corrective glasses to be Since issuing the NPRM, the FAA has 1. The authority citation for part 25 worn. reconsidered the proposal and continues to read as follows: (5) The equipment must supply determined that an AD is not the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, protective oxygen of 15 minutes appropriate avenue for addressing 44702 and 44704. duration per crewmember at a pressure individual cases of improper altitude of 8,000 feet with a respiratory maintenance or lack of maintenance that 2. Amend § 25.677 by revising minute volume of 30 liters per minute paragraph (b) to read as follows: prompted the proposal. Accordingly, BTPD. The equipment and system must the proposed rule is withdrawn. be designed to prevent any inward § 25.677 Trim systems. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: leakage to the inside of the device and * * * * * Sung-Hui Cavazos, Aviation Safety prevent any outward leakage causing (b) There must be means adjacent to Engineer, FAA, Special Certification significant increase in the oxygen Office, Fort Worth, TX 76193–0190; the trim control to indicate the direction content of the local ambient telephone (817) 222–5142, fax (817) of the control movement relative to the atmosphere. If a demand oxygen system 222–5785. airplane motion. In addition, there must is used, a supply of 300 liters of free be clearly visible means to indicate the oxygen at 70° F. and 760mm Hg. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A position of the trim device with respect pressure is considered to be of 15- proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39 to to the range of adjustment. The minute duration at the prescribed add a new AD for Marathon batteries indicator must be clearly marked with altitude and minute volume. If a was published in the Federal Register the range within which it has been continuous flow protective breathing on February 14, 2001 (66 FR 10241). demonstrated that take-off is safe for all system is used (including a closed The proposed rule would have required center of gravity positions approved for circuit rebreather type system) a flow visually inspecting each #10–32 screw take-off. rate of 60 liters per minute at 8,000 feet in certain Marathon batteries within 12 * * * * * (45 liters per minute at sea level) and a months or the next scheduled battery 3. Revise § 25.1439 to read as follows: supply of 600 liters of free oxygen at 70° maintenance and, before further flight, F. and 760 mm. Hg. pressure is replacing any unairworthy screw with § 25.1439 Protective breathing equipment. considered to be of 15-minute duration an airworthy screw, part number 10488– (a) Fixed (stationary, or built in) at the prescribed altitude and minute 020. That action was prompted by an protective breathing equipment must be volume. Continuous flow systems must explosion of a G.E./Saft battery due to installed for the use of the flightcrew, not increase the ambient oxygen content failure of an unairworthy screw. The and at least one portable protective of the local atmosphere above that of proposed actions were intended to breathing equipment shall be located at demand systems. BTPD refers to body prevent an explosion of a battery, or near the flight deck for use by a flight temperature conditions (that is, 37° C., structural damage, and subsequent loss crewmember. In addition, portable at ambient pressure, dry). of power to the electrical systems. protective breathing equipment must be (6) The equipment must meet the Since issuing that NPRM, the FAA installed for the use of appropriate requirements of § 25.1441. has concluded that the explosion of the crewmembers for fighting fires in Issued in Renton, Washington, on August G.E./Saft battery and the other batteries compartments accessible in flight. This 26, 2002. that contained the unairworthy screws includes isolated compartments and Ali Bahrami, that prompted the proposal resulted upper and lower lobe galleys, in which from individual cases of improper crewmember occupancy is permitted Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. maintenance or lack of maintenance due during flight. Equipment must be to failure to follow normal maintenance [FR Doc. 02–25055 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] installed for the maximum number of practices on a product. crewmembers expected to be in the area BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Upon further consideration, the FAA during any operation. has determined that the issue of the (b) For protective breathing DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION unairworthy screws is limited in scope equipment required by paragraph (a) of and may be more effectively addressed this section or by the applicable Federal Aviation Administration as improper maintenance procedures. Operating Regulations: Accordingly, the proposed rule is (1) The equipment must be designed 14 CFR Part 39 hereby withdrawn. to protect the appropriate crewmember Withdrawal of this NPRM constitutes from smoke, carbon dioxide, and other [Docket No. 2000–SW–38–AD] only such action and does not preclude harmful gases while on flight deck duty RIN 2120–AA64 the agency from issuing another notice or while combating fires. in the future, nor does it commit the (2) The equipment must include— Airworthiness Directives; Marathon agency to any course of action in the (i) Masks covering the eyes, nose and Power Technologies Company future. mouth, or AGENCY: Federal Aviation Since this action only withdraws an (ii) Masks covering the nose and Administration, DOT. NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a mouth, plus accessory equipment to final rule and therefore, is not covered ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. cover the eyes. under Executive Order 12866, Executive

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61843

Order 13132, the Regulatory Flexibility the Rules Docket at the following September 5, 2001. The alert telexes Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and address: [email protected]. specify a new service life of 300 flight Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, Comments may be inspected at the hours for control rod, P/N 1979). Office of the Regional Counsel between 365A33616121. The DGAC classified 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through these alert telexes as mandatory and List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Friday, except Federal holidays. issued AD No. 2001–443–054(A), for Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Model AS 365 N3 helicopters, and AD safety, Safety. Grigg, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, No. 2001–444–003(A), for Model EC The Withdrawal Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft 155B helicopters. Both AD’s are dated Standards Staff, Fort Worth, Texas October 17, 2001 and were issued to Accordingly, the notice of proposed 76193–0110, telephone (817) 222–5490, ensure the continued airworthiness of rulemaking, Docket No. 2000–SW–38– fax (817) 222–5961. these helicopters in France. AD, published in the Federal Register These helicopter models are on February 14, 2001 (66 FR 10241), is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: manufactured in France and are type withdrawn. Comments Invited certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 14 CFR Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September Interested persons are invited to 21.29 and the applicable bilateral 19, 2002. participate in the making of the agreement. Pursuant to the applicable Eric D. Bries, proposed rule by submitting such bilateral agreement, the DGAC has kept Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, written data, views, or arguments as the FAA informed of the situation Aircraft Certification Service. they may desire. Communications described above. The FAA has [FR Doc. 02–24990 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] should identify the Rules Docket examined the findings of the DGAC, BILLING CODE 4910–13–P number and be submitted in triplicate to reviewed all available information, and the address specified above. All determined that AD action is necessary communications received on or before for products of these type designs that DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION the closing date for comments will be are certificated for operation in the considered before taking action on the Federal Aviation Administration United States. proposed rule. The proposals contained This unsafe condition is likely to exist in this document may be changed in 14 CFR Part 39 or develop on other helicopters of these light of the comments received. same type designs registered in the [Docket No. 2001–SW–61–AD] Comments are specifically invited on United States. Therefore, the proposed RIN 2120–AA64 the overall regulatory, economic, AD would reduce the current service environmental, and energy aspects of life limit of 1,500 hours time in service Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter the proposed rule. All comments (TIS) to 300 hours TIS for the control France Model AS 365 N3 and EC 155B submitted will be available, both before rod, part number 365A33616121, and Helicopters and after the closing date for comments, would require removing the control rod: in the Rules Docket for examination by • Before further flight for helicopters AGENCY: Federal Aviation interested persons. A report with control rods having 700 or more Administration, DOT. summarizing each FAA-public contact hours TIS; ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking concerned with the substance of this • Within 20 hours TIS for helicopters (NPRM). proposal will be filed in the Rules with control rods having 500 or more Docket. SUMMARY: hours TIS, but less than 700 hours TIS; This document proposes Commenters wishing the FAA to adopting a new airworthiness directive and acknowledge receipt of their mailed • Within 30 hours TIS for helicopters (AD) for the specified Eurocopter France comments submitted in response to this with control rods having more than 270 (Eurocopter) helicopters. This proposal proposal must submit a self-addressed, hours TIS and less than 500 hours TIS. would revise the Airworthiness stamped postcard on which the The proposed AD would require Limitations section of the maintenance following statement is made: revising the Airworthiness Limitations manuals by establishing a new service ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2001-SW–61- section of the maintenance manuals to life limit for the Fenestron pitch change AD.’’ The postcard will be date stamped reflect the new retirement life of 300 control rod (control rod). This proposal and returned to the commenter. hours TIS for the control rod. The is prompted by a failure of a control rod actions would be required to be on a prototype helicopter that led to a Discussion accomplished in accordance with the precautionary landing. The actions The Direction Generale De L’Aviation alert telexes described previously. specified by this proposed AD are Civile (DGAC), the airworthiness The FAA estimates that 2 helicopters intended to prevent failure of the authority for France, notified the FAA of U.S. registry would be affected by this control rod, loss of control of the tail that an unsafe condition may exist on proposed AD, that it would take rotor, and subsequent loss of control of Eurocopter Model AS 365 N and Model approximately 0.5 work hour per the helicopter. EC 155B helicopters. The DGAC advises helicopter to accomplish the proposed DATES: Comments must be received on that a control rod failure occurred on a actions, and that the average labor rate or before December 2, 2002. prototype aircraft and mandates is $60 per work hour. Based on these ADDRESSES: Submit comments in removing control rod, part number (P/N) figures, the total cost impact of the triplicate to the Federal Aviation 365A33616121, at certain times proposed AD on U.S. operators is Administration (FAA), Office of the depending on the number of helicopter estimated to be $60, assuming no Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, flight hours. control rods will reach the 300 hours Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–SW– Eurocopter has issued Alert Telex No. TIS retirement life within the next year. 61–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 04A003, for Model EC 155B helicopters, The regulations proposed herein 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may and Alert Telex No. 01.00.54, for Model would not have a substantial direct also send comments electronically to AS 365 N3 helicopters, both dated effect on the States, on the relationship

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:08 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61844 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

between the national Government and The Proposed Amendment provision, regardless of whether it has been otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the States, or on the distribution of Accordingly, pursuant to the the area subject to the requirements of this power and responsibilities among the authority delegated to me by the various levels of government. Therefore, AD. For helicopters that have been modified, Administrator, the Federal Aviation altered, or repaired so that the performance it is determined that this proposal Administration proposes to amend part would not have federalism implications of the requirements of this AD is affected, the 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations owner/operator must request approval for an under Executive Order 13132. (14 CFR part 39) as follows: For the reasons discussed above, I alternative method of compliance in certify that this proposed regulation (1) accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS The request should include an assessment of is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ DIRECTIVES under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not the effect of the modification, alteration, or a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 1. The authority citation for part 39 repair on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 continues to read as follows: been eliminated, the request should include FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. specific proposed actions to address it. promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, § 39.13 [Amended] Compliance: Required as indicated, unless on a substantial number of small entities 2. Section 39.13 is amended by accomplished previously. To prevent failure of the Fenestron pitch under the criteria of the Regulatory adding a new airworthiness directive to change control rod (control rod), loss of Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft read as follows: control of the tail rotor, and subsequent loss regulatory evaluation prepared for this Eurocopter France: Docket No. 2001–SW– of control of the helicopter, accomplish the action is contained in the Rules Docket. 61–AD. following: A copy of it may be obtained by Applicability: Model AS 365 N3 with MOD (a) Remove the control rod from service in contacting the Rules Docket at the 0764B39 (Quiet Fenestron) and Model EC accordance with Eurocopter Alert Telex No. location provided under the caption 155B helicopters with tail rotor pitch change 04A003, for Model EC 155B helicopters, and ADDRESSES. control rod, part number (P/N) Alert Telex No. 01.00.54, for Model AS 365 365A33616121, installed, certificated in any N3 helicopters, both dated September 5, List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 category. 2001, using the following table for the initial Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter compliance time, and thereafter at intervals safety, Safety. identified in the preceding applicability not to exceed 300 hours time-in-service (TIS):

Remove the control rod For control rods with

Before further flight ...... 700 or more hours TIS. Within 20 hours TIS ...... 500 or more hours TIS but less than 700 hours TIS. Within 30 hours TIS ...... More than 270 hours TIS and less than 500 hours TIS.

(b) This AD revises the helicopter Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September Priorities List (NPL) and requests public Airworthiness Limitations section of the 18, 2002. comments on this notice of intent to maintenance manuals by establishing a new Eric Bries, delete. Parcel 4 is located on the retirement life for control rod, P/N Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, southern border of the operational area 365A33616121, of 300 hours TIS. Aircraft Certification Service. of the Mound Superfund Site. The NPL, (c) An alternative method of compliance or [FR Doc. 02–24989 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] promulgated pursuant to section 105 of adjustment of the compliance time that BILLING CODE 4910–13–P the Comprehensive Environmental provides an acceptable level of safety may be Response, Compensation, and Liability used if approved by the Manager, Regulations Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION found at Appendix B of 40 CFR part Operators shall submit their requests through AGENCY 300, which is the National Oil and an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, Hazardous Substances Pollution who may concur or comment and then send 40 CFR Part 300 Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and it to the Manager, Regulations Group. the State of Ohio, through the Ohio Note 2: Information concerning the [FRL–7384–1] Environmental Protection Agency, have existence of approved alternative methods of National Oil and Hazardous Substance determined that the DOE has compliance with this AD, if any, may be implemented all appropriate response obtained from the Regulations Group. Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List actions required with respect to Parcel (d) Special flight permits may be issued in 4. However, this deletion does not accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 AGENCY: Environmental Protection preclude future actions under to operate the helicopter to a location where Agency. Superfund or relieve DOE of their Long- the requirements of this AD can be ACTION: Notice of intent to delete a Stewardship or Operation and accomplished. portion of the Department of Energy Maintenance responsibilities. In the Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed (DOE) Mound Superfund Site from the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ Section of in Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile National Priorities List. today’s Federal Register, we are (France) AD No. 2001–443–054(A), for Model publishing a direct final notice of AS 365 N3 helicopters, and AD No. 2001– SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection deletion of Parcel 4 of the Mound 444–003(A), for Model EC 155B helicopters. Agency, (EPA) Region V is issuing a Superfund Site without prior notice of Both AD’s are dated October 17, 2001. notice of intent to delete Parcel 4 from intent to delete because we view this as the Department of Energy (DOE) Mound a non-controversial revision and Superfund Site ( Mound Site) located in anticipate no adverse comment. We Miamisburg, Ohio, from the National have explained our reasons for this

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 61845

deletion in the preamble to the direct Dated: September 17, 2002. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR final notice of deletion. If we receive no Norman Niedergang, adverse comment(s) on the direct final Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region Fish and Wildlife Service notice of deletion, we will not take V. 50 CFR Part 17 further action. If we receive timely [FR Doc. 02–24642 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] adverse comment(s), we will withdraw BILLING CODE 6560–50–P RIN 1018–AH70 the direct final notice of deletion and it will not take effect. We will, as Endangered and Threatened Wildlife appropriate, address all public and Plants; Designating Critical comments in a subsequent final deletion FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Habitat for Plant Species from the notice based on adverse comments COMMISSION Islands of Maui and Kahoolawe, HI received on this notice of intent to AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, delete. We will not institute a second 47 CFR Part 73 comment period on this notice of intent Interior. to delete. Any parties interested in ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and commenting must do so at this time. For [DA 02–2066; MB Docket No. 02–255; RM– extension of comment period and notice additional information, see the direct 10524] of availability of draft economic analysis. final notice of deletion which is located Radio Broadcasting Services; Cottage in the Rules section of this Federal Grove, Depoe Bay, Garibaldi, Toledo, SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Register. and Veneta, Oregon Wildlife Service, announce the DATES: Comments concerning this Site availability of the draft economic must be received by November 1, 2002. AGENCY: Federal Communications analysis for the proposed designations ADDRESSES: Written comments should Commission. of critical habitat for plant species from be addressed to: Stuart Hill, Community the islands of Maui and Kahoolawe, ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. Involvement Coordinator, U.S. EPA (P– Hawaii. In earlier Federal Register 19J), 77 W. Jackson, Chicago, IL 60604, notices published August 26, 2002, we 312–886–0689 or 1–800–621–8431. SUMMARY: This document corrects the reopened the comment period and amendatory language to a proposed rule FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: provided notice of a public hearing (67 published in the Federal Register of Timothy Fischer, Remedial Project FR 54764 and 67 FR 54766) for the September 12, 2002, regarding Radio Manager at (312) 886–5787, or Gladys proposed designations or non- Beard, State NPL Deletion Process Broadcasting Services in Cottage Grove, designations of critical habitat for these Manager at (312) 886–7253 or 1–800– Depoe Bay, Garibaldi, Toledo, and plants. We are now providing notice of 621–8431, Superfund Division, U.S. Veneta, Oregon. The amendatory extending the comment period to allow EPA (SR–6J), 77 W. Jackson, IL 60604. language stated the wrong channel peer reviewers and all interested parties number for the community of Garibaldi. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For to comment simultaneously on the additional information, see the Direct This document corrects the channel proposed rule and the associated draft Final Notice of Deletion which is number for the community of Garibaldi. economic analysis. Comments previously submitted need not be located in the Rules section of this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Register. resubmitted as they will be incorporated Victoria M. McCauley, Media Bureau, into the public record as part of this Information Repositories: Repositories (202) 418–2180. have been established to provide extended comment period and will be detailed information concerning this Correction fully considered in preparation of the decision at the following address: EPA final rule. Region V Library, 77 W. Jackson, In proposed rule FR Doc. 02–23139, DATES: We will accept public comments Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353–5821, published September 12, 2002 (67 FR until November 1, 2002. Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.; 57781) make the following correction. ADDRESSES: Written comments and The CERCLA Public Reading Room, On page 57781, in the third column information should be submitted to Miamisburg Senior Adult Center, 305 of § 73.202(b), correct the amendatory Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Central Avenue, Miamisburg, OH 45342, language to read as follows: Service, Pacific Islands Office, 300 Ala (937) 866–8999, Monday and 2.Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Moana Blvd., P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850–0001. For further instructions Wednesday 12 p.m. to 8 p.m., Tuesday Allotments under Oregon, is amended on commenting, refer to Public 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. and 4 p.m. to 8 p.m., by removing Channel 288C3 and adding Thursday 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. and Friday Comments Solicited section of this Channel 264C2 at Depoe Bay, by 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. notice. removing Channel 288A at Cottage List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 Grove, by removing Toledo, Channel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 264C2, by adding Garibaldi, Channel Henson, Field Supervisor, Pacific Environmental protection, Air Islands Office, at the above address pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 288A, and by adding Veneta, Channel 288C3. (telephone: 808/541–3441; facsimile: waste, Hazardous substances, 808/541–3470). Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Federal Communications Commission. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Reporting and recordkeeping John A. Karousos, requirements, Superfund, Water Background Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media pollution control, Water supply. Bureau. Seventy plant species reported from Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. [FR Doc. 02–25073 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] the islands of Maui and Kahoolawe 9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, BILLING CODE 6712–01–P were listed as threatened or endangered 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; under the Endangered Species Act of 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 1973, as amended (Act), between 1991

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61846 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules

and 1999 (56 FR 1450, 56 FR 47686, 56 Secretary shall designate or revise Public Comments Solicited FR 55770, 57 FR 20589, 57 FR 20772, critical habitat based upon the best We will accept written comments and 57 FR 46325, 59 FR 9304, 59 FR 10305, scientific and commercial data information during this re-opened 59 FR 14482, 59 FR 32932, 59 FR 49025, available, and after taking into comment period. If you wish to 59 FR 49860, 59 FR 56333, 59 FR 62346, consideration the economic impact of comment, you may submit your 61 FR 53108 and 64 FR 48307). specifying any particular area as critical comments and materials concerning this Seventeen of these species are endemic habitat. We have prepared a draft proposal by any of several methods: to the islands of Maui and/or economic analysis of the proposed (1) You may submit written comments Kahoolawe, while 53 species are critical habitat designation. The draft and information to the Field Supervisor, reported from one or more other islands, economic analysis is available on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific as well as Maui and/or Kahoolawe. Internet and from the mailing address in Islands Office, 300 Ala Moana Blvd., In other published proposals (65 FR the Public Comments Solicited section P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850– 7919), we proposed that critical habitat below. 0001. was prudent for 37 plants from the The public comment period for the (2) You may send comments by islands of Maui and Kahoolawe. In a April 3, 2002, proposal originally closed electronic mail (e-mail) to: November 7, 2000 (65 FR 66808), we on June 3, 2002 (67 FR 15856). On [email protected]. If you submit proposed that critical habitat was August 26, 2002, we published a comments by e-mail, please submit prudent for 11 plants that are reported Federal Register notice (67 FR 54766) of them as an ASCII file and avoid the use from Maui and Kahoolawe as well as the reopening of the comment period for of special characters and any form of from Kauai and Niihau. In addition, at the proposed designations and non- encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn: the time we listed Clermontia samuelii, designations of critical habitat for plant RIN 1018—AH70’’ and your name and Cyanea copelandii ssp. haleakalaensis, return address in your e-mail message. Cyanea glabra, Cyanea hamatiflora ssp. species on the islands of Maui and If you do not receive a confirmation hamatiflora, Dubautia plantaginea ssp. Kahoolawe, as well as for the proposed from the system that we have received humilis, and Kanaloa kahoolawensis, on designations and non-designations of your e-mail message, contact us directly September 3, 1999 (64 FR 48307), we critical habitat for plant species on the by calling our Honolulu Fish and determined that designation of critical islands of Kauai, Niihau, Molokai, Maui, Wildlife Office at telephone number habitat was prudent for these six taxa Kahoolawe, Hawaii, and Oahu; and we 808/541–3441. from Maui and Kahoolawe. No change announced that the comment period (3) You may hand-deliver comments is made to these 54 prudency would close on September 30, 2002. On to our Honolulu Fish and Wildlife determinations in this revised proposal, August 26, 2002, we also published a Office at the address given above. and they are hereby incorporated by Federal Register notice (67 FR 54764) Comments and materials received, as reference (64 FR 48307; 65 FR 66808; 65 that announced the reopening of the well as supporting documentation used FR 79192). comment period and gave notice of a in preparation of the proposal to In the December 18, 2000, proposed public hearing for the proposed designate critical habitat, will be rule, we determined that critical habitat designations and non-designations of available for inspection, by was not prudent for Acaena exigua, a critical habitat for plant species on the appointment, during normal business species known only from Kauai and islands of Maui and Kahoolawe. The hours at the address under (1) above. Maui, because it had not been seen public hearing was held on September Copies of the draft economic analysis recently in the wild, and no viable 12, 2002, on the island of Maui. We are are available on the Internet at http:// genetic material of this species was now announcing the availability of the pacificislands.fws.gov or by request known to exist. No change is made here draft economic analysis and the from the Field Supervisor at the address to the December 18, 2000, prudency extension of the comment period for the and phone number under (1 and 2) determination for this species and it is proposed designations and non- above. hereby incorporated by reference (65 FR designations of critical habitat for plant 79192). species on the islands of Maui and Author(s) We propose critical habitat Kahoolawe. We will accept public The primary author of this notice is designations for 61 species within 13 comments on the proposal and the John Nuss, U.S. Fish and Wildlife critical habitat units totaling associated draft economic analysis for Service, Regional Office, 911 NE 11th approximately 51,208 hectares (ha) the islands of Maui and Kahoolawe Avenue, 4th Floor, Portland, OR 97232– (126,531 acres (ac)) on the island of until November 1, 2002. The extension 4181. Maui, and within 2 critical habitat units of the comment period gives all totaling approximately 714 ha (18,972 interested parties the opportunity to Authority ac) on the island of Kahoolawe (67 FR comment on the proposal and the The authority for this action is the 15856). associated draft economic analysis for Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 Critical habitat receives protection the islands of Maui and Kahoolawe. U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). from destruction or adverse Comments already submitted on the modification through required proposed designations and non- Dated: September 25, 2002. consultation under section 7 of the Act designations of critical habitat for plant Paul Hoffman, (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) with regard to species from the islands of Maui and Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and actions carried out, funded, or Kahoolawe need not be resubmitted as Wildlife and Parks. authorized by a Federal agency. Section they will be fully considered in the final [FR Doc. 02–25039 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that the determinations. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Sep<04>2002 12:26 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02OCP1.SGM 02OCP1 61847

Notices Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 191

Wednesday, October 2, 2002

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER To receive copies of the documents development of guidelines will help contains documents other than rules or referenced in the notice contact the FSIS ensure that foods conform to the proposed rules that are applicable to the Docket Clerk, U.S. Department of essential requirements. The Government public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection of Australia is hosting this activity. committee meetings, agency decisions and Service, Room 102, Cotton Annex, 300 rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Issues To Be Discussed at the Public petitions and applications and agency 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC Meetings statements of organization and functions are 20250–3700. The documents will also examples of documents appearing in this become accessible via the World Wide The following issues will be discussed during the public meetings: section. Web at the following address: http:// • codexalimentarius.net/current.asp. Proposed Draft Guidelines on the If you have comments, please send an Judgement of Equivalence of Sanitary DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE original and two copies to the FSIS Measures Associated with Food Inspection and Certification Systems. Docket Clerk and reference Docket # 02– • Food Safety and Inspection Service 035N. All comments submitted will be Proposed Draft Guidelines for the available for public inspection in the Exchange of Information of Food Docket Clerk’s Office, between 8:30 a.m. Control Emergency Situations. [Docket No. 02–035N] • Proposed Draft Guidelines for the and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Utilization and Promotion of Quality Codex Alimentarius: Meeting of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Codex Committee on FoodImport and Assurance Systems to meet William James, Acting Director, U.S. Requirements in Relation to Food. Export Inspection and Certification Codex Office, Food Safety and • Systems Traceability in the Context of Food Inspection Service, Room 4861, South Import and Export Inspection and Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection Certification Systems. Service, USDA. SW., Washington, DC 20250, Phone: (202) 205–7760, Fax: (202) 720–3157. Additional Public Notification ACTION: Notice of public meetings, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public awareness of all segments of request for comments. rulemaking and policy development is Background important. Consequently, in an effort to SUMMARY: The Office of the Under The Codex Alimentarius Commission Secretary for Food Safety, United States better ensure that minorities, women, was established in 1962 by two United Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. and persons with disabilities are aware Nations organizations, the Food and Department of Health and Human of this notice, FSIS will announce it and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Services, Food and Drug Administration make copies of this Federal Register World Health Organization (WHO). (FDA) are sponsoring two public publication available through the FSIS Codex is the major international meetings. The first meeting will be held Constituent Update. FSIS provides a organization for encouraging fair on October 22, 2002, 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. weekly Constituent Update, which is international trade in food and to review agenda items and receive communicated via Listserv, a free e-mail protecting the health and economic comments in preparation for developing subscription service. In addition, the interests of consumers. Through draft U.S. positions, and the second will update is available on-line through the adoption of food standards, codes of be held on November 20, 2002, 1 p.m. FSIS web page located at http:// practice, and other guidelines to 3 p.m. to provide information and www.fsis.usda.gov. The update is used developed by its committees, and by receive public comments on the U.S. to provide information regarding FSIS promoting their adoption and draft positions for agenda items that will policies, procedures, regulations, implementation by governments, Codex be discussed at the Codex Committee on Federal Register notices, FSIS public seeks to ensure that the world’s food Food Import and Export Inspection and meetings, recalls, and any other types of supply is sound, wholesome, free from Certification Systems (CCFICS) which information that could affect or would adulteration, and correctly labeled. In will be held in Adelaide, Australia, be of interest to our constituents/ the United States, USDA, FDA, and the December 2–6, 2002. The Under stakeholders. The constituent Listserv Environmental Protection Agency Secretary and FDA recognize the consists of industry, trade, and farm manage and carry out U.S. Codex. importance of providing interested groups, consumer interest groups, allied The Codex Committee on Food Import parties with information on the health professionals, scientific and Export Inspection and Certification Eleventh Session of CCFICS and to professionals, and other individuals that Systems was established to develop address items on the Agenda. have requested to be included. Through principles and guidelines for food the Listserv and web page, FSIS is able DATES: The public meetings are import and export inspection and to provide information to a much scheduled for Tuesday, October 22, certification systems to facilitate trade broader, more diverse audience. 2002 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. and through harmonization and to supply For more information contact the Wednesday, November 20, 2002 from 1 safe and quality foods to consumers. Congressional and Public Affairs Office, p.m. to 3 p.m. Included in the charge to the Committee at (202) 720–9113. To be added to the ADDRESSES: The public meetings will be is application of measures by competent free e-mail subscription service held in the Auditorium of the Harvey E. authorities to provide assurances that (Listserv) go to the ‘‘Constituent Wiley Federal Building, 5100 Paint foods comply with essential Update’’ page on the FSIS web site at Branch Pkwy, College Park, MD (green requirements. Recognition of quality http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oa/update/ line College Park Metro stop). assurance systems through the update.htm. Click on the ‘‘Subscribe to

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:00 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61848 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

the Constituent Update Listserv’’ link, Dated: September 25, 2002. Office Box 2890, Room 6139–S, then fill out and submit the form. William P. Lisowsky, Washington, DC. 20013–2890. The Done at Washington, DC on September 26, Area Supervisor, Land Between The Lakes. telephone number is (202) 720–5023. 2002. [FR Doc. 02–24987 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] The standards are also available, and Edward Scarbrough, BILLING CODE 3410–11–P can be downloaded from the Internet at: U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius. http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/ practice_stds.html. [FR Doc. 02–24978 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Natural Resources Conservation 343 of the Federal Agriculture Service Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE requires NRCS to make available, for Notice of Proposed Changes in the public review and comment, proposed Forest Service National Handbook of Conservation revisions to conservation practice Practices standards used to carry out the highly Meeting of the Land Between The erodible land and wetland provisions of Lakes Advisory Board AGENCY: Natural Resources the law. For the next 30 days, NRCS will Conservation Service, USDA. receive comments on the proposed AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice and request for changes. Following that period, a ACTION: Notice of meeting. comments. determination will be made by NRCS regarding disposition of those SUMMARY: SUMMARY: The Land Between The Lakes Notice is hereby given of the intention of the Natural Resources comments, and a final determination of Advisory Board will hold a meeting on change will be made. Thursday, October 24, 2002. Notice of Conservation Service (NRCS) to issue a series of new or revised conservation Signed in Washington, DC, on September this meeting is given under the Federal 20, 2002. Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. practice standards in its National Bruce I. Knight, 2. Handbook of Conservation Practices. These standards include: Animal Chief, Natural Resources Conservation The meeting agenda includes the Mortality Facility; Aquaculture Ponds; Service. following: Bedding; Contour Orchard and Other [FR Doc. 02–24963 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] (1) Welcome/Introductions/Agenda Fruit Areas; Fence; Grazing Land BILLING CODE 3410–16–P (2) Update on ‘‘Respect the Resources’’ Mechanical Treatment; Irrigation Canal Program or Lateral; Irrigation Field Ditch; Irrigation System, Sprinkler; Irrigation (3) School Groups and Other BROADCASTING BOARD OF System, Surface, and Subsurface; Environmental Education Happenings GOVERNORS Irrigation Water Conveyance, Ditch and (4) Discussion of Comments Received Canal Lining, Plain Concrete; Irrigation Sunshine Act Meeting (5) Land & Resource Management Water Conveyance, Ditch and Canal Planning: Milestones of Phase I Lining, Galvanized Steel; Mole Drain; DATE AND TIME: October 8, 2002; 11:15 (6) Upcoming Speaking Engagements Range Planting; and Surface Drainage, a.m.–12:15 p.m. (7) Focus Groups Field Ditch. These standards are used to PLACE: Museum of Television and convey national guidance in developing Radio, 465 N. Beverly Dr., Beverly Hills, The meeting is open to the public. Field Office Technical Guide Standards CA 90210. Written comments are invited and may used in the States and the Pacific Basin be mailed to: William P. Lisowsky, Area CLOSED MEETING: The members of the and Caribbean Areas. NRCS State Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) Supervisor, Land Between The Lakes, Conservationists and Directors for the 100 Van Morgan Drive, Golden Pond, will meet in closed session to review Pacific Basin and Caribbean Areas who and discuss a number of issues relating Kentucky 42211. Written comments choose to adopt these practices for use must be received at Land Between The to U.S. Government-funded non- within their States/Areas will military international broadcasting. Lakes by October 17, 2002, in order for incorporate them into Section IV of their copies to be provided to the members at They will address internal procedural, Field Office Technical Guide. These budgetary, and personnel issues, as well the meeting. Board members will review practices may be used in resource written comments received, and at their as sensitive foreign policy issues management systems that treat highly relating to potential options in the U.S. request, oral clarification may be erodible land, or on land determined to requested at a future meeting. international broadcasting field. This be wetland. meeting is closed because if open it DATES: The meeting will be held on EFFECTIVE DATES: Comments will be likely would either disclose matters that Thursday, October 24, 2002, 9 a.m. to received on or before November 1, 2002. would be properly classified to be kept 3:30 p.m., CDT. This series of new or revised secret in the interest of foreign policy conservation practice standards will be ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at under the appropriate executive order (5 adopted after the close of the 30-day Kentucky Dam Village State Resort Park, U.S.C. 552b(c)(1)) or would disclose period. Gilbertsville, Kentucky, and will be information the premature disclosure of open to the public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: which would be likely to significantly Single copies of these standards are frustrate implementation of a proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available from NRCS–CED in agency action. (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B)) In Sharon Byers, Advisory Board Liaison, Washington, DC. Submit individual addition, part of the discussion will Land Between The Lakes, 100 Van inquiries and return any comments in relate solely to the internal personnel Morgan Drive, Golden Pond, Kentucky writing to William Hughey, National and organizational issues of the BBG or 42211, 270–924–2002. Agricultural Engineer, Natural the International Broadcasting Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None. Resources Conservation Service, Post (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6))

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:00 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61849

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: being sought for activity conducted Dated: September 24, 2002. Persons interested in obtaining more under FTZ procedures that would result Dennis Puccinelli, information should contact either in a change in tariff classification. Executive Secretary. Zone procedures would exempt Brenda Hardnett or Carol Booker at [FR Doc. 02–25069 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] (202) 401–3736. Bulova from Customs duty payments on BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Dated: September 30, 2002. foreign products that are reexported. On its domestic sales, the company would Carol Booker, be able to defer duty payments until Legal Counsel. merchandise is shipped from the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [FR Doc. 02–25222 Filed 9–30–02; 3:55 pm] facilities. The application indicates that International Trade Administration BILLING CODE 8230–01–M the savings from zone procedures would help improve the facilities’ international Antidumping or Countervailing Duty competitiveness. Order, Finding, or Suspended DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE In accordance with the Board’s Investigation; Opportunity To Request regulations, a member of the FTZ staff Administrative Review Foreign-Trade Zones Board has been designated examiner to investigate the application and report to [Docket 37–2002] AGENCY: Import Administration, the Board. International Trade Administration, Foreign-Trade Zone 1—New York; Public comment is invited from Application for Subzone, Bulova interested parties. Submissions (original Department of Commerce. Corporation (Watches and Clocks), and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the ACTION: Notice of Opportunity to New York, NY Board’s Executive Secretary at one of Request Administrative Review of the following addresses: Antidumping or Countervailing Duty An application has been submitted to 1. Submission Via Express/Package Order, Finding, or Suspended the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Delivery Services: Foreign-Trade Zones Investigation. Board) by the City of New York, grantee Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, of FTZ 1, requesting special-purpose Franklin Court Building—Suite 4100W, Background subzone status for the warehousing and 1099 14th St., NW, Washington, DC. distribution facilities of Bulova 20005; or Each year during the anniversary Corporation, located in Woodside and 2. Submissions Via the U.S. Postage month of the publication of an Brooklyn, New York. The application Service: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, antidumping or countervailing duty was submitted pursuant to the U.S. Department of Commerce, FCB— order, finding, or suspension of provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Suite 4100W, 1401 Constitution Ave. investigation, an interested party, as Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), NW, Washington, DC 20230. defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR The closing period for their receipt is Act of 1930, as amended, may request, part 400). It was formally filed on December 2, 2002. Rebuttal comments in accordance with section 351.213 September 23, 2002. in response to material submitted (2002), that the Department conduct an Bulova’s facility is comprised of two during the foregoing period may be administrative review of that sites. Site 1 (77,439 sq. ft., 319 submitted during the subsequent 15-day antidumping or countervailing duty employees) is located at 26–15 Brooklyn period (to December 16, 2002). Queens Expressway, Woodside, New A copy of the application and order, finding, or suspended York; and Site 2 (87,000 sq. ft., 31 accompanying exhibits will be available investigation. employees) is located at 77 Commercial for public inspection at the Office of the Opportunity to Request a Review: Not Street in Brooklyn, New York. Foreign-Trade Zones Board’s Executive later than the last day of October 2002, The facilities repair, warehouse and Secretary at address Number 1 listed interested parties may request distribute watch and clock products and above, and the U.S. Department of administrative review of the following parts. The products are distributed in Commerce Export Assistance Center, 20 orders, findings, or suspended the U.S. and worldwide. (About 12 Exchange Place, 40th Floor, New York, investigations, with anniversary dates in percent are exported.) No authority is New York 10005. October for the following periods:

Period

Antidumping Duty Proceedings Period Italy: Pressure Sensitive Tape, A–475–059 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Malaysia: Extruded Rubber Thread, A–557–805 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Romania: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products 1, A–485–806 ...... 5/3/01—8/31/02 The People’s Republic of China: Barium Chloride, A–570–007 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 The People’s Republic of China: Lock Washers, A–570–822 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 The People’s Republic of China: Shop Towels, A–570–003 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Countervailing Duty Proceedings Iran: Roasted In-Shell Pistachios, C–507–601 ...... 1/1/01—12/31/01 Suspension Agreements Russia: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A–821–808 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Russia: Uranium, A–821–802 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 South Africa: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A–791–804 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 The People’s Republic of China: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A–570–849 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Ukraine: Silicomanganese, A–823–805 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 Ukraine: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel, A–823–808 ...... 10/1/01—9/30/02 1 On September 3, 2002 (67 FR 56267), this case was inadvertently listed in the opportunity notice for September cases. The correct anniver- sary month for Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Romania is November. This case will be listed in the opportunity notice for November cases which will be published on November 1, 2002.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61850 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

In accordance with section 351.213(b) Dated: September 26, 2002. has been notified of the HMSPDT’s or of the regulations, an interested party as Holly A. Kuga, HMSAS’s intent to take final action to defined by section 771(9) of the Act may Senior Office Director, Group II, Office 4, address the emergency. request in writing that the Secretary Import Administration. Special Accommodations conduct an administrative review. For [FR Doc. 02–25070 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] both antidumping and countervailing BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P In our continuing efforts to streamline duty reviews, the interested party must our meeting notification process, we are specify the individual producers or building an email notification list. If you exporters covered by an antidumping DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE would like to be notified of future finding or an antidumping or meetings via email, please contact Ms. countervailing duty order or suspension National Oceanic and Atmospheric Kerry Aden at (503) 820–2409 or agreement for which it is requesting a Administration [email protected] to provide your review, and the requesting party must [I.D. 092502G] email address. state why it desires the Secretary to The meeting is physically accessible review those particular producers or Pacific Fishery Management Council; to people with disabilities. Requests for exporters. If the interested party intends Public Meeting sign language interpretation or other for the Secretary to review sales of auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. merchandise by an exporter (or a AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Carolyn Porter at (503) 820–2280 at least producer if that producer also exports Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 5 days prior to the meeting date. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), merchandise from other suppliers) Dated: September 25, 2002. which were produced in more than one Commerce. Richard W. Surdi, country of origin and each country of ACTION: Notice of public meeting. origin is subject to a separate order, then Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. the interested party must state SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery specifically, on an order-by-order basis, Management Council’s (Council) Highly [FR Doc. 02–25076 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] which exporter(s) the request is Migratory Species Plan Development BILLING CODE 3510–22–S intended to cover. Team (HMSPDT) and Highly Migratory Six copies of the request should be Species Advisory Subpanel (HMSAS) submitted to the Assistant Secretary for will hold a work session, which is open DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE to the public. Import Administration, International National Oceanic and Atmospheric Trade Administration, Room 1870, U.S. DATES: The HMSPDT and HMSAS will Administration Department of Commerce, 14th Street & meet Tuesday, October 22, 2002 from 9 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, a.m. until 5 p.m.; and Wednesday, [I.D. 092602E] DC 20230. The Department also asks October 23, 2002 from 9 a.m. until parties to serve a copy of their requests business for the day is completed. Marine Mammals; File No. 774–1649–00 to the Office of Antidumping/ ADDRESSES: The work session will be AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Countervailing Enforcement, Attention: held at the Hubbs-Sea World Research Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Sheila Forbes, in room 3065 of the main Institute, West Room, 2595 Ingraham Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce Building. Further, in Street, San Diego, CA 92109; telephone: Commerce. accordance with section 351.303(f)(l)(i) (619) 226–3870. ACTION: of the regulations, a copy of each Receipt of application for Council address: Pacific Fishery amendment. request must be served on every party Management Council, 7700 NE on the Department’s service list. Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that The Department will publish in the OR 97220–1384. NMFS, Southwest Fisheries Science Federal Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Center, 8604 La Jolla Shores Drive, La of Administrative Review of Jolla, CA 92037, has requested an Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Dan Waldeck, Pacific Fishery Management Council, (503) 820–2280. amendment to Permit No. 774–1649 to Order, Finding, or Suspended take Southern elephant seals (Mirounga Investigation’’ for requests received by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The leonina). the last day of October 2002. If the primary purpose of the work session is Department does not receive, by the last to review the September 2002 draft DATES: Written or telefaxed comments day of October 2002, a request for fishery management plan (FMP) and must be received on or before November review of entries covered by an order, develop recommendations to the 1, 2002. finding, or suspended investigation Council. The FMP is scheduled for final ADDRESSES: The amendment request listed in this notice and for the period Council action in November and related documents are available for identified above, the Department will 2002.Although nonemergency issues not review upon written request or by instruct the Customs Service to assess contained in the meeting agenda may appointment in the following office(s): antidumping or countervailing duties on come before the HMSPDT and HMSAS Permits, Conservation and Education those entries at a rate equal to the cash for discussion, those issues may not be Division, Office of Protected Resources, deposit of (or bond for) estimated the subject of formal HMSPDT or NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room antidumping or countervailing duties HMSAS action during this meeting. 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone required on those entries at the time of HMSPDT and HMSAS action will be (301)713–2289; fax (301)713–0376; and entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, restricted to those issues specifically Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West for consumption and to continue to listed in this document and any issues Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, collect the cash deposit previously arising after publication of this CA 90802–4213; phone (562)980–4001; ordered. document that require emergency action fax (562)980–4018.Written comments or This notice is not required by statute under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- requests for a public hearing on this but is published as a service to the Stevens Fishery Conservation and request should be submitted to the international trading community. Management Act, provided the public Chief, Permits, Conservation and

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61851

Education Division, F/PR1, Office of Commission and its Committee of see 66 FR 59409, published on Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East- Scientific Advisors. November 28, 2001. West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Dated: September 26, 2002. James C. Leonard III, Spring, MD 20910. Those individuals Eugene T. Nitta, requesting a hearing should set forth the Chairman, Committee for the Implementation Acting Chief, Permits, Conservation and of Textile Agreements. specific reasons why a hearing on this Education Division, Office of Protected Committee for the Implementation of Textile particular amendment request would be Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Agreements appropriate. [FR Doc. 02–25075 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] September 30, 2002. Comments may also be submitted by BILLING CODE 3510–22–S facsimile at (301)713–0376, provided Commissioner of Customs, the facsimile is confirmed by hard copy Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC submitted by mail and postmarked no 20229. later than the closing date of the COMMITTEE FOR THE Dear Commissioner: This directive comment period. Please note that IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE amends, but does not cancel, the directive comments will not be accepted by e- AGREEMENTS issued to you on November 21, 2001, by the Chairman, Committee for the Implementation mail or other electronic media. Adjustment of an Import Limit for of Textile Agreements. That directive FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Certain Cotton Textile Products concerns imports of certain cotton and man- Ruth Johnson and Amy Sloan (301)713– Produced or Manufactured in made fiber textile products, produced or 2289. manufactured in Bangladesh and exported Bangladesh during the twelve-month period which began SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The September 30, 2002. on January 1, 2002 and extends through subject amendment to Permit No. 774– December 31, 2002. 1649 issued on November 14, 2001 (66 AGENCY: Committee for the Effective on October 2, 2002, you are FR 58445) is requested under the Implementation of Textile Agreements directed to increase the current limit for authority of the Marine Mammal (CITA). Categories 347/348 to 3,949,163 dozen 1. Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 ACTION: Issuing a directive to the The Committee for the Implementation of U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the Regulations Commissioner of Customs adjusting a Textile Agreements has determined that this Governing the Taking and Importing of limit. action falls within the foreign affairs exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5 Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216). U.S.C. 553(a)(1). EFFECTIVE DATE: Permit No.774–1649–00 authorizes October 2, 2002. Sincerely, the permit holder to take Antarctic fur FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross James C. Leonard III, seals (Arctocephalus gazella), Southern Arnold, International Trade Specialist, Chairman, Committee for the elephant seals (Mirounga leonina), Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. Implementation of Textile Agreements. Crabeater seals (Lobodon Department of Commerce, (202) 482– [FR Doc. 02–25116 Filed 9–30–02; 10:40 a.m. carcinophagus), Leopard seals 4212. For information on the quota BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S (Hydrurga leptonyx), Ross seals status of this limit, refer to the Quota (Ommatophoca rossii), and Weddell Status Reports posted on the bulletin seals (Leptonychotes weddellii) by boards of each Customs port, call (202) COMMITTEE FOR THE harassment associated with life history 927–5850, or refer to the U.S. Customs IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE studies and census surveys for website at http://www.customs.gov. For AGREEMENTS abundance and distribution of information on embargoes and quota re- pinnipeds. The targeted species for openings, refer to the Office of Textiles Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain census surveys is the Antarctic fur seal, and Apparel website at http:// Cotton, Wool, Man-Made Fiber, Silk however, due to overlap of their www.otexa.ita.doc.gov. Blend and Other Vegetable Fiber Textiles and Textile Products breeding range with southern elephant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and ice seals, a relatively small number Produced or Manufactured in Thailand Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural of other Antarctic pinnipeds are September 26, 2002. authorized be taken incidentally during Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as AGENCY: Committee for the these surveys. amended. Implementation of Textile Agreements The permit holder requests The Governments of the United States (CITA). authorization to take Southern elephant and the People’s Republic of Bangladesh ACTION: Issuing a directive to the seal pups by level A harassment have agreed to increase the 2002 limit Commissioner of Customs adjusting associated with capture, tagging and for Category 347/348 by 175,230 dozen limits. marking. A total of 200 seals will be special carryforward. For every dozen of taken with four accidental mortalities this special carryforwared that is used, EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2002. over the next four years. three dozen will be deducted from the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross In compliance with the National 2003 limit for Category 347/348, up to Arnold, International Trade Specialist, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 a maximum of 525,690 dozen. This will Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial reopen the current limit effective on Department of Commerce, (202) 482– determination has been made that the October 2, 2002. 4212. For information on the quota activity proposed is categorically A description of the textile and status of these limits, refer to the Quota excluded from the requirement to apparel categories in terms of HTS Status Reports posted on the bulletin prepare an environmental assessment or numbers is available in the boards of each Customs port, call (202) environmental impact statement. CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel 927–5850, or refer to the U.S. Customs Concurrent with the publication of Categories with the Harmonized Tariff Web site at http://www.customs.gov. For this notice in the Federal Register, Schedule of the United States (see NMFS is forwarding copies of this Federal Register notice 66 FR 65178, 1 The limit has not been adjusted to account for application to the Marine Mammal published on December 18, 2001). Also any imports exported after December 31, 2001.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61852 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

information on embargoes and quota re- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Category Adjusted twelve-month openings, refer to the Office of Textiles limit 1 3506 of the Paperwork Act of 1995 (44 and Apparel Web site at http:// U.S.C. Chapter 35) reuqires that the otexa.ita.doc.gov. 347/348 ...... 1,360,947 dozen. Office of Management and Budget 351/651 ...... 376,208 dozen. (OMB) provide interested Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 434 ...... 14,049 dozen. 435 ...... 58,547 dozen. agencies and the public an early Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural opportunity to comment on information Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); 438 ...... 21,072 dozen. Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as 638/639 ...... 2,952,657 dozen. collection requests. OMB may amend or amended. 647/648 ...... 1,561,380 dozen. waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public The current limits for certain 1 The limits have not been adjusted to ac- categories are being adjusted, variously, count for any imports exported after December participation in the approval process for carryover, carryforward, and 31, 2001. would defeat the purpose of the carryforward used. 2 Categories 331pt.: all HTS numbers except information collection, violate State or 6116.10.1720, 6116.10.4810, 6116.10.5510, Federal law, or substantially interfere A description of the textile and 6116.10.7510, 6116.92.6410, 6116.92.6420, apparel categories in terms of HTS 6116.92.6430, 6116.92.6440, 6116.92.7450, with any agency’s ability to perform its numbers is available in the 6116.92.7460, 6116.92.7470, 6116.92.8800, statutory obligations. The Leader, CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel 6116.92.9400 and 6116.99.9510. Regulatory Information Management 3 Category 359pt.: all HTS numbers except Group, Office of the Chief Information Categories with the Harmonized Tariff 6115.19.8010, 6117.10.6010, 6117.20.9010, Schedule of the United States (see 6203.22.1000, 6204.22.1000, 6212.90.0010, Officer, publishes that notice containing Federal Register notice 66 FR 65178, 6214.90.0010, 6406.99.1550, 6505.90.1525, proposed information collection published on December 18, 2001). Also 6505.90.1540, 6505.90.2060 and requests prior to submission of these 6505.90.2545. requests to OMB. Each proposed see 66 FR 63036, published on 4 Category 459pt.: all HTS numbers except December 4, 2001. 6115.19.8020, 6117.10.1000, 6117.10.2010, information collection, grouped by 6117.20.9020, 6212.90.0020, 6214.20.0000, office, contains the following: (1) Type D. Michael Hutchinson, 6405.20.6030, 6405.20.6060, 6405.20.6090, of review requested, e.g. new, revision, Acting Chairman, Committee for the 6406.99.1505 and 6406.99.1560. extension, existing or reinstatment; (2) Implementation of Textile Agreements. 5 Category 631pt.: all HTS numbers except 6116.10.1730, 6116.10.4820, 6116.10.5520, title; (3) summary of the collection; (4) Committee for the Implementation of Textile 6116.10.7520, 6116.93.8800, 6116.93.9400, description of the need for, and Agreements 6116.99.4800, 6116.99.5400 and proposed use of, the information; (5) 6116.99.9530. respondents and frequency of September 26, 2002. 6 Category 659–H: only HTS numbers Commissioner of Customs, 6502.00.9030, 6504.00.9015, 6504.00.9060, collection; and (6) reporting and/or Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC 6505.90.5090, 6505.90.6090, 6505.90.7090 recordkeeping burden. OMB invites and 6505.90.8090. public comment. The Department of 20229 7 Category 659pt.: all HTS numbers except Education is especially interested in Dear Commissioner: This directive 6502.00.9030, 6504.00.9015, 6504.00.9060, amends, but does not cancel, the directive 6505.90.5090, 6505.90.6090, 6505.90.7090, public comment addressing the issued to you on November 27, 2001, by the 6505.90.8090 (Category 659–H); following issues: (1) Is this collection Chairman, Committee for the Implementation 6115.11.0010, 6115.12.2000, 6117.10.2030, necessary to the proper functions of the of Textile Agreements. That directive 6117.20.9030, 6212.90.0030, 6214.30.0000, Department; (2) will this information be 6214.40.0000, 6406.99.1510 and concerns imports of certain cotton, wool, processed and used in a timely manner; man-made fiber, silk blend and other 6406.99.1540. vegetable fiber textiles and textile products, (3) is the esstimate of burden accurate; The Committee for the Implementation of (4) how might the Department enhance produced or manufactured in Thailand and Textile Agreements has determined that exported during the twelve-month period these actions fall within the foreign affairs the quality, utility, and clarity of the which began on January 1, 2002 and extends exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5 inforamtion to be collected; and (5) how through December 31, 2002. U.S.C. 553(a)(1). might the Department minimize the Effective on October 2, 2002, you are burden of this collection on the D. Michael Hutchinson, directed to adjust the limits for the following respondents, including t hrough the use categories, as provided for under the Uruguay Acting Chairman, Committee for the of information technology. Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing: Implementation of Textile Agreements. Dated: September 26, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–24983 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Adjusted twelve-month John D. Tressler, Category 1 BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S limit Leader, Regulatory Infromation Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Group II 237, 331pt.2, 332– 405,485,737 square DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Special Education and 348, 351, 352, meters equivalent. Rehabilitative Service 359pt. 3, 433–438, Notice of Proposed Information 440, 442–448, Collection Requests Type of Review: Extension. 459pt. 4, 631pt. 5, Title: Annual Program Cost Report. 633–648, 651, AGENCY: Department of Education. Frequency: Annually. 652, 659–H 6, ACTION: Notice. Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal 659pt. 7, 845, 846 Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. and 852, as a SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour group Information Management Group, Office Burden: Sublevels in Group II of the Chief Information Officer, invites Responses: 82. 335/635 ...... 758,298 dozen. comments on the proposed information Burden Hours: 385. 336/636 ...... 501,611 dozen. collection requests as required by the 338/339 ...... 2,607,246 dozen. Abstract: Vocational Rehabilitation 340 ...... 450,971 dozen. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. (VR) Services data submitted on the 341/641 ...... 964,619 dozen. DATES: Interested persons are invited to RSA–2 by State VR agencies for each 342/642 ...... 927,982 dozen. submit comments on or before fiscal year (FY) is used by the 345 ...... 439,304 dozen. December 2, 2002. Rehabilitation Services Administration

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61853

(RSA) to administer and manage the that the Office of Management and address [email protected] or faxed to Title I Program; to analyze expenditures, Budget (OMB) provide interested 202–708–9346. Please specify the evaluate program performance and Federal agencies and the public an early complete title of the information identify problem areas. opportunity to comment on information collection when making your request. Requests for copies of the proposed collection requests. OMB may amend or Comments regarding burden and/or information collection request may be waive the requirement for public the collection activity requirements accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, consultation to the extent that public should be directed to Joseph Schubart at by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending participation in the approval process his e-mail address [email protected]. Collections’’ link and by clicking on would defeat the purpose of the Individuals who use a lilnk number 2168. When you access the information collection, violate State or telecommunications device for the deaf information collection, click on Federal law, or substantially interfere (TDD) may call the Federal Information ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. with any agency’s ability to perform its Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– Written requests for information should statutory obligations. The Leader, 8339. be addressed to Vivian Reese, Regulatory Information Management [FR Doc. 02–24855 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Department of Education, 400 Maryland Group, Office of the Chief Information Avenue, SW., Room 4050, Regional Officer, publishes that notice containing BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Office Building 3, Washington, DC proposed information collection 20202–4651 or to the e-mail address requests prior to submission of these _ vivian [email protected]. Requests may also requests to OMB. Each proposed DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY be electronically mailed to the e-mail information collection, grouped by _ address OCIO [email protected] or faxed to office, contains the following: (1) Type Office of Science 202–708–9346. Please specify the of review requested, e.g. new, revision, complete title of the information extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Advanced Scientific Computing collection when making your request. title; (3) summary of the collection; (4) Advisory Committee Comments regarding burden and/or description of the need for, and the collection activity requirements proposed use of, the information; (5) AGENCY: Department of Energy. should be directed to Sheila Carey or respondents and frequency of ACTION: Notice of open meeting. her e-mail address [email protected]. collection; and (6) reporting and/or Individuals who use a recordkeeping burden. OMB invites SUMMARY: This notice announces a telecommunications device for the deaf public comment. meeting of the Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (TDD) may call the Federal Information Dated:September 25, 2002. Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– (ASCAC). Federal Advisory Committee John D. Tressler, 8339. Act (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) Leader, , Regulatory Information Management requires that public notice of these [FR Doc. 02–24964 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer. meetings be announced in the Federal BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Federal Student Aid Register. Type of Review: Revision. DATES: Thursday, October 17, 2002, 8:30 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Title: William D. Ford Federal Direct a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; Friday, October 18, Loan Program Repayment Plan 2002, 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Submission for OMB Review; Selection Form. ADDRESSES: Hilton Washington Embassy Comment Request Frequency: On Occasion. Row Hotel, 2015 Massachusetts Avenue, AGENCY: Department of Education. Affected Public: Individuals or NW., Washington, DC. household. ACTION: Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Melea Baker, Office of Advanced SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Burden: Scientific Computing Research; SC–30/ Information Management Group, Office Responses: 1,927,000. Germantown Building; U.S. Department of the Chief Information Officer invites Burden Hours: 635,910. of Energy; 1000 Independence Avenue, comments on the submission for OMB Abstract: Borrowers who receive SW., Washington DC 20585–1290; review as required by the Paperwork loans through the William D. Ford Telephone (301)–903–7486 (Email: Reduction Act of 1995. Federal Direct Loan Program will use [email protected]). this form to select a repayment plan for DATES: Interested persons are invited to their loans. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submit comments on or before Requests for copies of the submission Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose November 1, 2002. for OMB review; comment request may of this meeting is to provide advice and ADDRESSES: Written comments should be accessed from http:// guidance with respect to the advanced be addressed to the Office of edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the scientific computing research program. Information and Regulatory Affairs, ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and Tentative Agenda: Agenda will Attention: Lauren Wittenberg, Desk by clicking on link number 2116. When include discussions of the following: Officer, Department of Education, Office you access the information collection, Thursday, October 17, 2002 of Management and Budget, 725 17th click on ‘‘Download Attachments ‘‘ to Street, NW., Room 10235, New view. Written requests for information Introduction Executive Office Building, Washington, should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Remarks from the Director, Office of DC 20503 or should be electronically Department of Education, 400 Maryland Science mailed to the e-mail address Reports and Discussions of ASCAC _ Avenue, SW., Room 4050, Regional Lauren [email protected]. Office Building 3, Washington, DC Facilities Subcommittee Meeting on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 20202–4651 or to the e-mail address Japanese Earth Simulator Initiative 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of [email protected]. Requests may also Scientific Discovery through Advanced 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires be electronically mailed to the e-mail Computing Update Public Comment

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61854 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Friday, October 18, 2002 Second Revised Sheet No. 651 Fifth Revised Sheet No. 66, to be Report on Activities of DOE Advisory Algonquin states that the purpose of effective October 25, 2002. Committee Chairs this filing is to revise the capacity ALNG states that the purpose of this Workshop Updates—Nanoscience and release provisions in Section 14 of the filing is to revise the capacity release Networking General Terms and Conditions with the provisions in Section 14 of the General Applied Mathematics Roadmap addition of a new section 14.12 which Terms and Conditions with the addition Fusion Simulation Project Update sets forth its right to terminate of a new Section 14.12 which sets forth Biotechnology Subcommittee Report temporary capacity releases by shippers its right to terminate temporary capacity New Business who are not creditworthy or who have releases by shippers who are not Advisory Committee Open Discussion become non-creditworthy. creditworthy or who have become non- of Issues Algonquin states that copies of its creditworthy. Public Comment filing have been mailed to all affected Public Participation: The meeting is customers and interested state ALNG states that copies of its filing open to the public. If you would like to commissions. Any person desiring to be have been mailed to all affected file a written statement with the heard or to protest said filing should file customers and interested state Committee, you may do so either before a motion to intervene or a protest with commissions. or after the meeting. If you would like the Federal Energy Regulatory Any person desiring to be heard or to to make oral statements regarding any of Commission, 888 First Street, NE., protest said filing should file a motion the items on the agenda, you should Washington, DC 20426, in accordance to intervene or a protest with the contact Melea Baker via FAX at 301– with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 903–4846 or via email Commission’s rules and regulations. All 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC ([email protected]). You such motions or protests must be filed 20426, in accordance with Sections must make your request for an oral in accordance with Section 154.210 of 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s statement at least 5 business days prior the Commission’s regulations. Protests Rules and Regulations. All such motions to the meeting. Reasonable provision will be considered by the Commission or protests must be filed in accordance will be made to include the scheduled in determining the appropriate action to with Section 154.210 of the oral statements on the agenda. The be taken, but will not serve to make Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Chairperson of the Committee will protestants parties to the proceedings. conduct the meeting to facilitate the Any person wishing to become a party be considered by the Commission in orderly conduct of business. Public must file a motion to intervene. This determining the appropriate action to be comment will follow the 10-minute filing is available for review at the taken, but will not serve to make rule. Commission in the Public Reference protestants parties to the proceedings. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting Room or may be viewed on the Any person wishing to become a party will be available for public review and Commission’s Web site at http:// must file a motion to intervene. This copying within 30 days at the Freedom www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. filing is available for review at the of Information Public Reading Room; Enter the docket number excluding the Commission in the Public Reference 1E–190, Forrestal Building; 1000 last three digits in the docket number Room or may be viewed on the Independence Avenue, SW., field to access the document. For Commission’s website at http:// Washington, DC 20585; between 9 a.m. Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Enter the docket number excluding the except holidays. protests and interventions may be filed last three digits in the docket number Issued in Washington, DC, on September electronically via the Internet in lieu of field to access the document. For 27, 2002. paper. The Commission strongly Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for Rachel M. Samuel, encourages electronic filings. See, 18 TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Deputy Advisory Committee, Management CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the protests and interventions may be filed Officer. instructions on the Commission’s Web electronically via the Internet in lieu of [FR Doc. 02–25074 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. paper. The Commission strongly BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Linwood A. Watson, Jr., encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Deputy Secretary. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s web DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FR Doc. 02–25023 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Federal Energy Regulatory Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Deputy Secretary. [Docket No. RP02–556–000] [FR Doc. 02–25022 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Algonquin Gas Transmission Commission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff [Docket No. RP02–557–000]

September 26, 2002. Algonquin LNG, Inc.; Notice of Take notice that on September 24, Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff 2002, Algonquin Gas Transmission Company (Algonquin) tendered for September 26, 2002. filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Take notice that on September 24, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, the 2002, Algonquin LNG, Inc. (ALNG) following revised tariff sheet effective tendered for filing as part of its FERC October 25, 2002: Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61855

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 20426, in accordance with Sections ESNG states that copies of the filing 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s have been served upon its jurisdictional Federal Energy Regulatory Rules and Regulations. All such motions customers and interested State Commission or protests must be filed in accordance Commissions. [Docket No. RP02–356–000] with Section 154.210 of the Any person desiring to be heard or to Commission’s Regulations. Protests will protest said filing should file a motion Canyon Creek Compression Company; be considered by the Commission in to intervene or a protest with the Notice of Further Technical determining the appropriate action to be Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Conference taken, but will not serve to make 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC protestants parties to the proceedings. 20426, in accordance with sections September 26, 2002. Any person wishing to become a party 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s In the Commission’s order issued on must file a motion to intervene. This rules and regulations. All such motions June 27, 2002,1 the Commission filing is available for review at the or protests must be filed in accordance directed that a technical conference be Commission in the Public Reference with section 154.210 of the held to address issues raised by the Room or may be viewed on the Commission’s regulations. Protests will filing. Commission’s website at http:// be considered by the Commission in Take notice that a further telephone www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. determining the appropriate action to be conference will be held on Tuesday, Enter the docket number excluding the taken, but will not serve to make October 8, 2002, at 10 a.m. last three digits in the docket number protestants parties to the proceedings. Parties will be sent instruction on field to access the document. For Any person wishing to become a party how to join the telephone conference. Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for must file a motion to intervene. This TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, filing is available for review at the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., protests and interventions may be filed Commission in the Public Reference Deputy Secretary. electronically via the Internet in lieu of Room or may be viewed on the [FR Doc. 02–25027 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] paper. The Commission strongly Commission’s Web site at http:// BILLING CODE 6717–01–P encourages electronic filings. See, 18 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Enter the docket number excluding the instructions on the Commission’s web last three digits in the docket number DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. field to access the document. For Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for Federal Energy Regulatory Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Deputy Secretary. protests and interventions may be filed [Docket No. RP02–558–000] [FR Doc. 02–25021 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] electronically via the Internet in lieu of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P paper. The Commission strongly East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Gas Tariff DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY instructions on the Commission’s Web September 26, 2002. Federal Energy Regulatory site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Take notice that on September 24, Commission Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 2002, East Tennessee Natural Gas [Docket No. RP02–554–000] Deputy Secretary. Company (East Tennessee) tendered for [FR Doc. 02–25025 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Second Revised Volume No. 1, Third Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Revised Sheet No. 100, First Revised Gas Tariff Original Sheet No. 147A, Fifth Revised DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Sheet No. 155, and Original Sheet No. September 26, 2002. 155A, effective October 25, 2002. Take notice that on September 24, Federal Energy Regulatory East Tennessee states that the purpose 2002, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Commission of this filing is to revise the capacity Company (ESNG) tendered for filing as release provisions in Sections 17 and 18 part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second [Docket No. RP02–559–000] of the General Terms and Conditions Revised Volume No. 1, revised tariff with the addition of a new Sections sheets listed on Appendix A to the Egan Hub Partners, L.P.; Notice of 17.15 and 18.14 which set forth its right filing, with a proposed effective date of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff to terminate temporary capacity releases October 1, 2002. by shippers who are not creditworthy or ESNG states that the purpose of this September 26, 2002. who have become non-creditworthy. instant filing is to track rate changes Take notice that on September 24, East Tennessee states that copies of its attributable to storage services 2002, Egan Hub Partners, L.P. (Egan filing have been mailed to all affected purchased from Transcontinental Gas Hub) tendered for filing as part of its customers and interested state Pipe Line Corporation (Transco) under FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, commissions. its Rate Schedules GSS, LGA and LSS. Original Sheet No. 70A, effective Any person desiring to be heard or to The costs of the above referenced October 25, 2002: protest said filing should file a motion storage services comprise the rates and Egan Hub states that the purpose of to intervene or a protest with the charges payable under ESNG’s Rate this filing is to revise the capacity Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Schedules GSS , LGA and LSS, release provisions in Section 4 of the 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC respectively. This tracking filing is General Terms and Conditions with the being made pursuant to Section 3 of addition of a new Section 4.13 which 1 Canyon Creek Compression Company, 99 FERC ESNG’s Rate Schedules GSS, LGA and sets forth its right to terminate ¶61,351 (2002). LSS. temporary capacity releases by shippers

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61856 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

who are not creditworthy or who have last three digits in the docket number DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY become non-creditworthy. field to access the document. For Egan Hub states that copies of its Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for Federal Energy Regulatory filing have been mailed to all affected TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Commission customers and interested state protests and interventions may be filed [Project No. 184–065, California] commissions. electronically via the Internet in lieu of Any person desiring to be heard or to paper. The Commission strongly El Dorado Irrigation District; Notice of protest said filing should file a motion encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Public Meetings to intervene or a protest with the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, instructions on the Commission’s web September 25, 2002. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Federal Energy Regulatory 20426, in accordance with Sections Commission (Commission) is reviewing 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s Linwood A. Watson, Jr., the application for a new license for the rules and regulations. All such motions Deputy Secretary. El Dorado Project (FERC No. 184), filed or protests must be filed in accordance [FR Doc. 02–25020 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] on February 22, 2000. The El Dorado with Section 154.210 of the Project, licensed to the El Dorado BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Irrigation District (EID), is located on the be considered by the Commission in South Fork American River, in El determining the appropriate action to be Dorado, Alpine, and Amador Counties, taken, but will not serve to make California. The project occupies lands of protestants parties to the proceedings. the Eldorado National Forest. Any person wishing to become a party The EID, several State and Federal must file a motion to intervene. This agencies, and several non-governmental filing is available for review at the agencies are working collaboratively Commission in the Public Reference with a facilitator to resolve certain Room or may be viewed on the issues relevant to this proceeding. These Commission’s Web site at http:// meetings are a part of that collaborative www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. process. Meetings will be held as Enter the docket number excluding the follows:

Date Group Time

October 8 ...... Aquatics/Hydrology Workgroup ...... 9 a.m.–4 p.m. October 9 ...... Aquatics/Hydrology Workgroup ...... 9 a.m.–12 p.m. October 9 ...... Recreation Workgroup ...... 1 p.m.–4 p.m.

We invite the participation of all tendered for filing as part of its FERC http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ interested governmental agencies, non- Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, link. Enter the docket number excluding governmental organizations, and the Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 121B, the last three digits in the docket general public in these meetings. with an effective date of September 1, number field to access the document. All meetings will be held in the 2002. For Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or Rancho Cordova Holiday Inn, located at KPC states that the filing is being for TTY, (202) 502–8659. The 11131 Folsom Blvd, Rancho Cordova, made in compliance with the Commission strongly encourages California. Commission’s September 12, 2002 order electronic filings. See, 18 CFR For further information, please in these proceedings. 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions contact Elizabeth Molloy at (202) 502– KPC states that complete copies of its on the Commission’s Web site under the 8771 or John Mudre at (202) 502–8902. filing are being mailed to all of the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. parties on the Commission’s Official Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Service list for these proceedings, all of Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Deputy Secretary. its jurisdictional customers, and Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 02–24880 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] applicable State Commissions. [FR Doc. 02–24884 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Any person desiring to protest said BILLING CODE 6717–01–P filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 20426, in accordance with Section Federal Energy Regulatory 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Regulations. All such protests must be Commission filed in accordance with Section [Docket Nos. RP00–318–002 and RP01–6– [Docket No. RP02–488–001] 003] 154.210 of the Commission’s Regulations. Protests will be considered Enbridge Pipelines (KPC); Notice of Enbridge Pipelines (KPC); Notice of by the Commission in determining the Compliance Filing Compliance Filing appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to September 26, 2002. September 25, 2002. the proceedings. This filing is available Take notice that on September 24, Take notice that on September 23, for review at the Commission in the 2002, Enbridge Pipelines (KPC), (KPC) 2002, as amended September 24, 2002, Public Reference Room or may be tendered for filing as part of its FERC Enbridge Pipelines (KPC), (KPC) viewed on the Commission’s Web site at Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61857

Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 180, addition of a new Section 9.9 which sets rate transaction entered into by Natural with an effective date of October 1, forth its right to terminate temporary and Northern Indiana Public Service 2002. capacity releases by shippers who are Company under Natural’s Rate Schedule KPC states that the filing is being not creditworthy or who have become FTS pursuant to Section 49 of the made in compliance with the non-creditworthy. General Terms and Conditions of Commission’s September 16, 2002 order Maritimes states that copies of its Natural’s Tariff. Natural states that the in this proceeding. filing have been mailed to all affected amended negotiated rate agreement does KPC states that complete copies of its customers and interested state not deviate in any material respect from filing are being mailed to all of the commissions. the applicable form of service agreement parties on the Commission’s Official Any person desiring to be heard or to in Natural’s Tariff. Service list for these proceedings, all of protest said filing should file a motion Natural states that copies of the filing its jurisdictional customers, and to intervene or a protest with the are being mailed to all parties set out on applicable State Commissions. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Commission’s official service list in Any person desiring to protest said 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Docket No. RP99–176. filing should file a protest with the 20426, in accordance with Sections Any person desiring to be heard or to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s protest said filing should file a motion 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Rules and Regulations. All such motions to intervene or a protest with the 20426, in accordance with section or protests must be filed in accordance Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and with Section 154.210 of the 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC regulations. All such protests must be Commission’s Regulations. Protests will 20426, in accordance with Sections filed in accordance with section 154.210 be considered by the Commission in 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s of the Commission’s regulations. determining the appropriate action to be Rules and Regulations. All such motions Protests will be considered by the taken, but will not serve to make or protests must be filed in accordance Commission in determining the protestants parties to the proceedings. with Section 154.210 of the appropriate action to be taken, but will Any person wishing to become a party Commission’s Regulations. Protests will not serve to make protestants parties to must file a motion to intervene. This be considered by the Commission in the proceedings. This filing is available filing is available for review at the determining the appropriate action to be for review at the Commission in the Commission in the Public Reference taken, but will not serve to make Public Reference Room or may be Room or may be viewed on the protestants parties to the proceedings. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at Commission’s website at http:// Any person wishing to become a party http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. must file a motion to intervene. This link. Enter the docket number excluding Enter the docket number excluding the filing is available for review at the the last three digits in the docket last three digits in the docket number Commission in the Public Reference number field to access the document. field to access the document. For Room or may be viewed on the For Assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or for Commission’s Web site at http:// for TTY, (202) 502–8659. The TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. Commission strongly encourages protests and interventions may be filed Enter the docket number excluding the electronic filings. See, 18 CFR electronically via the Internet in lieu of last three digits in the docket number 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions paper. The Commission strongly field to access the document. For on the Commission’s Web site under the encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or for ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, instructions on the Commission’s web protests and interventions may be filed Linwood A. Watson, Jr., site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. electronically via the Internet in lieu of Deputy Secretary. paper. The Commission strongly Linwood A. Watson, Jr., [FR Doc. 02–25026 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] encourages electronic filings. See, 18 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Deputy Secretary. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the [FR Doc. 02–25019 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] instructions on the Commission’s Web BILLING CODE 6717–01–P site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Federal Energy Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Deputy Secretary. Commission [FR Doc. 02–24883 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory [Docket No. RP02–560–000] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Commission Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; [Docket No. RP99–176–068] Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Gas Tariff Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Negotiated Rate Federal Energy Regulatory September 26, 2002. Commission Take notice that on September 24, September 25, 2002. 2002, Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, Take notice that on September 23, September 25, 2002. L.L.C. (Maritimes) tendered for filing as 2002, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of [Docket Nos. RP00–398–002 and RP01–34– part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised America (Natural) tendered for filing to 004] Volume No. 1, Original Sheet No. 259A, become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Overthrust Pipeline Company; Notice to become effective October 25, 2002. Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, certain of Compliance Filing Maritimes states that the purpose of tariff sheets, to be effective December 1, Take notice that on September 23, this filing is to revise the capacity 2002. 2002, Overthrust Pipeline Company release provisions in Section 9 of the Natural states that the purpose of this (Overthrust) tendered for filing as part General Terms and Conditions with the filing is to implement a new negotiated of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61858 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Volume No. 1-A, the tariff sheets listed number field to access the document. December 2002 a Commission follows: For Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or declaration: First Revised Volume No. 1-A for TTY, (202) 502–8659. The (a) That a substantial divergence, Ninth Revised Sheet No. 1 Commission strongly encourages pursuant to Section 342.4(a), can be Ninth Revised Sheet No. 4 electronic filings. See, 18 CFR based on a capital investment, such as Sixth Revised Sheet No. 5 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions SFPP’s investment in the proposed East Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 30 on the Commission’s Web site under the Line expansion; Fifth Revised Sheet No. 44 ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. (b) that, if cost-of-service tariff rates Fifth Revised Sheet No. 45 Linwood A. Watson, Jr., calculated in the event the proposed Ninth Revised Sheet No. 48 East Line expansion goes into service Deputy Secretary. Fifth Revised Sheet No. 54 exceed indexed tariff rates by 20 percent Fourth Revised Sheet No. 58 [FR Doc. 02–24885 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] or more, the Commission will find that Original Sheet No. 58A BILLING CODE 6717–01–P such a difference constitutes a First Revised Sheet No. 67G substantial divergence pursuant to Original Sheet No. 67H Section 342.4(a) under the Original Sheet No. 67I DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Original Sheet No. 67J circumstances of the East Line and will Original Sheet No. 67K Federal Energy Regulatory permit SFPP to charge such cost-of- Fourth Revised Sheet No. 78E Commission service tariff rates; and (c) that if, in response to a protest First Revised Sheet No. 78I [Docket No. OR02–13–000] Original Sheet No. 78J concerning the level of the tariff rates, the Commission suspends East Line Original Sheet No. 78K SFPP, L.P.; Notice of Petition for cost-of-service tariff rates filed by SFPP Alternate Original Sheet No. 78J Declaratory Order Alternate Original Sheet No. 78K following the proposed East Line Overthrust states that the filing is September 26, 2002. expansion, those rates will be accepted being made in compliance with the Take notice that on September 19, for filing and made effective as of the Commission’s Order on Compliance 2002, SFPP, L.P. (SFPP) filed in Docket date proposed by SFPP, subject to with Order Nos. 637, 587-G and 587-L No. OR02–13–000, a petition for a refund. issued on August 22, 2002, (the August declaratory order, pursuant to Rule SFPP states that without favorable 22nd order) in Docket Nos. RP00–398– 207(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Commission action on these requests, it 000, RP01–34–000, and -001. The Practice and Procedure (18 CFR will not undertake the proposed East August 22nd order approved, in part, 385.207(a)(2)). SFPP requests that the Line expansion. Assuming Commission Overthrust’s pro forma tariff sheets filed Commission issue an expedited approval of SFPP’s Petition for July 14, 2000, and directed Overthrust decision on this Petition no later than Declaratory Order and request for to make further modifications. the end of December 2002. This filing expedited decisions, SFPP states that it Overthrust tendered for filing, proposed may be viewed online at http:// anticipates construction to begin in actual tariff sheets that include the www.ferc.fed.us/ferris.htm, on file with 2004 and service on the expanded East language approved in Overthrust’s July the Commission and open to public Line to begin in the first quarter of 2005. 14, 2000, pro forma compliance filing as inspection. Any person desiring to be heard or to well as language that comports with the SFPP states that it proposes to expand protest said filing should file a motion Commission’s directives. These the capacity of its currently constrained to intervene or a protest with the modifications are included in First East Line, which operates under Tariff Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Revised Volume No. 1-A of Overthrust’s FERC No. 73 and provides service from 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC FERC Gas Tariff. El Paso, TX and Diamond Junction, TX 20426, in accordance with Sections Overthrust states that a copy of this to Lordsburg, NM, Tucson, AZ, and 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s filing has been served upon its Phoenix, AZ, as follows: (1) SFPP Rules and Regulations. All such motions customers, the Public Service proposes to expand the capacity of the or protests must be filed on or before Commission of Utah and the Public East Line’s segment from El Paso to October 21, 2002. Protests will be Service Commission of Wyoming. Tucson by approximately 53,000 barrels considered by the Commission in Any person desiring to protest said per day, and (2) SFPP proposes to determining the appropriate action to be filing should file a protest with the expand the capacity of the East Line’s taken, but will not serve to make Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, segment from Tucson to Phoenix by protestants parties to the proceedings. 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC approximately 44,000 barrels per day. Any person wishing to become a party 20426, in accordance with Section SFPP’s East Line has been under must file a motion to intervene. This 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and prorationing since the beginning of filing is available for review at the Regulations. All such protests must be 1999. The current constrained capacity Commission in the Public Reference filed in accordance with Section of the East Line is expected to be Room or may be viewed on the 154.210 of the Commission’s exacerbated by anticipated expansions Commission’s Web site at http:// Regulations. Protests will be considered of refineries and a pipeline currently www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. by the Commission in determining the providing supply to the East Line, and Enter the docket number excluding the appropriate action to be taken, but will by the opening of Longhorn Pipeline. last three digits in the docket number not serve to make protestants parties to SFPP states that letters of intent field to access the document. For the proceedings. This filing is available received from current and potential East Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or for for review at the Commission in the Line shippers regarding this proposed TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Public Reference Room or may be expansion indicate that this expansion protests and interventions may be filed viewed on the Commission’s Web site at is necessary and will be utilized. electronically via the Internet in lieu of http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ In order to go forward with this paper. The Commission strongly link. Enter the docket number excluding proposed expansion of the East Line, encourages electronic filings. See, 18 the last three digits in the docket SFPP states that it seeks, by the end of CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61859

instructions on the Commission’s Web DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Rate Order No. SWPA–45 effective site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. October 1, 2001, through September 30, Federal Energy Regulatory 2002. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission Any person desiring to intervene or to Deputy Secretary. [Docket No. EF02–4011–000] protest this filing should file with the [FR Doc. 02–25014 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Southwestern Power Administration; 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC Notice of Filing 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY September 26, 2002. Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 Take notice that the Secretary, U.S. and 385.214). Protests will be Federal Energy Regulatory Department of Energy on September 20, considered by the Commission in Commission 2002, submitted to the Federal Energy determining the appropriate action to be Regulatory Commission (Commission) taken, but will not serve to make [Docket No. EL02–128–000] for confirmation and approval on a final protestants parties to the proceeding. basis, pursuant to the authority vested Any person wishing to become a party Sithe New England Holdings, LLC v. in the Commission by Delegation Order must file a motion to intervene. All such ISO New England Inc.; Notice of Filing No. 00–037.00, effective December 6, motions or protests should be filed on 2001, the following Southwestern Power or before the comment date, and, to the September 26, 2002. Administration (Southwestern) extent applicable, must be served on the Take notice that on September 23, Integrated System rate schedules: applicant and on any other person Rate Schedule P–02, Wholesale Rates 2002, Sithe New England Holdings, LLC designated on the official service list. for Hydro Peaking Power This filing is available for review at the tendered for filing a complaint against Rate Schedule NFTS–02, Wholesale ISO New England Inc., alleging Commission or may be viewed on the Rates for Non-Federal Commission’s Web site at http:// violations of the Federal Power Act and Transmission/Interconnection www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. the Commission’s regulations. Facilities Service Enter the docket number excluding the Any person desiring to intervene or to Rate Schedule EE–02, Wholesale Rate for Excess Energy last three digits in the docket number protest this filing should file with the filed to access the document. For Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, The Integrated System (System) rate schedules were confirmed and approved assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC (202) 502–8659. Protests and 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 on an interim basis by the Secretary in Rate Order No. SWPA–48 for the period interventions may be filed electronically and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 October 1, 2002, through September 30, 2006, and have been submitted to the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the and 385.214). Protests will be instructions on the Commission’s Web considered by the Commission in Commission for confirmation and approval on a final basis for the same site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The determining the appropriate action to be Commission strongly encourages taken, but will not serve to make period. The System rates will increase the annual revenue from $109,463,500 electronic filings. Comment Date: protestants parties to the proceeding. to $115,006,176 primarily to recover October 21, 2002. Any person wishing to become a party increased expenditures in operation and must file a motion to intervene. All such Linwood A. Watson, Jr., maintenance (O&M) and investment. In motions or protests should be filed on Deputy Secretary. addition, an analysis of the Purchased or before the comment date, and, to the [FR Doc. 02–25011 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Power Deferral Account indicates the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P extent applicable, must be served on the need for an annual increase of $595,827 applicant and on any other person to recover the purchased energy costs. designated on the official service list. The total annual revenue increase will DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY This filing is available for review at the be $6,138,503, or 5.6 percent effective Commission or may be viewed on the October 1, 2002. Southwestern has Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Web site at http:// continued the rate structure that Commission www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. conforms with the intent of the [Docket No. EF02–4021–000] Enter the docket number excluding the Commission Order No. 888; last three digits in the docket number consequently, the actual rate impact on Southwestern Power Administration; filed to access the document. For each customer will vary based on the Notice of Filing assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, type of service requested and provided. (202) 502–8659. Protests and The proposal also includes a September 26, 2002. interventions may be filed electronically continuation of the Administrator’s Take notice that the Secretary, U.S. via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 Discretionary Purchased Power Adder Department of Energy, on September 20, CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Adjustment, to adjust the purchased 2002, submitted to the Federal Energy instructions on the Commission’s Web power adder annually up to $0.0011 per Regulatory Commission (FERC or site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The kilowatt-hour as necessary, under a Commission) for confirmation and Commission strongly encourages formula-type rate, with notification to approval on a final basis, pursuant to electronic filings. Comment Date: the Commission. the authority vested in the FERC by October 16, 2002. The Secretary has also submitted for Delegation Order No. 00–037.00, confirmation and approval on a final December 6, 2001, an annual power rate Linwood A. Watson, Jr., basis the previous extension of the of $2,013,024 for the sale of power and Deputy Secretary. Integrated System rates. The extension energy by the Southwestern Power [FR Doc. 02–25013 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] was confirmed and approved on an Administration (Southwestern) from the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P interim basis by the Deputy Secretary in Sam Rayburn Dam Project (Rayburn) to

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61860 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY instructions on the Commission’s Web Inc. (SRDEC). The rate was confirmed site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Federal Energy Regulatory and approved on an interim basis by the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Secretary in Rate Order No. SWPA–49 Commission Deputy Secretary. for the period October 1, 2002, through [FR Doc. 02–25024 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] September 30, 2006, and has been [Docket No. RP02–555–000] submitted to FERC for confirmation and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P approval on a final basis for the same Texas Eastern Transmission, LP; Notice of Tariff Filing period. The annual rate of $2,013,024 is DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY based on the 2002 Revised Power September 26, 2002. Repayment Study for Rayburn and Federal Energy Regulatory represents an annual decrease in Take notice that on September 24, Commission 2002, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP revenue of $64,608, or 3.1 percent, the [Docket No. RP97–255–046] lowest possible rate required to meet (Texas Eastern) tendered for filing as cost recovery criteria. part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh TransColorado Gas Transmission Revised Volume No. 1, the following This rate supersedes the annual Company; Notice of Negotiated Rate revised tariff sheets effective October 25, power rate of $2,077,632, which FERC 2002: September 26, 2002. approved on a final basis October 22, First Revised Original Sheet No. 539 Take notice that on May 15, 2002, 2001, under Docket No. EF01–4021–000 TransColorado Gas Transmission for the period October 1, 2001, through First Revised Sheet No. 540 Company (TransColorado) tendered for September 30, 2005. Texas Eastern states that the purpose filing an amended negotiated-rate Any person desiring to intervene or to of this filing is to revise the capacity contract with Western Gas Resources, protest this filing should file with the release provisions in section 3.14 of the Inc. (WGR). Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, General Terms and Conditions with the TransColorado states that the filing is 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC addition of a new Section 3.14(M) being pursuant to the Commission’s 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 which sets forth its right to terminate April 25, 2002, letter order issued in and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of temporary capacity releases by shippers Docket No. RP97–255–043. Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 who are not creditworthy or who have In Docket No. RP97–255–043, and 385.214). Protests will be become non-creditworthy. TransColorado filed a negotiated-rate tariff filing to revise it Statement of considered by the Commission in Texas Eastern states that copies of its Negotiated Rates to reflect the determining the appropriate action to be filing have been mailed to all affected negotiated-rate contract with WGR. The taken, but will not serve to make customers and interested state Commission’s April 25th order stated protestants parties to the proceeding. commissions. that the Commission found WGR’s Any person wishing to become a party Any person desiring to be heard or to contact to contain a provision that must file a motion to intervene. All such protest said filing should file a motion constitutes a negotiated term and motions or protests should be filed on to intervene or a protest with the condition of service that may result in or before the comment date, and, to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, WGR receiving a different quality of extent applicable, must be served on the 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC service than other customers. applicant and on any other person 20426, in accordance with sections TransColorado renegotiated the contract designated on the official service list. 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s with WRG and removed the objectiable This filing is available for review at the rules and regulations. All such motions language. The renegotiated contract is Commission or may be viewed on the or protests must be filed in accordance included with this filing and has an Commission’s Web site at http:// with section 154.210 of the effective date of April 1, 2002. Any person desiring to be heard or to www.ferc.gov, using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. Commission’s regulations. Protests will protest said filing should file a motion Enter the docket number excluding the be considered by the Commission in to intervene or a protest with the last three digits in the docket number determining the appropriate action to be filed to access the document. For Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, taken, but will not serve to make 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, protestants parties to the proceedings. (202) 502–8659. Protests and 20426, in accordance with sections Any person wishing to become a party 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s interventions may be filed electronically must file a motion to intervene. This via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 rules and regulations. All such motions filing is available for review at the or protests must be filed on or before CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Commission in the Public Reference instructions on the Commission’s Web October 3, 2002. Protests will be Room or may be viewed on the considered by the Commission in site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission’s Web site at http:// determining the appropriate action to be Commission strongly encourages www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. taken, but will not serve to make electronic filings. Comment Date: Enter the docket number excluding the protestants parties to the proceedings. October 21, 2002. last three digits in the docket number Any person wishing to become a party Linwood A. Watson, Jr., field to access the document. For must file a motion to intervene. This Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or for Deputy Secretary. filing is available for review at the TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Commission in the Public Reference [FR Doc. 02–25012 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] protests and interventions may be filed Room or may be viewed on the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P electronically via the Internet in lieu of Commission’s Web site at http:// paper. The Commission strongly www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Enter the docket number excluding the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the last three digits in the docket number

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61861

field to access the document. For Ltd. (WIC) tendered for filing as part of Hydroelectric Project, located on Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or for its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Pitchfork Falls, near the town of TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, Volume No. 2, the following tariff Skagway, in the First Judicial District, protests and interventions may be filed sheets, with an effective date of October Alaska, and has prepared a Final electronically via the Internet in lieu of 1, 2002: Environmental Assessment (FEA) for paper. The Commission strongly Substitute Original Sheet No. 36C.01 the project. The project occupies lands encourages electronic filings. See, 18 Ninth Revised Sheet No. 37C of the Tongass National Forest. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the First Revised Sheet No. 37C.01 The FEA contains the staff’s analysis instructions on the Commission’s Web Fifth Revised Sheet No. 37D of the potential environmental impacts site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. WIC states that this filing is being of the project and concludes that submitted to revise the North American licensing the project, with appropriate Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Energy Standards Board (NAESB) environmental protective measures, Deputy Secretary. Standards contained in WIC’s Tariff in would not constitute a major federal [FR Doc. 02–25028 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] compliance with the Commission’s action that would significantly affect the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P order in this proceeding. quality of the human environment. Any person desiring to protest said A copy of the FEA is available for filing should file a protest with the review at the Commission in the Public DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Reference Room or may be viewed on Federal Energy Regulatory 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC the Commission’s Web site at http:// Commission 20426, in accordance with Section www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Enter the docket number excluding the [Project No. 11886–002] Regulations. All such protests must be last three digits in the docket number filed in accordance with Section field to access the document. For Western Land Investments, Inc.; Notice 154.210 of the Commission’s assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for of Surrender of Preliminary Permit Regulations. Protests will be considered TTY, (202) 502–8659. September 26, 2002. by the Commission in determining the For further information, contact Take notice that Western Land appropriate action to be taken, but will Michael Henry at (503) 944–6762. Investments, Inc., permittee for the not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. This filing is available Linwood A. Watson, Jr., proposed River Side Project, has Deputy Secretary. requested that its preliminary permit be for review at the Commission in the [FR Doc. 02–25015 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] terminated. The permit was issued on Public Reference Room or may be June 22, 2001, and would have expired viewed on the Commission’s Web site at BILLING CODE 6717–01–P on May 31, 2004. The project would http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding have been located on the Snake River- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Boulder Rapids Reach in Twin Falls and the last three digits in the docket Gooding Counties, Idaho. number field to access the document. Federal Energy Regulatory The permittee filed the request on For Assistance, call (202)502–8222 or Commission August 5, 2002, and the preliminary for TTY, (202) 502–8659. The permit for Project No. 11886 shall Commission strongly encourages [Project No. 1354–005–California] remain in effect through the thirtieth electronic filings. See, 18 CFR Pacific Gas & Electric Company; day after issuance of this notice unless 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Notice of Availability of Supplemental that day is a Saturday, Sunday, or on the Commission’s Web site under the Environmental Assessment holiday as described in 18 CFR ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. 385.2007, in which case the permit shall Linwood A. Watson, Jr., September 26, 2002. remain in effect through the first Deputy Secretary. In accordance with the National business day following that day. New [FR Doc. 02–24886 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and applications involving this project site, the Federal Energy Regulatory BILLING CODE 6717–01–P to the extent provided for under 18 CFR Commission (Commission) regulations, part 4, may be filed on the next business 18 CFR part 380 (FERC Order No. 486, day. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Projects has reviewed the application Deputy Secretary. Federal Energy Regulatory for a new license for the Crane Valley Commission Project. Commission staff, with the U.S. [FR Doc. 02–25016 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Forest Service as a cooperating agency, [Project No. 11077–022, Alaska] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P has prepared a supplemental Goat Lake Hydro Inc.; Notice of environmental assessment (SEA) for the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Availability of Final Environmental project. The project is located on Assessment Willow Creek, South Fork Willow Federal Energy Regulatory Creek, North Fork Willow Creek, Commission September 26, 2002. Chilkoot Creek, and Chiquito Creek in In accordance with the National the San Joaquin River Basin in Madera [Docket No. RP02–440–001] Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and County, California. Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.; the Federal Energy Regulatory The SEA contains our analysis of the Notice of Compliance Filing Commission’s (Commission) potential environmental effects of the regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. existing project and concludes that September 25, 2002. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy licensing the project, with appropriate Take notice that on September 23, Projects has reviewed the application environmental measures, would not 2002, Wyoming Interstate Company, for license amendment for the Goat Lake constitute a major federal action

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61862 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

significantly affecting the quality of the For further information, please agencies, and interested organizations human environment. contact Jim Fargo at (202) 502–6095 or and individuals. A copy of the SEA is on file with the at [email protected]. The DEIS was noticed in the Federal Commission and is available for public Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Register on September 20, 2002 (61 FR 6243), and comments are due November inspection at the Commission in the Deputy Secretary. Public Reference Room, or it may be 19, 2002. The DEIS evaluates the [FR Doc. 02–25017 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] environmental consequences of the viewed on the Commission’s website at BILLING CODE 6717–01–P construction, operation, and http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ maintenance of the Box Canyon Project link. Enter the docket number, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY in Washington and Idaho. About 709 excluding the last three digits in the acres within the project boundary are docket number field, to access the Federal Energy Regulatory located on lands of the United States, document. For assistance, call (202) Commission including Kalispel Indian Reservation 502–8222 or (202) 502–8659 (for TTY). (493 acres), U.S. Forest Service Colville Any comments should be filed within [Project No. 2042–013, Washington, Idaho] National forest (182.93 acres), U.S. 45 days from the date of this notice and Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Department of energy, Bonneville Power should be addressed to Magalie R. Salas, Oreille County; Notice of Intention To Administration (24.14 acres) U.S. Fish Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Hold Puclic Meetings for Discussion of and Wildlife Service (2.45 acres), U.S. Commission, 888 First Street, NE., the Draft Environmental Impact Army Corps of Engineers (5.29 acres, Washington, DC 20426. Please affix Statement for the Box Canyon and U.S. Bureau of Land Management ‘‘Crane Valley Project No. 1354–005,’’ to Hydroelectric Project (1.44 acres). The DEIS also evaluates the all comments. Comments may be filed environmental effects of implementing electronically via the Internet in lieu of September 25, 2002. the applicant’s proposals, agency and paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) On September 9, 2002, the tribal recommendations, staff’s and the instructions on the Commission staff mailed the Box recommendations, and the no-action alternative. Commission’s website at http:// Canyon Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to the Two public meetings, which will be www.ferc.gov under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Environmental Protection Agency, recorded by an official stenographer, are resource and land management scheduled:

Date Time Location

Monday, October 21, 2002 ...... 7–10 p.m ...... Newport High School Cafeteria, 1400 West 5th Street, New- port, WA. Tuesday, October 22, 2002 ...... 2–5 p.m ...... Airport Ramada Inn, Spokane International Airport, Spokane, WA.

At these meetings, resource agency DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) personnel and other interested persons 745–0834. will have the opportunity to provide Federal Energy Regulatory i. FERC Contact: Any questions on oral and written comments and Commission this notice should be addressed to Mr. recommendations regarding the DEIS for [Project No. 11887–000] Lynn R. Miles, Sr. at (202) 502–8763. the Commission’s public record. j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene, protests and comments: 60 For further information, please Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, days from the issuance date of this contact Timothy Welch, at (202) 502– Motions to Intervene, and Protests notice. 8760, [email protected], All documents (original and eight Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, September 25, 2002. copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Office of Energy Projects, 888 First St. Take notice that the following Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy NE., Washington, DC 20426. hydroelectric application has been filed Regulatory Commission, 888 First with the Commission and is available Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., for public inspection: Comments, protests and interventions Deputy Secretary. a. Type of Application: Preliminary may be filed electronically via the [FR Doc. 02–24882 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Permit. Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR BILLING CODE 6717–01–P b. Project No: 12281–000. 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions c. Date Filed: June 26, 2002. on the Commission’s web site under the d. Applicant: Wilkins Hydro, LLC. ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Please include the e. Name of Project: Glover Wilkins project number (P–12281–000) on any Lock & Dam Hydroelectric Project. comments or motions filed. f. Location: The proposed project The Commission’s rules of practice would be located on an existing dam and procedure require all interveners owned by the U.S. Army Corps of filing documents with the Commission Engineers, on the Tombigbee River in to serve a copy of that document on Monroe County, Mississippi. each person in the official service list g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power for the project. Further, if an intervener Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). files comments or documents with the h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. Commission relating to the merits of an Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., issue that may affect the responsibilities

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61863

of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for on that resource agency. application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to k. Description of Project: The application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an proposed run-of-river project using the application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to existing Corps’ Glover Wilkins Lock & served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. Dam would consist of: (1) A 108-inch- public notice. diameter, 100-foot-long steel penstock, p. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., (2) a powerhouse containing one Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. generating unit with an installed does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24867 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] capacity of 2.25 MW, (3) a 15-kv term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P transmission line approximately 1 mile would be 36 months. The work long, and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed under the preliminary permit project would have an annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 18 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering Federal Energy Regulatory l. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Commission the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Notice of Application Accepted for Commission’s web site at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation Filing and Soliciting Comments, www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Protests, and Motions To Intervene Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. last three digits in the docket number q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to September 25, 2002. field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Take notice that the following assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to hydroelectric application has been filed TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the with the Commission and is available available for inspection and requirements of rules of practice and for public inspection: a. Type of reproduction at Wilkins Hydro, LLC, procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. Application: Preliminary Permit. b. 975 South State Highway, Logan, UT In determining the appropriate action to Project No.: 12213–000. c. Date filed: 84321, (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all June 4, 2002. d. Applicant: Hugo Hydro, m. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but LLC. e. Name and Location of Project: Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to The Hugo Dam Hydroelectric Project application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the would be located on the Kiamichi River proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a in Choctaw County, Oklahoma. The competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, proposed project would utilize an of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must existing dam administered by the U.S. the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). f. specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. U.S.C. 791(a)—825(r). g. Applicant Submission of a timely notice of intent r. Filing and Service of Responsive contact: Mr. Brent L. Smith, Northwest allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in Power Services, Inc., P.O. Box 535, competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title Rigby, ID 83442, (208) 745–0834, fax application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT (208) 745–0835. h. FERC Contact: Tom the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Papsidero, (202) 502–6002. i. Deadline particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, for filing comments, protests, and preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO motions to intervene: 60 days from the conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the issuance date of this notice. n. Competing Development Project Number of the particular All documents (original and eight Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. copies) should be filed with Magalie R. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy competing development application must be filed by providing the original Regulatory Commission, 888 First must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The Comments, protests and interventions particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory may be filed electronically via the competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division on the Commission’s web site under the notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory strongly encourages electronic filings. to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned Please include the project number (P– later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, 12213–000) on any comments or comment date for the particular competing application or motion to motions filed. application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each The Commission’s Rules of Practice application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant and Procedure require all interveners 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. filing documents with the Commission o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent s. Agency Comments—Federal, State, to serve a copy of that document on must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file each person in the official service list address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. for the project. Further, if an intervener prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be files comments or documents with the an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the Commission relating to the merits of an

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61864 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

issue that may affect the responsibilities and must include an unequivocal obtained by agencies directly from the of a particular resource agency, they statement of intent to submit, if such an Applicant. If an agency does not file must also serve a copy of the document application may be filed, either a comments within the time specified for on that resource agency. j. Description preliminary permit application or a filing comments, it will be presumed to of Project: The proposed project, using development application (specify which have no comments. One copy of an the Corps’ existing Hugo Dam and type of application). A notice of intent agency’s comments must also be sent to Reservoir, would consist of: (1) A must be served on the applicant(s) the Applicant’s representatives. proposed 200-foot-long, 10-foot- named in this public notice. o. Proposed Linwood A. Watson, Jr., diameter penstock, (2) a proposed Scope of Studies under Permit—A Deputy Secretary. powerhouse containing one generating preliminary permit, if issued, does not unit with an installed capacity of 3 authorize construction. The term of the [FR Doc. 02–24868 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] megawatts, (3) a proposed 1-mile-long, proposed preliminary permit would be BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 15-kv transmission line, and (4) 36 months. The work proposed under appurtenant facilities. The project the preliminary permit would include DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY would operate in a run-of-river mode economic analysis, preparation of and would have an average annual preliminary engineering plans, and a Federal Energy Regulatory generation of 13.5 GWh. k. This filing is study of environmental impacts. Based Commission available for review at the Commission on the results of these studies, the in the Public Reference Room or may be Applicant would decide whether to Notice of Application Accepted for viewed on the Commission’s website at proceed with the preparation of a Filing and Soliciting Comments, http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ development application to construct Protests, and Motions To Intervene link. Enter the docket number excluding and operate the project. p. Comments, the last three digits in the docket Protests, or Motions to Intervene— September 25, 2002. number field to access the document. Anyone may submit comments, a Take notice that the following For assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or protest, or a motion to intervene in hydroelectric application has been filed TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also accordance with the requirements of with the Commission and is available available for inspection and Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR for public inspection: reproduction at Hugo Hydro, LLC, 975 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the a. Type of Application: Preliminary South State Highway, Logan, UT 84321, appropriate action to take, the Permit. b. Project No.: 12223–000. (435) 752–2580. l. Competing Commission will consider all protests or c. Date filed: June 17, 2002. Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to other comments filed, but only those d. Applicant: Dierks Hydro, LLC. file a competing application for who file a motion to intervene in e. Name and Location of Project: The preliminary permit for a proposed accordance with the Commission’s Dierks Dam Project would be located on project must submit the competing Rules may become a party to the the Saline River in Sevier County, application itself, or a notice of intent to proceeding. Any comments, protests, or Arkansas. The proposed project would file such an application, to the motions to intervene must be received be located on an existing dam Commission on or before the specified on or before the specified comment date administered by the U.S. Corps of comment date for the particular for the particular application. q. Filing Engineers (Corps). application (see 18 CFR 4.36). and Service of Responsive Documents— f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Submission of a timely notice of intent Any filings must bear in all capital Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 791(a)–825(r). allows an interested person to file the letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. competing preliminary permit ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., application no later than 30 days after COMPETING APPLICATION’’, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) the specified comment date for the ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, 745–0834, Fax (208) 745–0835. particular application. A competing ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, preliminary permit application must INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the (202) 502–6002. conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. Project Number of the particular i. Deadline for filing comments, m. Competing Development application to which the filing refers. protests, and motions to intervene: 60 Application—Any qualified Any of the above-named documents days from the issuance date of this development applicant desiring to file a must be filed by providing the original notice. competing development application and the number of copies provided by All documents (original and eight must submit to the Commission, on or the Commission’s regulations to: The copies) should be filed with Magalie R. before a specified comment date for the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy particular application, either a Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Regulatory Commission, 888 First competing development application or a Washington, DC 20426. An additional Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. notice of intent to file such an copy must be sent to Director, Division Comments, protests and interventions application. Submission of a timely of Hydropower Administration and may be filed electronically via the notice of intent to file a development Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR application allows an interested person Commission, at the above-mentioned 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions to file the competing application no address. A copy of any notice of intent, on the Commission’s web site under the later than 120 days after the specified competing application or motion to ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission comment date for the particular intervene must also be served upon each strongly encourages electronic filings. application. A competing license representative of the Applicant Please include the project number (P– application must conform with 18 CFR specified in the particular application. r. 12223–000) on any comments or 4.30(b) and 4.36. n. Notice of Intent—A Agency Comments—Federal, state, and motions filed. notice of intent must specify the exact local agencies are invited to file The Commission’s rules of practice name, business address, and telephone comments on the described application. and procedure require all interveners number of the prospective applicant, A copy of the application may be filing documents with the Commission

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61865

to serve a copy of that document on application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant each person in the official service list 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. for the project. Further, if an intervener n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, files comments or documents with the must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file Commission relating to the merits of an address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. issue that may affect the responsibilities prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be of a particular resource agency, they an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the must also serve a copy of the document submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file on that resource agency. filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for j. Description of Project: The proposed application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to project would utilize the existing Corps’ application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an Dierks Dam and Reservoir and would application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to consist of: (1) a proposed 200-foot-long, served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. 6-foot-diameter penstock, (2) a proposed public notice. powerhouse containing one generating o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., unit with an installed capacity of 2 Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. megawatts, (3) a proposed 5-mile-long, does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24869 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 25-kv transmission line, and (4) term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P appurtenant facilities. The project would be 36 months. The work would operate in a run-of-river mode proposed under the preliminary permit and would have an average annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 18 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering k. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Commission Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Notice of Application Accepted for Commission’s website at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation Filing and Soliciting Comments, www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Protests, and Motions to Intervene Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. last three digits in the docket number p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to September 25, 2002. field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Take notice that the following assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, comments, a protest, or a motion to hydroelectric application has been filed (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available intervene in accordance with the with the Commission and is available for inspection and reproduction at requirements of rules of practice and for public inspection: Dierks Hydro, LLC, 975 South State procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. a. Type of Application: Preliminary Highway, Logan, UT 84321, (435) 752– In determining the appropriate action to Permit. 2580. take, the Commission will consider all b. Project No.: 12239–000. l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but c. Date filed: June 17, 2002. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to d. Applicant: Pactola Hydro, LLC. application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the e. Name and Location of Project: The proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a Pactola Dam Hydroelectric Project competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, would be located on Rapid Creek in of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Pennington County, South Dakota. The the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified proposed project would utilize an specified comment date for the comment date for the particular existing dam administered by the U.S. particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. Bureau or Reclamation (BOR) and Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive would be partially located on lands allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in administered by the BOR. competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 791(a)–825(r). the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the 745–0834, fax (208) 745–0835. m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. (202) 502–6002. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents i. Deadline for filing comments, competing development application must be filed by providing the original protests, and motions to intervene: 60 must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by days from the issuance date of this before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The notice. particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory All documents (original and eight competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE, copies) should be filed with Magalie R. notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division Regulatory Commission, 888 First notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Comments, protests and interventions to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned may be filed electronically via the later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR comment date for the particular competing application or motion to 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each on the Commission’s web site under the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61866 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional strongly encourages electronic filings. application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division Please include the project number (P– notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and 12239–000) on any comments or application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory motions filed. to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned The Commission’s rules of practice later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, and procedure require all interveners comment date for the particular competing application or motion to filing documents with the Commission application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each to serve a copy of that document on application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant each person in the official service list 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. for the project. Further, if an intervener n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, files comments or documents with the must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file Commission relating to the merits of an address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. issue that may affect the responsibilities prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be of a particular resource agency, they an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the must also serve a copy of the document submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file on that resource agency. filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for j. Description of Project: The proposed application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to project, using the BOR’s existing Pactola application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an Dam and Reservoir, would consist of: (1) application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to A proposed 500-foot-long, 4-foot- served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. diameter penstock, (2) a proposed public notice. powerhouse containing one generating o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., unit with an installed capacity of 1.3 Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. megawatts, (3) a proposed 5-mile-long, does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24870 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 15-kv transmission line, and (4) term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P appurtenant facilities. The project would be 36 months. The work would operate in a run-of-river mode proposed under the preliminary permit and would have an average annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 6 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering k. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Commission Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Commission’s website at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation Notice of Application Accepted for www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Filing and Soliciting Comments, Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. Protests, and Motions To Intervene last three digits in the docket number p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to September 25, 2002. field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Take notice that the following assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to hydroelectric application has been filed TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the with the Commission and is available available for inspection and requirements of Rules of Practice and for public inspection: reproduction at Pactola Hydro, LLC, 975 Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. a. Type of Application: Preliminary South State Highway, Logan, UT 84321, In determining the appropriate action to Permit. (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all b. Project No.: 12250–000. l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but c. Date filed: June 18, 2002. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to d. Applicant: Wesley E. Seale Hydro, application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the LLC. proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a e. Name and Location of Project: The competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, Wesley E. Seale Dam Hydroelectric of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Project would be located on the Nueces the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified River in Jim Wells County, Texas. The specified comment date for the comment date for the particular proposed project would be located on particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. an existing dam owned by the City of Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive Corpus Cristi and would not occupy any allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in federal lands or facilities. competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 791(a)–825(r). the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the 745–0834, fax (208) 745–0835. m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. (202) 502–6002. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents i. Deadline for filing comments, competing development application must be filed by providing the original protests, and motions to intervene: 60 must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by days from the issuance date of this before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The notice. particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory All documents (original and eight competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE, copies) should be filed with Magalie R.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61867

Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Regulatory Commission, 888 First the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Comments, protests and interventions preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO may be filed electronically via the conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. on the Commission’s web site under the development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission competing development application must be filed by providing the original strongly encourages electronic filings. must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Please include the project number (P– before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The 12250–000) on any comments or particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory motions filed. competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE, The Commission’s rules of practice notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional and procedure require all interveners application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division filing documents with the Commission notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and to serve a copy of that document on application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory each person in the official service list to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned for the project. Further, if an intervener later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, files comments or documents with the comment date for the particular competing application or motion to Commission relating to the merits of an application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each issue that may affect the responsibilities application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant of a particular resource agency, they 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. must also serve a copy of the document n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, on that resource agency. must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file j. Description of Project: The proposed address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. project would consist of: (1) An existing prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be 81-foot-high, 5,980-foot-long concrete an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the dam, (2) an existing impoundment, Lake submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file Corpus Christi, with a surface area of filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for 19,521 acres and a storage capacity of application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to 531,000 acre-feet at normal maximum application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an water surface elevation 93 feet, (3) a application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to proposed 200-foot-long, 6.5-foot- served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. diameter penstock, (4) a proposed public notice. powerhouse containing one generating o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., unit with an installed capacity of 1.3 Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. megawatts, (5) a proposed 1-mile-long, does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24871 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 15-kv transmission line, and (6) term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P appurtenant facilities. The project would be 36 months. The work would operate in a run-of-river mode proposed under the preliminary permit and would have an average annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 3.9 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering k. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Commission Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide [Project No. 11887–000] Commission’s website at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Notice of Application Accepted for Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. Filing and Soliciting Comments, last three digits in the docket number p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Motions To Intervene, and Protests field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, comments, a protest, or a motion to September 25, 2002. (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available intervene in accordance with the Take notice that the following for inspection and reproduction at requirements of Rules of Practice and hydroelectric application has been filed Wesley E. Seale Hydro, LLC, 975 South Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. with the Commission and is available State Highway, Logan, UT 84321, (435) In determining the appropriate action to for public inspection: 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all a. Type of Application: Preliminary l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but Permit. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to b. Project No: 12267–000. application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the c. Date Filed: June 24, 2002. proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a d. Applicant: MSR No. 27 Hydro, competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, LLC. of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must e. Name of Project: Mississippi Lock the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified & Dam No. 27 Hydroelectric Project. specified comment date for the comment date for the particular f. Location: The proposed project particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. would be located on an existing dam Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive owned by the U.S. Army Corps of allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in Engineers, on the Mississippi River in competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title Madison County, Illinois.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61868 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Act, 16 U.S.C. §§791(a)–825(r). the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) Submission of a timely notice of intent r. Filing and Service of Responsive 745–0834. allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in i. FERC Contact: Any questions on competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title this notice should be addressed to Mr. application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Lynn R. Miles, Sr. at (202) 502–8763. the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, j. Deadline for filing motions to particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, intervene, protests and comments: 60 preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO days from the issuance date of this conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the notice. n. Competing Development Project Number of the particular All documents (original and eight Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy competing development application must be filed by providing the original Regulatory Commission, 888 First must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The Comments, protests and interventions particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory may be filed electronically via the competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division on the Commission’s web site under the notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Please include the application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory project number (P–12267–000) on any to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned comments or motions filed. later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, The Commission’s Rules of Practice comment date for the particular competing application or motion to and Procedure require all interveners application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each filing documents with the Commission application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant to serve a copy of that document on 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. each person in the official service list o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, for the project. Further, if an intervener must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file files comments or documents with the address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. Commission relating to the merits of an prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be issue that may affect the responsibilities an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for on that resource agency. application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to k. Description of Project: The application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an proposed run-of-river project using the application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to existing Corps’ Mississippi Lock & Dam served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. No. 27 would consist of: (1) Two 600- public notice. inch-diameter, 50-foot-long concrete p. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., penstocks, (2) a powerhouse containing Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. two generating units with an installed does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24872 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] capacity of 40 MW, (3) a 50-kv term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P transmission line approximately 1 mile would be 36 months. The work long, and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed under the preliminary permit project would have an annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 336 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering l. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Commission Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Commission’s website at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation Notice of Application Accepted for www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Filing and Soliciting Comments, Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. Protests, and Motions To Intervene last three digits in the docket number q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to September 25, 2002. field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Take notice that the following assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to hydroelectric application has been filed TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the with the Commission and is available available for inspection and requirements of Rules of Practice and for public inspection: reproduction at the MSR No. 27 Hydro, Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. a. Type of Application: Preliminary LLC, 975 South State Highway, Logan, In determining the appropriate action to Permit. UT 84321, (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all b. Project No.: 12268–000. m. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but c. Date filed: June 24, 2002. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to d. Applicant: Wappapello Hydro, application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the LLC. proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a e. Name and Location of Project: The competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, Wappapello Dam Hydroelectric Project

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61869

would be located on the St. Francis LLC, 975 South State Highway, Logan, In determining the appropriate action to River in Wayne County, Missouri. The UT 84321, (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all proposed project would utilize an l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but existing dam administered by the U.S. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to Army Corps of Engineers. application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 791(a)–825(r). competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Telephone (208) 745–0834. particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive (202) 502–6002. allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in i. Deadline for filing comments, competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title protests, and motions to intervene: 60 application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT days from the issuance date of this the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, notice. particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, All documents (original and eight preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO copies) should be filed with Magalie R. conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy m. Competing Development Regulatory Commission, 888 First Project Number of the particular Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. development applicant desiring to file a Comments, protests, and interventions Any of the above-named documents competing development application must be filed by providing the original may be filed electronically via the must submit to the Commission, on or Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR and the number of copies provided by before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions particular application, either a on the Commission’s web site under the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission notice of intent to file such an strongly encourages electronic filings. Washington, DC 20426. An additional application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division Please include the project number (P– notice of intent to file a development 12268–000) on any comments or of Hydropower Administration and application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory motions filed. to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned The Commission’s rules of practice later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, and procedure require all interveners comment date for the particular competing application or motion to filing documents with the Commission application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each to serve a copy of that document on application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant each person in the official service list 4.30(b) and 4.36. for the project. Further, if an intervener n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent specified in the particular application. files comments or documents with the must specify the exact name, business r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, Commission relating to the merits of an address, and telephone number of the and local agencies are invited to file issue that may affect the responsibilities prospective applicant, and must include comments on the described application. of a particular resource agency, they an unequivocal statement of intent to A copy of the application may be must also serve a copy of the document submit, if such an application may be obtained by agencies directly from the on that resource agency. filed, either a preliminary permit Applicant. If an agency does not file j. Description of Project: The proposed application or a development comments within the time specified for project, using the Corps’ existing application (specify which type of filing comments, it will be presumed to Wappapello Dam and Reservoir, would application). A notice of intent must be have no comments. One copy of an consist of: (1) A proposed 200-foot-long, served on the applicant(s) named in this agency’s comments must also be sent to 7-foot-diameter penstock, (2) a proposed public notice. the Applicant’s representatives. powerhouse containing one generating o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr., unit with an installed capacity of 2.5 Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Deputy Secretary. megawatts, (3) a proposed 1-mile-long, does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 02–24873 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 25-kv transmission line, and (4) term of the proposed preliminary permit appurtenant facilities. The project would be 36 months. The work BILLING CODE 6717–01–P would operate in a run-of-river mode proposed under the preliminary permit and would have an average annual would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generation of 18.5 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering k. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these Commission Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Commission’s Web site at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation [Project No. 11887–000] www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. Notice of Application Accepted for last three digits in the docket number p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Filing and Soliciting Comments, field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Motions to Intervene, and Protests assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the September 25, 2002. available for inspection and requirements of Rules of Practice and Take notice that the following reproduction at Wappapello Hydro, Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. hydroelectric application has been filed

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61870 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

with the Commission and is available Enter the docket number excluding the of a development application to for public inspection: last three digits in the docket number construct and operate the project. a. Type of Application: Preliminary field to access the document. For q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Permit. assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for Intervene—Anyone may submit b. Project No: 12271–000. TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also comments, a protest, or a motion to c. Date Filed: June 25, 2002. available for inspection and intervene in accordance with the d. Applicant: Bevill Hydro, LLC. reproduction at the Bevill Hydro, LLC, requirements of Rules of Practice and e. Name of Project: Bevill Lock And 975 South State Highway, Logan, UT, Dam Hydroelectric Project. 84321, (435) 752–2580. Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to f. Location: The proposed project m. Competing Preliminary Permit— would be located on an existing dam Anyone desiring to file a competing take, the Commission will consider all owned by the U.S. Army Corps of application for preliminary permit for a protests or other comments filed, but Engineers, on the Tombigbee River in proposed project must submit the only those who file a motion to Pickens County, Alabama. competing application itself, or a notice intervene in accordance with the g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power of intent to file such an application, to Commission’s rules may become a party Act, 16 U.S.C. §§791(a)–825(r). the Commission on or before the to the proceeding. Any comments, h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. specified comment date for the protests, or motions to intervene must Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). be received on or before the specified P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) Submission of a timely notice of intent comment date for the particular 745–0834. application. i. FERC Contact: Any questions on allows an interested person to file the this notice should be addressed to Mr. competing preliminary permit r. Filing and Service of Responsive Lynn R. Miles, Sr. at (202) 502–8763. application no later than 30 days after Documents—Any filings must bear in j. Deadline for filing motions to the specified comment date for the all capital letters the title intervene, protests and comments: 60 particular application. A competing ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT days from the issuance date of this preliminary permit application must TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. notice. ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, n. Competing Development All documents (original and eight ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO Application—Any qualified copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the development applicant desiring to file a Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Project Number of the particular competing development application Regulatory Commission, 888 First application to which the filing refers. Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the Any of the above-named documents Comments, protests and interventions must be filed by providing the original may be filed electronically via the particular application, either a and the number of copies provided by Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR competing development application or a the Commission’s regulations to: The 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions notice of intent to file such an Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory on the Commission’s web site under the application. Submission of a timely ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Please include the notice of intent to file a development Commission, 888 First Street, NE, project number (P–12271–000) on any application allows an interested person Washington, DC 20426. An additional comments or motions filed. to file the competing application no copy must be sent to Director, Division The Commission’s rules of practice later than 120 days after the specified of Hydropower Administration and and procedure require all interveners comment date for the particular Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory filing documents with the Commission application. A competing license Commission, at the above-mentioned to serve a copy of that document on application must conform with 18 CFR address. A copy of any notice of intent, each person in the official service list 4.30(b) and 4.36. competing application or motion to for the project. Further, if an intervener o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent intervene must also be served upon each files comments or documents with the must specify the exact name, business representative of the Applicant Commission relating to the merits of an address, and telephone number of the specified in the particular application. prospective applicant, and must include issue that may affect the responsibilities s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, an unequivocal statement of intent to of a particular resource agency, they and local agencies are invited to file submit, if such an application may be must also serve a copy of the document comments on the described application. on that resource agency. filed, either a preliminary permit A copy of the application may be k. Description of Project: The application or a development proposed run-of-river project using the application (specify which type of obtained by agencies directly from the existing Corps’ Bevill Lock and Dam application). A notice of intent must be Applicant. If an agency does not file would consist of: (1) Two 156-inch- served on the applicant(s) named in this comments within the time specified for diameter, 50-foot-long concrete public notice. filing comments, it will be presumed to penstocks, (2) a powerhouse containing p. Proposed Scope of Studies under have no comments. One copy of an two generating units with a total Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, agency’s comments must also be sent to installed capacity of 20 MW, (3) a 50- does not authorize construction. The the Applicant’s representatives. kv transmission line approximately 1 term of the proposed preliminary permit Linwood A. Watson, Jr., mile long, and (4) appurtenant facilities. would be 36 months. The work The project would have an annual proposed under the preliminary permit Deputy Secretary. generation of 336 GWh. would include economic analysis, [FR Doc. 02–24874 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] l. This filing is available for review at preparation of preliminary engineering BILLING CODE 6717–01–P the Commission in the Public Reference plans, and a study of environmental Room or may be viewed on the impacts. Based on the results of these Commission’s web site at http:// studies, the Applicant would decide www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. whether to proceed with the preparation

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61871

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY diameter penstock, (2) a proposed served on the applicant(s) named in this powerhouse containing one generating public notice. Federal Energy Regulatory unit with an installed capacity of 1 o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Commission megawatt, (3) a proposed 1-mile-long, Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, 15–kv transmission line, and (4) does not authorize construction. The Notice of Application Accepted for appurtenant facilities. The project term of the proposed preliminary permit Filing and Soliciting Comments, would operate in a run-of-river mode would be 36 months. The work Protests, and Motions To Intervene and would have an average annual proposed under the preliminary permit September 25, 2002. generation of 6 GWh. would include economic analysis, Take notice that the following k. This filing is available for review at preparation of preliminary engineering hydroelectric application has been filed the Commission in the Public Reference plans, and a study of environmental with the Commission and is available Room or may be viewed on the impacts. Based on the results of these for public inspection: Commission’s Web site at http:// studies, the Applicant would decide a. Type of Application: Preliminary www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. whether to proceed with the preparation Permit. Enter the docket number excluding the of a development application to b. Project No.: 12291–000. last three digits in the docket number construct and operate the project. c. Date filed: July 5, 2002. field to access the document. For p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to d. Applicant: Beach City Hydro, LLC. assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or TTY, Intervene—Anyone may submit e. Name and Location of Project: The (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available comments, a protest, or a motion to Beach City Dam Hydroelectric Project for inspection and reproduction at intervene in accordance with the would be located on the Sugar Creek in Beach City Hydro, LLC, 975 South State requirements of Rules of Practice and Tuscarawas County, Ohio. The Highway, Logan, UT 84321, (435) 752– Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. proposed project would utilize an 2580. In determining the appropriate action to existing dam administered by the U.S. l. Competing Preliminary Permit— take, the Commission will consider all Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Anyone desiring to file a competing protests or other comments filed, but f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power application for preliminary permit for a only those who file a motion to Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). proposed project must submit the intervene in accordance with the g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. competing application itself, or a notice Commission’s Rules may become a Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., of intent to file such an application, to party to the proceeding. Any comments, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) the Commission on or before the protests, or motions to intervene must 745–0834, fax (208) 745–0835. specified comment date for the be received on or before the specified h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). comment date for the particular (202) 502–6002. Submission of a timely notice of intent application. i. Deadline for filing comments, allows an interested person to file the q. Filing and Service of Responsive protests, and motions to intervene: 60 competing preliminary permit Documents—Any filings must bear in days from the issuance date of this application no later than 30 days after all capital letters the title notice. the specified comment date for the ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT All documents (original and eight particular application. A competing TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, copies) should be filed with Magalie R. preliminary permit application must ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO Regulatory Commission, 888 First m. Competing Development INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. Application—Any qualified Project Number of the particular Comments, protests and interventions development applicant desiring to file a application to which the filing refers. may be filed electronically via the competing development application Any of the above-named documents Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR must submit to the Commission, on or must be filed by providing the original 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions before a specified comment date for the and the number of copies provided by on the Commission’s Web site under the particular application, either a the Commission’s regulations to: The ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission competing development application or a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory strongly encourages electronic filings. notice of intent to file such an Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Please include the project number (P– application. Submission of a timely Washington, DC 20426. An additional 12291–000) on any comments or notice of intent to file a development copy must be sent to Director, Division motions filed. application allows an interested person of Hydropower Administration and The Commission’s Rules of Practice to file the competing application no Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory and Procedure require all interveners later than 120 days after the specified Commission, at the above-mentioned filing documents with the Commission comment date for the particular address. A copy of any notice of intent, to serve a copy of that document on application. A competing license competing application or motion to each person in the official service list application must conform with 18 CFR intervene must also be served upon each for the project. Further, if an intervener 4.30(b) and 4.36. representative of the Applicant files comments or documents with the n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent specified in the particular application. Commission relating to the merits of an must specify the exact name, business r. Agency Comments—Federal, State, issue that may affect the responsibilities address, and telephone number of the and local agencies are invited to file of a particular resource agency, they prospective applicant, and must include comments on the described application. must also serve a copy of the document an unequivocal statement of intent to A copy of the application may be on that resource agency. submit, if such an application may be obtained by agencies directly from the j. Description of Project: The proposed filed, either a preliminary permit Applicant. If an agency does not file project, using the Corps’ existing Beach application or a development comments within the time specified for City Dam and Reservoir, would consist application (specify which type of filing comments, it will be presumed to of: (1) A proposed 200-foot-long, 6-foot- application). A notice of intent must be have no comments. One copy of an

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61872 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

agency’s comments must also be sent to of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be the Applicant’s representatives. must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit on that resource agency. application or a development Linwood A. Watson, Jr., k. Description of Project: The application (specify which type of Deputy Secretary. proposed run-of-river project using the application). A notice of intent must be [FR Doc. 02–24875 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] existing Corps’ Huntington Dam and served on the applicant(s) named in this BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Lake would consist of: (1) A 72-inch- public notice. diameter, 200-foot-long steel penstock, p. Proposed Scope of Studies under (2) a powerhouse containing one Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY generating unit with an installed does not authorize construction. The capacity of 1.8 MW, (3) a 15–kv term of the proposed preliminary permit Federal Energy Regulatory transmission line approximately 2 miles would be 36 months. The work Commission long; and (4) appurtenant facilities. The proposed under the preliminary permit Notice of Application Accepted for project would have an annual would include economic analysis, Filing and Soliciting Comments, generation of 7.8 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering l. This filing is available for review at Motions To Intervene, and Protests plans, and a study of environmental the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these September 25, 2002. Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide Take notice that the following Commission’s Web site at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation hydroelectric application has been filed www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to with the Commission and is available Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. for public inspection: last three digits in the docket number q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to a. Type of Application: Preliminary field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit Permit. assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to b. Project No: 12294–000. TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the c. Date Filed: July 5, 2002. available for inspection and requirements of Rules of Practice and d. Applicant: Huntington Hydro, LLC. reproduction at the Huntington Hydro, Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. e. Name of Project: Huntington Lake LLC, 975 South State Highway, Logan, In determining the appropriate action to Dam Hydroelectric Project. UT, 84321, (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all f. Location: The proposed project m. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but would be located on an existing dam Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to owned by the U.S. Army Corps of application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the Engineers, on the Wabash River in proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a Huntington County, Indiana. competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, (208) Submission of a timely notice of intent r. Filing and Service of Responsive 745–0834. allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in i. FERC Contact: Any questions on competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title this notice should be addressed to Mr. application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Lynn R. Miles, Sr. at (202) 502–8763 the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, j. Deadline for filing motions to particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, intervene, protests and comments: 60 preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO days from the issuance date of this conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the notice. n. Competing Development Project Number of the particular All documents (original and eight Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy competing development application must be filed by providing the original Regulatory Commission, 888 First must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The Comments, protests and interventions particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory may be filed electronically via the competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division on the Commission’s Web site under the notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Please include the application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory project number (P–12294–000) on any to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned comments or motions filed. later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, The Commission’s Rules of Practice comment date for the particular competing application or motion to and Procedure require all interveners application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each filing documents with the Commission application must conform with 18 CFR representative of the Applicant to serve a copy of that document on 4.30(b) and 4.36. specified in the particular application. each person in the official service list o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, for the project. Further, if an intervener must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file files comments or documents with the address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. Commission relating to the merits of an prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be issue that may affect the responsibilities an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61873

Applicant. If an agency does not file filing documents with the Commission application must conform with 18 CFR comments within the time specified for to serve a copy of that document on 4.30(b) and 4.36. filing comments, it will be presumed to each person in the official service list n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent have no comments. One copy of an for the project. Further, if an intervener must specify the exact name, business agency’s comments must also be sent to files comments or documents with the address, and telephone number of the the Applicant’s representatives. Commission relating to the merits of an prospective applicant, and must include issue that may affect the responsibilities an unequivocal statement of intent to Linwood A. Watson, Jr., of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be Deputy Secretary. must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit [FR Doc. 02–24876 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] on that resource agency. application or a development BILLING CODE 6717–01–P j. Description of Project: The proposed application (specify which type of project, using the Corps’ existing application). A notice of intent must be Monongahela L&D No. 4 and Reservoir, served on the applicant(s) named in this DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY would consist of: (1) Two proposed 40- public notice. foot-long, 10-foot-diameter penstocks, o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Federal Energy Regulatory (2) a proposed powerhouse containing Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Commission two generating units with a combined does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit Notice of Application Accepted for installed capacity of 4.1 megawatts, (3) would be 36 months. The work Filing and Soliciting Comments, a proposed 200-foot-long, 14.7–kv transmission line, and (4) appurtenant proposed under the preliminary permit Protests, and Motions To Intervene facilities. The project would operate in would include economic analysis, September 25, 2002. a run-of-river mode and would have an preparation of preliminary engineering Take notice that the following average annual generation of 25 GWh. plans, and a study of environmental hydroelectric application has been filed k. This filing is available for review at impacts. Based on the results of these with the Commission and is available the Commission in the Public Reference studies, the Applicant would decide for public inspection: Room or may be viewed on the whether to proceed with the preparation a. Type of Application: Preliminary Commission’s Web site at http:// of a development application to Permit. www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. construct and operate the project. b. Project No.: 12307–000. Enter the docket number excluding the p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to c. Date filed: July 17, 2002. last three digits in the docket number Intervene—Anyone may submit d. Applicant: Universal Electric field to access the document. For comments, a protest, or a motion to Power Corporation. assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for intervene in accordance with the e. Name and Location of Project: The TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also requirements of Rules of Practice and Monongahela L&D No. 4 Hydroelectric available for inspection and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. Project would be located on the reproduction at the applicant’s address In determining the appropriate action to Monongahela River in Westmoreland in item g above. take, the Commission will consider all County, Pennsylvania. The proposed l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but project would utilize an existing dam Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to administered by the U.S. Army Corps of application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the Engineers (Corps). proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)—825(r). of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must g. Applicant contact: Mr. Raymond the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified Helter, Universal Electric Power specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Corporation, 1145 Highbrook Street, particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. Akron, OH 44301, (330) 535–7115. Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in (202) 502–6002. competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title i. Deadline for filing comments, application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT protests, and motions to intervene: 60 the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, days from the issuance date of this particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, notice. preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO All documents (original and eight conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the copies) should be filed with Magalie R. m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. Regulatory Commission, 888 First development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. competing development application must be filed by providing the original Comments, protests, and interventions must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by may be filed electronically via the before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE, on the Commission’s Web site under the notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division strongly encourages electronic filings. notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and Please include the project number (P– application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory 12307–000) on any comments or to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned motions filed. later than 120 days after the specified address. A copy of any notice of intent, The Commission’s Rules of Practice comment date for the particular competing application or motion to and Procedure require all interveners application. A competing license intervene must also be served upon each

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61874 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

representative of the Applicant strongly encourages electronic filings. application. Submission of a timely specified in the particular application. Please include the project number (P– notice of intent to file a development r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, 12309–000) on any comments or application allows an interested person and local agencies are invited to file motions filed. to file the competing application no comments on the described application. The Commission’s Rules of Practice later than 120 days after the specified A copy of the application may be and Procedure require all interveners comment date for the particular obtained by agencies directly from the filing documents with the Commission application. A competing license Applicant. If an agency does not file to serve a copy of that document on application must conform with 18 CFR comments within the time specified for each person in the official service list 4.30(b) and 4.36. filing comments, it will be presumed to for the project. Further, if an intervener n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent have no comments. One copy of an files comments or documents with the must specify the exact name, business agency’s comments must also be sent to Commission relating to the merits of an address, and telephone number of the the Applicant’s representatives. issue that may affect the responsibilities prospective applicant, and must include of a particular resource agency, they an unequivocal statement of intent to Linwood A. Watson, Jr., must also serve a copy of the document submit, if such an application may be Deputy Secretary. on that resource agency. filed, either a preliminary permit [FR Doc. 02–24877 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] j. Description of Project: The proposed application or a development BILLING CODE 6717–01–P project, using the Corps’ existing Ohio application (specify which type of River Lock and Dam No. 52, would application). A notice of intent must be consist of: (1) Two proposed 50-foot- served on the applicant(s) named in this DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY long, 16-foot-diameter penstocks, (2) a public notice. proposed powerhouse containing two o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Federal Energy Regulatory generating units with a combined Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Commission installed capacity of 20 megawatts, (3) a does not authorize construction. The proposed 1-mile-long, 50-kv term of the proposed preliminary permit Notice of Application Accepted for transmission line, and (4) appurtenant would be 36 months. The work Filing and Soliciting Comments, facilities. The project would operate in proposed under the preliminary permit Protests, and Motions To Intervene a run-of-river mode and would have an would include economic analysis, September 25, 2002. average annual generation of 160 GWh. preparation of preliminary engineering Take notice that the following k. This filing is available for review at plans, and a study of environmental hydroelectric application has been filed the Commission in the Public Reference impacts. Based on the results of these with the Commission and is available Room or may be viewed on the studies, the Applicant would decide for public inspection: Commission’s Web site at http:// whether to proceed with the preparation a. Type of Application: Preliminary www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. of a development application to Permit. Enter the docket number excluding the construct and operate the project. b. Project No.: 12309–000. last three digits in the docket number p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to c. Date filed: July 15, 2002. field to access the document. For Intervene—Anyone may submit d. Applicant: Ohio River L&D 52 assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for comments, a protest, or a motion to Hydro, LLC. TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also intervene in accordance with the e. Name and Location of Project: The available for inspection and requirements of Rules of Practice and Ohio River L&D No. 52 Hydroelectric reproduction at Ohio River L&D 52 Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. Project would be located on the Ohio Hydro, LLC, 975 South State Highway, In determining the appropriate action to River in McCracken County, Kentucky. Logan, UT 84321, (435) 752–2580. take, the Commission will consider all The proposed project would utilize an l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but existing dam administered by the U.S. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Brent L. of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Smith, Northwest Power Services, Inc., the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442, specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Telephone (208) 745–0834. particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive (202) 502–6002. allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in i. Deadline for filing comments, competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title protests, and motions to intervene: 60 application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT days from the issuance date of this the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, notice. particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, All documents (original and eight preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO copies) should be filed with Magalie R. conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular Regulatory Commission, 888 First Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents Comments, protests, and interventions competing development application must be filed by providing the original may be filed electronically via the must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory on the Commission’s Web site under the competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61875

copy must be sent to Director, Division Regulatory Commission, 888 First development applicant desiring to file a of Hydropower Administration and Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. competing development application Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Comments, protests, and interventions must submit to the Commission, on or Commission, at the above-mentioned may be filed electronically via the before a specified comment date for the address. A copy of any notice of intent, Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR particular application, either a competing application or motion to 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions competing development application or a intervene must also be served upon each on the Commission’s Web site under the notice of intent to file such an representative of the Applicant ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. The Commission application. Submission of a timely specified in the particular application. strongly encourages electronic filings. notice of intent to file a development r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, Please include the project number (P– application allows an interested person and local agencies are invited to file 12324–000) on any comments or to file the competing application no comments on the described application. motions filed. later than 120 days after the specified A copy of the application may be The Commission’s Rules of Practice comment date for the particular obtained by agencies directly from the and Procedure require all interveners application. A competing license Applicant. If an agency does not file filing documents with the Commission application must conform with 18 CFR comments within the time specified for to serve a copy of that document on 4.30(b) and 4.36. filing comments, it will be presumed to each person in the official service list n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent have no comments. One copy of an for the project. Further, if an intervener must specify the exact name, business agency’s comments must also be sent to files comments or documents with the address, and telephone number of the the Applicant’s representatives. Commission relating to the merits of an prospective applicant, and must include issue that may affect the responsibilities an unequivocal statement of intent to Linwood A. Watson, Jr., of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be Deputy Secretary. must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit [FR Doc. 02–24878 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] on that resource agency. application or a development BILLING CODE 6717–01–P j. Description of Project: The proposed application (specify which type of project, using the Corps’ existing application). A notice of intent must be Aberdeen Lock and Dam and Reservoir, served on the applicant(s) named in this DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY would consist of: (1) Two proposed 80- public notice. foot-long, 6-foot-diameter steel o. Proposed Scope of Studies under Federal Energy Regulatory penstocks, (2) a proposed powerhouse Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Commission containing two generating units with a does not authorize construction. The combined installed capacity of 2.7 term of the proposed preliminary permit Notice of Application Accepted for megawatts, (3) a proposed 700-foot-long, would be 36 months. The work Filing and Soliciting Comments, 14.7-kv transmission line, and (4) proposed under the preliminary permit Protests, and Motions To Intervene appurtenant facilities. The project would include economic analysis, September 25, 2002. would operate in a run-of-river mode preparation of preliminary engineering Take notice that the following and would have an average annual plans, and a study of environmental hydroelectric application has been filed generation of 17 GWh. k. This filing is impacts. Based on the results of these with the Commission and is available available for review at the Commission studies, the Applicant would decide for public inspection: in the Public Reference Room or may be whether to proceed with the preparation a. Type of Application: Preliminary viewed on the Commission’s Web site at of a development application to Permit. http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ construct and operate the project. b. Project No.: 12324–000. link. Enter the docket number excluding p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to c. Date filed: August 2, 2002. the last three digits in the docket Intervene—Anyone may submit d. Applicant: Universal Electric number field to access the document. comments, a protest, or a motion to Power Corporation. For assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or intervene in accordance with the e. Name and Location of Project: The for TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also requirements of Rules of Practice and Aberdeen L&D Hydroelectric Project available for inspection and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. would be located on the Tombigbee reproduction at the address in item g. In determining the appropriate action to River in Monroe County, Mississippi. above. take, the Commission will consider all The proposed project would utilize an l. Competing Preliminary Permit— protests or other comments filed, but existing dam administered by the U.S. Anyone desiring to file a competing only those who file a motion to Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). application for preliminary permit for a intervene in accordance with the f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power proposed project must submit the Commission’s Rules may become a Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). competing application itself, or a notice party to the proceeding. Any comments, g. Applicant contact: Mr. Raymond of intent to file such an application, to protests, or motions to intervene must Helter, Universal Electric Power the Commission on or before the be received on or before the specified Corporation, 1145 Highbrook Street, specified comment date for the comment date for the particular Akron, OH 44301, Telephone (330) 535– particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). application. 7115. Submission of a timely notice of intent q. Filing and Service of Responsive h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, allows an interested person to file the Documents—Any filings must bear in (202) 502–6002. competing preliminary permit all capital letters the title i. Deadline for filing comments, application no later than 30 days after ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT protests, and motions to intervene: 60 the specified comment date for the TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, days from the issuance date of this particular application. A competing ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, notice. preliminary permit application must ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO All documents (original and eight conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the copies) should be filed with Magalie R. m. Competing Development Project Number of the particular Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Application—Any qualified application to which the filing refers.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61876 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Any of the above-named documents j. Deadline for Comments: 30 days Commission staff performs the must be filed by providing the original from the date of this notice. environmental review after the and the number of copies provided by All documents (original and eight application is filed. The alternative the Commission’s regulations to: The copies) should be filed with Magalie R. procedures are intended to simplify and Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy expedite the licensing process by Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Regulatory Commission, 888 First combining the pre-filing consultation Washington, DC 20426. An additional Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. and environmental review processes copy must be sent to Director, Division Comments may be filed electronically into a single process, to facilitate greater of Hydropower Administration and via the Internet in lieu of paper. The participation, and to improve Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission strongly encourages communication and cooperation among Commission, at the above-mentioned electronic filings. See 18 CFR the participants. address. A copy of any notice of intent, 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. has contacted competing application or motion to on the Commission’s Web site (http:// federal and state resources agencies, intervene must also be served upon each www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. NGOs, elected officials, flood control representative of the Applicant k. The existing project consists of a 16.5- and downstream interests, specified in the particular application. foot-high timber dam at the outlet of environmental groups, business and r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, Upper Lake, creating a reservoir of economic development organizations, and local agencies are invited to file approximately 8 acres at the maximum the boating industry, and members of comments on the described application. reservoir elevation of 431 feet (local the public regarding the Chignik Project. A copy of the application may be datum), a channel spillway, a 7,700- NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. intends to file obtained by agencies directly from the foot-long, 8-inch-diameter wood-stave 6-month progress reports during the Applicant. If an agency does not file and steel pipeline, a 60-kW generating alternative procedures process that comments within the time specified for unit inside the applicant’s fish cannery, leads to the filing of a license filing comments, it will be presumed to the generator leads, and appurtenant application by October 4, 2003. have no comments. One copy of an facilities. No new facilities are proposed. l. A copy of the request to use Linwood A. Watson, Jr., agency’s comments must also be sent to Deputy Secretary. the Applicant’s representatives. alternative procedures is available for review at the Commission in the Public [FR Doc. 02–24881 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Reference Room or may be viewed on BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Deputy Secretary. the Commission’s Web site at http:// [FR Doc. 02–24879 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number Federal Energy Regulatory field to access the document. For Commission DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also Notice of Application Ready for Federal Energy Regulatory available for inspection and Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Commission reproduction at the address in item h Comments, Recommendations, Terms above. m. NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. has and Conditions, and Prescriptions Notice of Request To Use Alternative demonstrated that it has made an effort Procedures in Preparing a License to contact all federal and state resources September 26, 2002. Application agencies, non-governmental Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed September 25, 2002. organizations (NGO), and others affected by the project. NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. with the Commission and is available Take notice that the following request has also demonstrated that a consensus for public inspection. a. Type of to use alternative procedures to prepare exists that the use of alternative Application: New Major License. b. a license application has been filed with procedures is appropriate in this case. Project No.: 2090–003. c. Date filed: the Commission. NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. has submitted a August 31, 1999. d. Applicant: Green a. Type of Application: Request to use communications protocol that is Mountain Power Corporation. e. Name alternative procedures to prepare a new supported by the stakeholders. of Project: Waterbury Project. f. license application. The purpose of this notice is to invite Location: On Little River in Washington b. Project No.: 620. any additional comments on NorQuest County, Vermont. No Federal Lands c. Date filed: July 6, 2002. Seafoods, Inc.’s request to use the used in this project. g. Filed Pursuant to: d. Applicant: NorQuest Seafoods, Inc. alternative procedures, pursuant to Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a) e. Name of Project: Chignik Project. Section 4.34(i) of the Commission’s -825(r). h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Craig f. Location: On Indian Creek, a regulations. Additional notices seeking T. Myotte, Green Mountain Power tributary of Chignik Bay, in Chignik, comments on the specific project Corporation, 163 Action Lane, Alaska. The project occupies 38.89 acres proposal, interventions and protests, Colchester, VT 05446, (802) 660–5830. i. of United States lands under the and recommended terms and conditions FERC Contact: Any questions on this supervision of the U.S. Bureau of Land will be issued at a later date. NorQuest notice should be addressed to Sergiu Management. Seafoods, Inc. will complete and file a Serban, E-mail g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power preliminary Environmental Assessment, address,[email protected], or Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)—825(r). in lieu of Exhibit E of the license telephone 202–502–6211 j. Deadline for h. Applicant Contact: Daniel Hertrich, application. This differs from the filing motions to intervene and protests: Polarconsult Alaska, Inc., 1503 W. 33rd traditional process, in which an 60 days from the issuance date of this Avenue, #310, Anchorage, AK 99503, applicant consults with agencies, Indian notice. (907) 258–2420. tribes, NGOs, and other parties during All documents (original and eight i. FERC Contact: John Mudre at (202) preparation of the license application copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. 502–8902; e-mail [email protected]. and before filing the application, but the Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61877

Regulatory Commission, 888 First Commission only upon a showing of ACTION: Notice of conference and Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. good cause or extraordinary agenda. The Commission’s rules of practice circumstances in accordance with 18 and procedure require all intervenors CFR 385.2008. SUMMARY: As announced in the filing documents with the Commission All filings must (1) bear in all capital Commission’s August 22, 2002, Notice to serve a copy of that document on letters the title ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘REPLY of Follow-up Staff Conference on data each person on the official service list COMMENTS’’, and software standards (67 FR 55230, for the project. Further, if an intervenor ‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS,’’ ‘‘TERMS August 28, 2002) the Commission is files comments or documents with the AND CONDITIONS,’’ or convening a technical conference on Commission relating to the merits of an ‘‘PRESCRIPTIONS;’’ (2) set forth in the October 3, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. to discuss issue that may affect the responsibilities heading the name of the applicant and continued efforts to standardize inputs of a particular resource agency, they the project number of the application to and outputs for electric market software must also serve a copy of the document which the filing responds; (3) furnish in connection with the implementation on that resource agency. the name, address, and telephone of the Commission’s Standard Market Comments, recommendations, terms number of the person submitting the Design (SMD) Rule. By this notice, the and conditions, and prescriptions may filing; and (4) otherwise comply with Commission is providing an agenda for be filed electronically via the Internet in the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 the conference. lieu of paper. The Commission strongly through 385.2005. All comments, DATES: The Conference will be encourages electronic filings. See 18 recommendations, terms and conditions convened on October 3, 2002. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the or prescriptions must set forth their ADDRESSES: Federal Energy Regulatory instructions on the Commission’s web evidentiary basis and otherwise comply Commission, 888 First Street, NE., site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e- with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Room—2C, Washington, DC 20426. Filing’’ link. k. This application has Agencies may obtain copies of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: been accepted, and is ready for application directly from the applicant. ´ environmental analysis at this time. l. Rene Forsberg , Office of Markets, Tariff Each filing must be accompanied by and Rates, Federal Energy Regulatory The existing project utilizing the U.S. proof of service on all persons listed on Army Corps of Engineers Waterbury Commission, 888 First Street, NE., the service list prepared by the Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8425. Dam and reservoir consists of: (1) A Commission in this proceeding, in submerged concrete intake structure; (2) E-mail: [email protected]. accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b), and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: two 205-foot-long, 54-inch diameter 385.2010. o. Procedural schedule and steel penstocks which connect to a 79- final amendments: The application will Notice of Conference and Agenda inch-diameter penstock; (3) a be processed according to the following powerhouse having one generating unit As announced in the Notice of Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to with an installed capacity of 5,520 kW; Conference issued August 22, 2002, the the schedule will be made as (4) a tailrace; (5) 50-foot-long, 33 kV staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory appropriate. transmission line; and (6) appurtenant Commission (Commission) will hold a facilities The applicant does not Notice of application is ready for follow-up conference to the July 18, propose any modifications to the project environmental analysis—September 2002 Conference on Data and Software features or operation The project would 2002 Standards. This conference is scheduled have an annual generation of 16,223 Notice of the availability of the draft forOctober 3, 2002 to continue our MWh and would be used to provide EA—March 2003 efforts to standardize inputs and outputs energy to its customers. m. A copy of Notice of the availability of the final for electric market software in the application is available for review at EA—June 2003 connection with the implementation of the Commission in the Public Reference Ready for Commission’s decision on the the Commission’s Standard Market Room or may be viewed on the application—June 2003 Design (SMD) rule. The conference will Commission’s website at http:// Final amendments to the application start at 9 a.m. the Federal Energy www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘FERRIS’’ link. must be filed with the Commission no Regulatory Commission, 888 First Enter the docket number excluding the later than 30 days from the issuance Street, NE., in Washington DC, in the last three digits in the docket number date of this notice. Commission Meeting Room . field to access the document. For Consistent with the Commission’s assistance, call (202) 502–8222 or for Linwood A. Watson, Jr., efforts to assure the efficient operation TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also Deputy Secretary. of wholesale energy markets under the available for inspection and [FR Doc. 02–25018 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] control of independent transmission reproduction at the address in item h BILLING CODE 6717–01–P and market operators, the second above. n. The Commission directs, conference on software for SMD will pursuant to Section 4.34(b) of the explore the question of how to Regulations (see Order No. 533 issued DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY maximize the value and minimize the May 8, 1991, 56 FR 23108, May 20, developmental and user costs of grid Federal Energy Regulatory 1991) that all comments, and market software and data transfers. Commission recommendations, terms and conditions This conference will seek to answer, through collaborative discussion, the and prescriptions concerning the [Docket No. RM01–12–000] application be filed with the questions of the appropriate process to Commission within 60 days from the Standard Market Design; Continuing develop more standardized and issuance date of this notice. All reply Efforts To Standardize Inputs and compatible software and data, what comments must be filed with the Outputs for Electric Market Software entities play a role in developing market Commission within 105 days from the and business rules and standards, and date of this notice. September 24, 2002. how should these matters be organized Anyone may obtain an extension of AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory within the wholesale electric industry time for these deadlines from the Commission, DOE. stakeholders for timely and cost

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61878 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

effective success. The day’s Agenda is on Remedying Undue Discrimination receiving the broadcast, or who need attached. Through Open Access Transmission information on making arrangements Also attached is a chart that depicts Service and Standard Electricity Market should contact David Reininger or Julia our current view of the standards Design (particularly paragraphs 351– Morelli at Capitol Connection (703– development process under the 360), click on Standard Market Design 993–3100) as soon as possible or visit Commission’s SMD. The RTO seams and Structure NOPR; for the transcript the Capitol Connection Web site at issues are to be developed by the of the July 18, 2002, Technical http://www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu Commission. Scheduling and other Conference on Data and Software and click on ‘‘FERC.’’ market and communication standards Standards, click on: SMD Structure and All interested parties are invited to are to be developed by NAESB. The Conferences. attend. There is no registration fee. For state estimator and other operational The conference will be transcribed. additional information, please contact data standards are to be developed by Those interested in acquiring the Rene´ Forsberg at 202–502–8425 (new NAESB, EPRI or by another approach. transcript should contact Ace Reporters phone number) or The chart also raises the question of at 202–347–3700 or 800–336–6646. [email protected]. whether there will be seams issues if the Transcripts will be placed in the public market and operational standards are record ten days after the Commission Linwood A. Watson, Jr., developed by the same body. receives the transcripts. Additionally, Deputy Secretary. New participants are invited to review Capitol Connection offers the recent activities on standard market opportunity for remote listening and Attachments: design at http://www.ferc.gov/Electric/ viewing of the conference. It is available Chart: Standards Developments Under RTO/Mrkt-Strct-comments/smd.htm. for a fee, live or over the Internet, via SMD For the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking C-Band Satellite. Persons interested in Conference Agenda

Conference Agenda—October 3, 2002 Peter Hirsch Vice President Power Data Interchange-Standards Association Delivery Markets, EPRI To Be Announced • Opening Remarks: 9 a.m.–9:05 a.m. Gordon van Welie President/CEO, Jim Buccigross Chairman, Executive • Who Has a Role in Standard-Setting? New England—ISO Committee, NAESB/GISB 9:05 a.m.–10:30 a.m. Data and Software Standard-Setting • Lunch: 11:45 a.m.–1 p.m. Process: 10:30 a.m–11:45 a.m. John Canavan Chairman, Electronic • Developing the Plan for Wholesale Scheduling Collaborative Brian Hewson Manager—Energy Electric Market and Grid Software Jim Buccigross Chairman, Executive Licensing, Market Readiness Project Consistency: 1 p.m.–3:30 p.m. Committee, NAESB/GISB Manager, ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD/IMO Gordon van Welie President/CEO, Robert Cummings NERC Lockheed Martin To Be Announced New England ISO

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 EN02oc02.003 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61879

Jay Britton Senior Systems Architect, download off the Internet at http:// requirements will vary for each of the ALSTOM/ESCA www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR four source categories depending on the Gary Michor President/CEO, The SPI Number 1871.03. For technical required control equipment and Group questions about the ICR, contact Marı´a monitoring equipment. All records are Petar Ristanovic Executive Consultant, Malave´ in the Office of Compliance at to be maintained by the facility for a Siemens. (202) 564–7027 or via E-mail to minimum of five years. Andy Ott Gen. Mgr. of Mkt. [email protected]. An agency may not conduct or Coordination, PJM–ISO. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: sponsor, and a person is not required to [FR Doc. 02–24844 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Title: National Emission Standards for respond to, a collection of information BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source unless it displays a currently valid OMB Categories: Generic Maximum control number. The OMB control Achievable Control Technology (40 CFR numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Part 63, Subpart YY); OMB Control in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. AGENCY Number 2060–0420; EPA ICR Number The Federal Register document 1871.03; expiration date September 30, required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), [FRL–7389–4] 2002. This is a request for an extension soliciting comments on this collection of a currently approved collection. of information was published on Agency Information Collection Abstract: The National Emission October 29, 2002. No comments were Activities: Submission for OMB Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants received. Review; Comment Request; National (NESHAP) for Source Categories: Burden Statement: The annual public Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Generic Maximum Achievable Control reporting and recordkeeping burden for Pollutants for Source Categories: Technology (hereafter, this subpart is this collection of information is Generic Maximum Achievable Control referred to as the ‘‘generic MACT’’), estimated to average 138 hours per Technology published at 40 CFR part 63, subpart response. Burden means the total time, AGENCY: Environmental Protection YY, were proposed on October 14, 1998 effort, or financial resources expended Agency (EPA). (63 FR 55178), and promulgated on June by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 29, 1999 (64 FR 34854). The rule ACTION: Notice. or disclose or provide information to or addressed hazardous air pollutant for a Federal agency. This includes the SUMMARY: In compliance with the (HAP) emission sources in four time needed to review instructions; Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. categories: Polycarbonates (PC) develop, acquire, install, and utilize 3501 et seq.), this document announces Production, Acrylic and Modacrylic technology and systems for the purposes that the following Information Fibers (AMF) Production, Acetal Resins of collecting, validating, and verifying Collection Request (ICR) has been (AR) Production and Hydrogen Fluoride information, processing and forwarded to the Office of Management (HF) Production. On November 22, maintaining information, and disclosing and Budget (OMB) for review and 1999, the Agency proposed wastewater and providing information; adjust the approval: Title: National Emission provisions amendments (64 FR 63779) existing ways to comply with any Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants to the promulgated generic MACT previously applicable instructions and for Source Categories: Generic applicable to the AR, AMF, and PC requirements; train personnel to be able Maximum Achievable Control production source categories. The HF to respond to a collection of Technology Standards (40 CFR part 63, production source category does not information; search data sources; subpart YY); OMB Control Number have wastewater streams. This complete and review the collection of 2060–0420; expiration date September Information Collection Request (ICR) information; and transmit or otherwise 30, 2002. The ICR describes the nature addresses these four source categories. disclose the information. of the information collection and its On December 6, 2000, at 63 FR 76408, Respondents/Affected Entities: Any expected burden and cost; where the Agency added four additional owner or operator of acetal resins appropriate, it includes the actual data source categories to the Generic MACT production, acrylic and modacrylic fiber collection instrument. rule including: cyanide chemicals production, hydrogen fluoride DATES: Comments must be submitted on manufacturing, carbon black production, and polycarbonates or before November 1, 2002. production, ethylene production, and production. spandex production, which are being ADDRESSES: Send comments, referencing Estimated Number of Respondents: addressed by ICR Number 1983.02, 10. EPA ICR Number 1871.03 and OMB OMB Number 2060–0489. Frequency of Response: Semiannual Control Number 2060–0420, to the Respondents are required to submit and on occasion. following addresses: Susan Auby, one-time reports of the (1) start of United States Environmental Protection construction for new facilities or an Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: Agency, Collection Strategies Division initial notification if it is an existing 4,077. (Mail Code 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania source at the time of rule promulgation, Estimated Total Annualized Capital, Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460– (2) anticipated and actual start-up dates O&M Cost Burden: $107, 289. 0001; and to the Office of Information for new facilities, and (3) physical or Send comments on the Agency’s need and Regulatory Affairs, Office of operational changes to existing for this information, the accuracy of the Management and Budget (OMB), facilities. Owners and operators must provided burden estimates, and any Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 also submit periodic reports suggested methods for minimizing 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC (semiannual or according to the respondent burden, including through 20503. schedule for Title V) and leak detection the use of automated collection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For and repair (LDAR) semiannual reports techniques to the addresses listed above. a copy of the ICR, contact Susan Auby which could be submitted with the Please refer to EPA ICR Number 1871.03 at EPA by phone at (202) 566–1672, by periodic reports. The specific and OMB Control Number 2060–0420 in e-mail at [email protected] or monitoring and recordkeeping any correspondence.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61880 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Dated: September 25, 2002. Abstract: The Agency has judged that previously applicable instructions and Oscar Morales, volatile organic chemical emissions requirements; train personnel to be able Director, Collection Strategies Division. from bulk gasoline terminals cause or to respond to a collection of [FR Doc. 02–25042 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] contribute to air pollution that may information; search data sources; BILLING CODE 6560–50–P reasonably be anticipated to endanger complete and review the collection of public health or welfare. Owners or information; and transmit or otherwise operators of bulk gasoline terminals disclose the information. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION must make the following one-time-only Respondents/Affected Entities: AGENCY reports: notification of the date of Owners and operators of bulk gasoline construction or reconstruction; terminals. [FRL–7389–5] notification of the anticipated and Estimated Number of Respondents: Agency Information Collection actual dates of startup; notification of 40. Activities: Submission for OMB any physical or operational change to an Frequency of Response: One time existing facility which may increase the Review; Comment Request, NSPS Bulk only. regulated pollutant emission rate; Gasoline Terminals Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: notification of the date of the initial 11,420. AGENCY: Environmental Protection performance test, and the results of the Estimated Total Annualized Capital, Agency (EPA). initial performance test. Owners or O&M Cost Burden: 0. ACTION: Notice. operators are also required to maintain Send comments on the Agency’s need records of the occurrence and duration for this information, the accuracy of the SUMMARY: In compliance with the of any startup, shutdown, or provided burden estimates, and any Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. malfunction in the operation of an suggested methods for minimizing 3501 et seq.), this document announces affected facility. Monitoring respondent burden, including through that the following Information requirements specific to bulk gasoline the use of automated collection Collection Request (ICR) has been terminals consist mainly of identifying techniques to the addresses listed above. forwarded to the Office of Management and documenting vapor tightness for Please refer to EPA ICR No. 0664.07 and and Budget (OMB) for review and each gasoline tank truck that is loaded OMB Control No. 2060–0006 in any approval: Title: OMB Control Number at the affected facility, and notifying the correspondence. 2060–0006, expiration date 09/30/2002. owner or operator of each tank truck Dated: September 28, 2002. that is not vapor tight. The owner or The ICR describes the nature of the Oscar Morales, information collection and its expected operator must also perform a monthly Director, Collection Strategies Division. burden and cost; where appropriate, it visual inspection for liquid or vapor includes the actual data collection leaks. An agency may not conduct or [FR Doc. 02–25043 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] instrument. sponsor, and a person is not required to BILLING CODE 6560–50–P respond to, a collection of information DATES: Comments must be submitted on unless it displays a currently valid OMB or before November 1, 2002. control number. The OMB control ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ADDRESSES: Send comments, referencing numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed AGENCY EPA ICR No. 0664.07 and OMB Control in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. [FRL–7389–3] No. 2060–0006, to the following An agency may not conduct or addresses: Susan Auby, U.S. sponsor, and a person is not required to Agency Information Collection Environmental Protection Agency, respond to, a collection of information Activities: Submission for OMB Collection Strategies Division (Mail unless it displays a currently valid OMB Review; Comment Request; Used Oil Code 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania control number. The OMB control Management Standards Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460– numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed Recordkeeping and Reporting 0001; and to Office of Information and in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. Requirements Regulatory Affairs, Office of The Federal Register document Management and Budget (OMB), required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), AGENCY: Environmental Protection Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 soliciting comments on this collection Agency (EPA). 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC of information was published on ACTION: Notice. 20503. October 29, 2001 (66 FR 54514); no SUMMARY: In compliance with the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For comments were received. Burden Statement: The annual public Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. a copy of the ICR contact Susan Auby reporting and recordkeeping burden for 3501 et seq.), this document announces at EPA by phone at (202) 566–1672, by this collection of information is that the following Information e-mail at [email protected] or estimated to average 286 hours per Collection Request (ICR) has been download off the Internet at http:// response. Burden means the total time, forwarded to the Office of Management www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR effort, or financial resources expended and Budget (OMB) for review and No. 0664.07. For technical questions by persons to generate, maintain, retain, approval: Used Oil Management about the ICR contact Julie Tankersley at or disclose or provide information to or Standards Recordkeeping and Reporting (202) 564–7002 or by e-mail at for a Federal agency. This includes the Requirements, OMB Control Number [email protected]. time needed to review instructions; 2050–0124, EPA ICR Number 1286.06, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: develop, acquire, install, and utilize expiring September 30, 2002. The ICR Title: NSPS Subpart XX for Bulk technology and systems for the purposes describes the nature of the information Gasoline terminals, OMB Control of collecting, validating, and verifying collection and its expected burden and Number 2060–0006, EPA ICR Number information, processing and cost; where appropriate, it includes the 0664.07, expiration date 09/30/2002. maintaining information, and disclosing actual data collection instrument. This is a request for extension of a and providing information; adjust the DATES: Comments must be submitted on currently approved collection. existing ways to comply with any or before November 1, 2002.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61881

ADDRESSES: Send comments, referencing collection requirements is used to FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS EPA ICR No. 1286.06 and OMB Control ensure compliance with the Used Oil COMMISSION No. 2050–0124, to the following Management Standards. An agency may [CC Docket No. 96–45; DA 02–2220] addresses: Susan Auby, U.S. not conduct or sponsor, and a person is Environmental Protection Agency, not required to respond to, a collection Revised Forms 486 and 479 and Collection Strategies Division (Mail of information unless it displays a Accompanying Instructions for Code 2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania currently valid OMB control number. Schools and Libraries Universal Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460– The OMB control numbers for EPA’s Service Support Mechanism 0001; and to Office of Information and regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 AGENCY: Federal Communications Regulatory Affairs, Office of and 48 CFR chapter 15. The Federal Management and Budget (OMB), Commission. Register notice required under 5 CFR Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on this ACTION: Notice. 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. collection of information was published SUMMARY: In this document the Wireline on April 12, 2002 (67 FR 17991); one Competition Bureau announces the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For comment was received. release of revised FCC Forms 486 and a copy of the ICR contact Susan Auby 479 and the associated instructions for at EPA by phone at (202) 566–1672, by Burden Statement: The annual public the schools and libraries universal e-mail at [email protected], or reporting and recordkeeping burden for service support mechanism. These download off the Internet at http:// this collection of information is revised forms adopt changes in the www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR estimated to range from 6 minutes to 23 certifications that libraries must make to No. 1286.06. For technical questions hours per response. Burden means the indicate compliance with the Children’s about the ICR contact Mike Svizzero by total time, effort, or financial resources Internet Protection Act. phone at (703) 308–0046, or by e-mail expended by persons to generate, at [email protected]. maintain, retain, or disclose or provide DATES: September 11, 2002. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information to or for a Federal agency. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Title: Used Oil Management This includes the time needed to review Narda Jones, Attorney, Standards Recordkeeping and Reporting instructions; develop, acquire, install, Telecommunications Access Policy Requirements, OMB Control No. 2050– and utilize technology and systems for Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, 0124, EPA ICR No. 1286.06, expiring the purposes of collecting, validating, (202) 418–7400, TTY: (202) 418–0484. September 30, 2002. This is a request for and verifying information, processing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The an extension of a currently approved and maintaining information, and Wireline Competition Bureau of the collection. disclosing and providing information; Federal Communications Commission Abstract: The Used Oil Management adjust the existing ways to comply with announces the release of revised FCC Standards, which include information any previously applicable instructions Forms 486 and 479 and the associated collection requests, were developed in and requirements; train personnel to be instructions for the schools and libraries accordance with section 3014 of the able to respond to a collection of universal service support mechanism. Resource Conservation and Recovery These revised forms adopt changes in information; search data sources; Act (RCRA), as amended by the the certifications that libraries must complete and review the collection of Hazardous and Solid Waste make to indicate compliance with the information; and transmit or otherwise Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), which Children’s Internet Protection Act directs EPA to ‘‘promulgate regulations disclose the information. (CIPA) (Public Law 106–554). The * * * as may be necessary to protect Respondent/Affected Entities: changes are adopted in response to the public health and the environment from Business or other for profit. recent decision of the United States the hazards associated with recycled Estimated Number of Respondents: District Court for the Eastern District of oil’’ and, at the same time, to not 1,640. Pennsylvania, which held that the CIPA discourage used oil recycling. In 1985 requirements incorporated at 47 U.S.C. and 1992, EPA established mandatory Frequency of Response: Biannually. 254(h)(6) were facially unconstitutional regulations that govern the management Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: as to libraries. See American Library of used oil (see 40 CFR part 279). To 460,286 hours. Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S., 201 F. Supp. 2d 401 document and ensure proper handling Estimated Total Annualized Capital, (E.D. Pa. 2002). of used oil, these regulations establish O&M Cost Burden: $10,011,000. SLD will continue to accept the notification, testing, tracking and previous versions of the FCC Forms 486 recordkeeping requirements for used oil Send comments on the Agency’s need and 479. Those libraries that choose to transporters, processors, re-refiners, for this information, the accuracy of the submit FCC Forms 486 or 479 using the marketers, and burners. They also set provided burden estimates, and any previous versions and that are required standards for the prevention and suggested methods for minimizing to certify to compliance with those CIPA cleanup of releases to the environment respondent burden, including through certifications established by 47 U.S.C. during storage and transit, and for the the use of automated collection 254(l) should check Item 11a, certifying safe closure of storage units and techniques to the addresses listed above. compliance with CIPA ‘‘as codified at processing and re-refining facilities to Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1286.06 and 47 U.S.C. 254(h) and (l).’’ Libraries mitigate future releases and damages. OMB Control No. 2050–0124 in any checking Item 11a are certifying that EPA believes these requirements correspondence. they have complied to the extent that minimize potential hazards to human Dated: September 24, 2002. these sections apply, as of the date of health and the environment from the the start of discounted services for the potential mismanagement of used oil by Oscar Morales, relevant funding year. Pursuant to the used oil handlers, while providing for Director, Collection Strategies Division. decision of the United States District the safe recycling of used oil. [FR Doc. 02–25047 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Court for the Eastern District of Information from these information BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Pennsylvania, section 254(h)(6) no

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61882 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

longer applies to libraries, and libraries (Verizon), for authority to enter the 3. The Department of Justice’s may truthfully check Item 11a to certify interLATA telecommunications market Evaluation. The Department of Justice compliance only with section 254(l). in the states of New Hampshire and filed its evaluation on August 1, 2002, Library applicants checking this box are Delaware. The Commission grants concluding that Verizon has generally certifying that they have an Internet Verizon’s application based on its succeeded in opening its local markets safety policy as described above, and conclusion that Verizon has satisfied all in New Hampshire and Delaware to have satisfied the public notice and of the statutory requirements for entry competition. Accordingly, the hearing/meeting requirement, but are and opened its local exchange markets Department of Justice recommends not certifying as to a technology to full competition. approval of Verizon’s application for section 271 authority in New Hampshire protection measure because they are not DATES: Effective October 4, 2002. required to filter Internet access. The and Delaware. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: same is true for the other CIPA Primary Issues in Dispute certifications on FCC Forms 486 and Henry Thaggert, Attorney-Advisor, 479. Additional guidance on the use of Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 4. Compliance with Section the old forms can be obtained on SLD’s 418–7941 or via the Internet at 271(c)(1)(A). The Commission Web site at http:// [email protected]. The complete text of concludes that Verizon demonstrates www.sl.universalservice.org/reference/ this Memorandum Opinion and Order is that it satisfies the requirements of CIPAGuidance.asp. available for inspection and copying section 271 (c)(1)(A) based on the Although SLD will continue to accept during normal business hours in the interconnection agreements it has the previous versions of the FCC Forms FCC Reference Information Center, implemented with competing carriers in 486 and 479, all applicants are strongly Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room New Hampshire and Delaware. The encouraged to make use of the new CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. record demonstrates that competitive forms. Unlike the prior versions, the Further information may also be LECs serve business and residential new forms can be scanned by SLD. Use obtained by calling the Wireline customers using predominantly their of the new forms will expedite Competition Bureau’s TTY number: own facilities in each of the states. 5. Checklist Item 2—Unbundled processing and receipt of discounts. The (202) 418–0484. Network Elements. Based on the record, new forms and instructions may be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a the Commission finds that Verizon has obtained at the SLD Web site, http:// summary of the Commission’s provided ‘‘nondiscriminatory access to www.sl.universalservice.org, or by Memorandum Opinion and Order in network elements in accordance with contacting the SLD Client Service WC Docket No. 02–157, FCC 02–262, the requirements of sections 251(c)(3) Bureau at (888) 203–8100. adopted September 25, 2002, and and 252(d)(1)’’ of the Act in compliance Federal Communications Commission. released September 25, 2002. The full with checklist item 2. Mark G. Seifert, text of this order may be purchased from 6. The Commission further finds that, the Commission’s duplicating Deputy Division Chief, Telecommunications while substantial questions were raised Access Policy Division. contractor, Qualex International, Portals regarding whether New Hampshire UNE II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402, [FR Doc. 02–25072 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] rates were adopted through a Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202– BILLING CODE 6712–01–M proceeding that correctly applied 863–2893, facsimile 202–863–2898, or TELRIC principles in all instances, via e-mail [email protected]. It is also Verizon’s current New Hampshire UNE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS available on the Commission’s Web site rates pass a benchmark comparison to at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/ COMMISSION _ New York UNE rates. Therefore, New Wireline Competition/in- Hampshire UNE rates satisfy checklist [WC Docket No. 02–157; FCC 02–262] _ region applications. item 2. The Commission performs its Application by Verizon New England Synopsis of the Order benchmark analysis by aggregating non loop rate elements. Inc., Verizon Delaware Inc., Bell 1. History of the Application. On June Atlantic Communications, Inc. (d/b/a 7. In Delaware, Verizon reduced its 27, 2002, Verizon filed an application switching rates during the pendency of Verizon Long Distance), NYNEX Long pursuant to section 271 of the Distance Company (d/b/a Verizon this proceeding in response to claims Telecommunications Act of 1996, with that the data underlying cost inputs to Enterprise Solutions), Verizon Global the Commission to provide in-region, Networks Inc., and Verizon Select the rates had become outdated. interLATA service in the states of New Verizon’s reduced switching rates Services Inc., for Authorization To Hampshire and Delaware. Provide In-Region, InterLATA Services caused Verizon’s non loop rates to in New Hampshire and Delaware 2. The State Commissions’ satisfy a benchmark comparison to New Evaluations. The New Hampshire York non loop rates. Delaware loop rates AGENCY: Federal Communications Public Utilities Commission (New also satisfied a benchmark comparison Commission. Hampshire Commission) and the to New York rates. Thus, Verizon’s ACTION: Notice. Delaware Public Services Commission Delaware UNE rates also satisfy (Delaware Commission), following an checklist item 2. SUMMARY: In the document, the Federal extensive review process, advised the 8. OSS. The Commission also Communications Commission Commission that Verizon has taken the concludes that Verizon provides (Commission) grants the section 271 statutorily required steps to open its nondiscriminatory access to its OSS— application of Verizon New England, local markets in each state to the systems, databases, and personnel Inc. Verizon Delaware Inc., Bell Atlantic competition. Consequently, the state necessary to support network elements Communications, Inc. (d/b/a Verizon commissions recommended that the or services. Verizon provides access to Long Distance), NYNEX Long Distance Commission approve Verizon’s in- its OSS in a manner that enables Company (d/b/a Verizon Enterprise region, interLATA entry in their competing carriers to perform the Solutions), Verizon Global Networks evaluations and comments in this functions in substantially the same time Inc., and Verizon Select Services Inc. proceeding. and manner as Verizon does or, if no

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61883

appropriate retail analogue exists within processes and procedures relating to 15. Section 271(d)(6) Enforcement Verizon’s systems, in a manner that unbundled loops in Delaware as it does Authority. Working with each of the permits competitors a meaningful in Pennsylvania. Therefore, because state commissions, the Commission opportunity to compete. In addition, there is insufficient data in Delaware, intends to closely monitor Verizon’s regarding specific areas where the we look to Verizon’s performance in post-approval compliance to ensure that Commission identifies relatively minor Pennsylvania as a basis for our Verizon continues to meet the issues with Verizon’s OSS performance evaluation, and it has met the conditions required for section 271 in New Hampshire—order processing benchmark standard for this approval. It stands ready to exercise its notifiers, flow-through, and billing measurement in Pennsylvania in each various statutory enforcement powers accuracy—these problems are not relevant month. quickly and decisively in appropriate sufficient to warrant a finding of 12. Checklist Items 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, circumstances to ensure that the local checklist noncompliance. 12, 13 and 14. An applicant under market remains open in each of the 9. Checklist Item 4—Unbundled Local section 271 must demonstrate that it states. Loops. Verizon demonstrates that it complies with checklist item 3 (access Federal Communications Commission. provides unbundled local loops in to poles, ducts, and conduits), item 5 accordance with the requirements of (unbundled local transport), item 6 Marlene H. Dortch, section 271 and our rules, in that it (unbundled local switching), item 7 Secretary. provides ‘‘local loop transmission from (911/E911 access and directory [FR Doc. 02–25062 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] the central office to the customer’s assistance/operator services), item 8 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P premises, unbundled from local (white pages directory listings), item 9 switching or other services.’’ More (numbering administration), item 10 specifically, Verizon establishes that it (databases and associated signaling), FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION provides access to loop make-up item 12 (local dialing parity), item 13 information in compliance with the (reciprocal compensation), and item 14 Sunshine Act Notice UNE Remand Order and (resale). Based on the evidence in the nondiscriminatory access to stand alone record, the Commission concludes that DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, October 8, xDSL-capable loops and high-capacity Verizon demonstrates that it is in 2002, at 10 a.m. loops. Also, Verizon provides voice compliance with checklist items 3, 5, 6, PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, grade loops, both as new loops and 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 14 in New DC (Ninth Floor). through hot-cut conversions, in a Hampshire and Delaware. STATUS: This meeting will be open to the nondiscriminatory manner. Finally, 13. Section 272 Compliance. Based on public. Verizon has demonstrated that it has a the record, Verizon provides evidence ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED. line-sharing and line-splitting that it maintains the same structural Correction and Approval of Minutes. provisioning process that affords separation and nondiscrimination Draft Advisory Opinion 2002–07: competitors nondiscriminatory access to safeguards in Delaware and New Careau & Co. and Mohre these facilities. Hampshire as it does in Pennsylvania, Communications by Robert F. Carrot, New York, Connecticut, and Other Checklist Items President. Massachusetts—states in which Verizon Draft Advisory Opinion 2002–11: 10. Checklist Item 1—Interconnection. has already received section 271 Mortgage Bankers Association of Based on the evidence in the record, the authority. Therefore, the Commission America (MBAA) and MBAA PAC by Commission concludes that Verizon concludes that Verizon has counsel, Jan Witold Baran and Carol A. provides access and interconnection on demonstrated that it is in compliance Laham. terms and conditions that are just, with the requirements of section 272. Routine Administrative Matters. reasonable and nondiscriminatory, in 14. Public Interest Analysis. The accordance with the requirements of Commission concludes that approval of DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, October 8, section 251(c)(2) and as specified in this application is consistent with the 2002, to follow the open meeting. section 271, and applied in the public interest. From its extensive PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, Commission’s prior orders. Pursuant to review of the competitive checklist, DC. this checklist item, Verizon must allow which embodies the critical elements of STATUS: This meeting will be closed to other carriers to interconnect their market entry under the Act, we find that the public. networks to its network for the mutual barriers to competitive entry in the local ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: exchange of traffic, using any available exchange markets have been removed Compliance matters pursuant to 2 method of interconnection at any and the local exchange markets in New U.S.C. 437g. available point in Verizon’s network. Hampshire and Delaware are open to Audits conducted pursuant to 2 Verizon’s performance generally competition. The Commission further U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C. satisfies the applicable benchmark or finds that, as noted in prior section 271 Matters concerning participation in retail comparison standards for this orders, BOC entry into the long distance civil actions or proceedings or checklist item. market will benefit consumers and arbitration. 11. Checklist Item 11—Local Number competition if the relevant local Internal personnel rules and Portability. Section 251(b)(2) requires all exchange market is open to competition procedures or matters affecting a LECs ‘‘to provide, to the extent consistent with the competitive particular employee. technically feasible, number portability checklist. Verizon demonstrates that DATE AND TIME: Thursday, October 10, in accordance with requirements there is significant local competition in 2002, at 10 a.m. prescribed by the Commission.’’ Based Delaware and New Hampshire, that on the evidence in the record, the Verizon’s local market will remain open PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, Commission finds that Verizon to competition, and that section 271 DC (Ninth Floor). complies with the requirements of approval would enhance local and long STATUS: This meeting will be open to the checklist item 11. As noted elsewhere in distance competition in Delaware and public. the order, Verizon uses the same New Hampshire. ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61884 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Correction and Approval of Minutes. Seaboard Marine, Ltd. World Logistics Service (U.S.A.), Inc. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Tropical Shipping and Construction Synopsis: The proposed agreement Consolidated Reporting. Co., Ltd. would allow World Logistics to charter Explanation and Justification for Frontier Liner Services, Inc. space for roll-on/roll-off cargo from Electioneering Communications Final Bernuth Agencies, Inc. Wallenius Wilhelmsen on its vessels Rules. Synopsis: The proposed amendment operating from Veracruz, Mexico, to Explanation and Justification for deletes NPR, Inc. and Sea Star Line, U.S. Atlantic and Gulf Coast ports. The Interim Final Rules on FCC LLC as parties to the Hispaniola parties request expedited review. Electioneerinig Communications Discussion Agreement. Agreement No.: 201006–004. Database. * * * * * Title: New Orleans-P&O Ports LA FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Agreement No.: 011737–008. Lease Agreement. Ron Harris, Press Officer, Telephone: Title: The MCA Agreement. Parties: (202) 694–1220. Parties: Board of Commissioners of the Port of Atlantic Container Line AB New Orleans Mary W. Dove, Alianca Navegacao e Logistica Ltda P&O Ports Louisiana, Inc. Secretary of the Commission. Antillean Marine Shipping Synopsis: The amendment amends [FR Doc. 02–25206 Filed 9–30–02; 2:58 pm] Corporation the term of the agreement to permit the BILLING CODE 6715–01–M CMA CGM, S.A. tenant to relocate to another of the port’s Companhia Libra De Navegacao facilities. It also adds provisions for Compania Sud Americana De Vapores special rate adjustments and minimum FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION S.A. annual guarantee adjustments. The CP Ships (UK) Limited, d/b/a ANZDL agreement now runs through October Notice of Agreement(s) Filed and d/b/a Contship Containerlines 31, 2003. Crowley Liner Services, Inc. The Commission hereby gives notice By order of the Federal Maritime Dole Ocean Cargo Express, Inc. Commission. of the filing of the following Hamburg-Sud Dated: September 23, 2002. agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of Hapag-Lloyd Container Linie 1984. Interested parties can review or King Ocean Central America S.A. Bryant L. VanBrakle, obtain copies of agreements at the King Ocean Service De Colombia S.A. Secretary. Washington, DC offices of the King Ocean Service De Venezuela [FR Doc. 02–25057 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, S.A. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P NW., Room 940. Interested parties may Lykes Lines Limited, LLC submit comments on an agreement to Montemar Maritima S.A. the Secretary, Federal Maritime Nippon Yusen Kaisha FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Commission, Washington, DC 20573, Norasia Container Line Limited within 10 days of the date this notice P&O Nedlloyd Limited Ocean Transportation Intermediary appears in the Federal Register. Safmarine Container Lines N.V. License Agreement No.: 002550–007. Tecmarine Lines, Inc. Reissuances Title: New Orleans-Maersk Lease TMM Lines Limited, LLC Agreement. Tropical Shipping & Construction Co., Notice is hereby given that the Parties: Board of Commissioners of the Ltd. following Ocean Transportation Port of New Orleans Maersk, Inc. Wallenius Wilhelmsen Lines AS. Intermediary licenses have been Synopsis: The amendment permits Synopsis: The proposed amendment reissued by the Federal Maritime arrangements for special rates for adds P&O Nedlloyd Limited as a Commission pursuant to section 19 of certain cargo handled at the member and deletes all references to the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended applicable terminal. committees in the agreement. by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of Agreement No.: 010977. Agreement No.: 011820. 1998 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the Title: Hispaniola Discussion Agreement. Title: WWL/WLS Space Charter regulations of the Commission Parties: A.P. Moller-Maersk Sealand Agreement. pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Crowley Liner Services, Inc. Parties: Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR Tecmarine Lines, Inc. Wallenius Wilhelmsen Lines AS 515.

License No. Name/address Date reissued

1857N ...... Air/Sea Forwarding Specialists, Inc., 3812 Springhill Avenue, Mobile, AL 36608 June 19, 2002. 16779F ...... EAFF (USA), Inc., 8840 NW 102nd Street, Medley, FL 33178 ...... August 1, 2002. 17200F ...... Global Forwarding Corp., 10420 NW 37th Terrace, Miami, FL 33178 ...... May 12, 2002. 15655N ...... Millennium Plus, Inc., 10910 S. La Cienega Blvd., Inglewood, CA 90304 ...... August 9, 2002. 17135N ...... Next Day Cargo, Inc., 8805 32nd Lane, Miami, FL 33122 ...... July 25, 2002. 13709N ...... PAC West Trading & Transport, Inc. dba Pacwest Transport, 2531 West 237th August 9, 2002. Street, Suite 122, Torrance, CA 90505. 17505N ...... Trans Logistics, Inc. dba World Express, 520 E. Carson Plaza Ct., Suite 205, August 1, 2002. Carson, CA 90746.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61885

Sandra L. Kusumoto, Address: 1424 NW 82nd Avenue, Date Revoked: September 7, 2002. Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints Miami, FL 33126. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid and Licensing. Date Revoked: August 21, 2002. bond. [FR Doc. 02–25058 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Reason: Failed to maintain valid License Number: 16792N. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P bonds. Name: Tap-Tap Shipping, Inc. License Number: 3634NF. Address: 1034 Linwood Street, Name: Ocean Cargo Line, Inc. dba Brooklyn, NY 11208. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Total Transport International. Date Revoked: August 18, 2002. Address: c/o 15 Exchange Place, Suite Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Ocean Transportation Intermediary 1020, Jersey City, NJ 07302–3912. bond. License Revocations Date Revoked: September 14, 2002. License Number: 3863NF. The Federal Maritime Commission Reason: Failed to maintain valid Name: Tera Trading Group, Inc. dba hereby gives notice that the following bonds. T.T.G. International Freight Forwarders. Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Number: 16194F. Address: 1850 NW 82nd Avenue, licenses have been revoked pursuant to Name: Palumbo International Freight Miami, FL 33126. section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 Forwarders, Inc. Date Revoked: July 6, 2002 and (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the Address: Calle Nebraska S–8, Ext. August 1, 2002. regulations of the Commission Parkville, Guaynabo, PR 00969. Reason: Failed to maintain valid pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Date Revoked: July 18, 2002. bonds. Transportation Intermediaries, effective Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 15797N. on the corresponding date shown below: bond. Name: United Cargo Handling A/S License Number: 12039N. License Number: 16981N. United Cargo Lines. Name: Caribbean Cargo Agencies, Inc. Name: PK Shipping, Inc. Address: 478 Pennsylvania Avenue, dba Intermar. Address: 5707 Calverton Street, Suite Suite 301, Glen Ellyn, IL 60137. Address: 2801 NW 74th Avenue, 2–E, Baltimore, MD 21228. Date Revoked: August 23, 2002. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Suite 105, Miami, FL 33122. Date Revoked: September 9, 2002. bond. Date Revoked: September 4, 2002. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond. License Number: 11962N. bond. License Number: 15814N. Name: Universal Freightways Corp. Name: Rally Express U.S.A., Inc. Address: 7500 NW 54th Street, License Number: 17204N. Address: 1925 W. Temple Street, Miami, FL 33166. Name: Cargo Unlimited, Inc. Suite 109, Los Angeles, CA 90026. Date Revoked: May 5, 2002. Address: 14950 Heathrow Forest Date Revoked: August 21, 2002. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Pkwy, Suite 165, Houston, TX 77032. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond. Date Revoked: August 8, 2002. bond. Reason: Surrendered license Sandra L. Kusumoto, voluntarily. License Number: 4327NF. Name: Sea Expo Freight Services, Inc. Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints License Number: 4265NF. Address: 32 Somerville Road, Hewitt, and Licensing. Name: Computrex International NJ 07421. [FR Doc. 02–25059 filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Services, Inc. dba Computrex Logistics. Date Revoked: August 25, 2002. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P Address: 9960 Corporate Campus Reason: Failed to maintain valid Drive, Suite 1100, Louisville, KY 40223. bonds. Date Revoked: September 14, 2002. License Number: 4350NF. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Reason: Failed to maintain valid Name: Seaborne International, Inc. bonds. Ocean Transportation Intermediary dba Seaborne Express Line. License; Applicants License Number: 3661N. Address: 11222 La Cienega Blvd., Name: Expressair Cargo, Inc. Suite 470, Inglewood, CA 90304. Notice is hereby given that the Address: 11091 NW 27th Street, Date Revoked: September 14, 2002. following applicants have filed with the Miami, FL 33172. Reason: Failed to maintain valid Federal Maritime Commission an Date Revoked: September 8, 2002. bonds. application for license as a Non-Vessel Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 17111NF. Operating Common Carrier and Ocean bond. Name: Spencer Shipping Corp. Freight Forwarder—Ocean License Number: 9806F. Address: 2050 NW 95th Avenue, Transportation Intermediary pursuant to Name: International Link Service Inc. Miami, FL 33172. section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 Address: 160–23 Rockaway Blvd., Date Revoked: August 24, 2002. as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 Jamaica, NY 11434. Reason: Failed to maintain valid CFR 515). Date Revoked: August 14, 2002. bonds. Persons knowing of any reason why Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 12629N. the following applicants should not bond. Name: T & T Shipping Services, Inc. receive a license are requested to License Number: 17408N. Address: 2546 Pitkin Avenue, contact the Office of Transportation Name: Maraly International Corp. Brooklyn, NY 11208. Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Address: 7206 NW 84th Avenue, Date Revoked: August 14, 2002. Commission, Washington, DC 20573. Miami, FL 33166. Reason: Failed to maintain a valid Non-Vessel Operating Common Date Revoked: July 7, 2002. bond. Carrier Ocean Transportation Reason: Failed to maintain a valid License Number: 16804N. Intermediary Applicants: bond. Name: Tae Logistics, Inc. Penasa Logistics (USA), Inc., 11222 S. License Number: 3120NF. Address: 8820 S. Sepulveda Blvd., La Cienega Blvd., #180, Inglewood, Name: Meridian Cargo, Inc. Unit 110, Los Angeles, CA 90045. CA 90304.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61886 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Officers: Yoon Hyoun Baek, by the Board under conditions set forth p.m., located on 21st Street between Secretary/Director (Qualifying in 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1. Board– Constitution Avenue and C Street, NW. Individual) Kam Yuen Tam, CEO approved collections of information are Members of the public may inspect ALSPAC Miami Corporation, 8408 N.W. incorporated into the official OMB comments in Room MP–500 between 66th Street, Miami, FL 33166. inventory of currently approved 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays Officers: Maurice Rousseau, Jr., Vice collections of information. Copies of the pursuant to 261.12, except as provided President (Qualifying Individual) OMB 83–I’s and supporting statements in 261.14, of the Board’s Rules Mounr Whan Chang, President and approved collection of information Regarding Availability of Information, Non-Vessel Operating Common instruments are placed into OMB’s 12 CFR 261.12 and 261.14. Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder public docket files. The Federal Reserve A copy of the comments may also be Transportation Intermediary Applicants: may not conduct or sponsor, and the submitted to the OMB desk officer for respondent is not required to respond the Board: Joseph Lackey, Office of K. Carlton International, Inc., 7744 to, an information collection that has Information and Regulatory Affairs, Peters Road, #225, Plantation, FL been extended, revised, or implemented Office of Management and Budget, New 33324. on or after October 1, 1995, unless it Executive Office Building, Room 3208, Officers: Kathleen R. Carlton, displays a currently valid OMB control Washington, DC 20503. President (Qualifying Individual) number. Michael Mattsson, Vice President FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A Request for Comment on Information General Logistics, Inc., 175–01 copy of the proposed form and Collection Proposal. Rockaway Blvd., Suite 213, instructions, the Paperwork Reduction The following information collection, Jamaica, NY 11434. Act Submission (OMB 83–I), supporting which is being handled under this Officer: Chae J. Kim, President statement, and other documents that delegated authority, has received initial (Qualifying Individual) will be placed into OMB’s public docket Board approval and is hereby published files once approved may be requested Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean for comment. At the end of the comment Transportation Intermediary Applicants: from the agency clearance officer, whose period, the proposed information name appears below. Limitless international Inc., 513 collection, along with an analysis of Mary M. West, Federal Reserve Board Whisper Walk, Chesapeake, VA comments and recommendations Clearance Officer (202–452–3829), 23322. received, will be submitted to the Board Division of Research and Statistics, Officer: Cheryl A. Stockstad, for final approval under OMB delegated Board of Governors of the Federal President (Qualifying Individual) authority. Comments are invited on the Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551. TDC International Express Inc., 500 following: Telecommunications Device for the Deaf Carson Plaza Drive, #20, Carson, CA a. whether the proposed collection of (TDD) users may contact Diane Jenkins 90746. information is necessary for the proper (202–452–3544), Board of Governors of Officer: Susan Cha, President performance of the Federal Reserve’s the Federal Reserve System, (Qualifying Individual) functions; including whether the Washington, DC 20551. information has practical utility; Susie Gonzalez, Inc. dba Friends Cargo SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: International, 8367 NW 74th Street, b. the accuracy of the Federal Miami, FL 33166. Reserve’s estimate of the burden of the Proposal to approve under OMB Officers: Susie Gonzalez, President proposed information collection, delegated authority the extension for (Qualifying Individual), Jorge including the validity of the three years, without revision, of the Gonzalez, Vice President. methodology and assumptions used; following report: c. ways to enhance the quality, utility, Dated: September 27, 2002. 1. Report title: Recordkeeping and and clarity of the information to be Disclosure Requirements Associated Bryant L. VanBrakle, collected; and Secretary. with Loans Secured by Real Estate d. ways to minimize the burden of Located in Flood Hazard Areas Pursuant [FR Doc. 02–25060 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] information collection on respondents, to Section 208.25 of Regulation H. BILLING CODE 6730–01–P including through the use of automated Agency form number: Reg H–2 collection techniques or other forms of OMB control number: 7100–0280 information technology. Frequency: Event–generated FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM DATES: Comments must be submitted on Reporters: State member banks or before December 2, 2002. Annual reporting hours: 111,420 Agency information collection ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to hours activities: Proposed collection; Ms. Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board Estimated average hours per response: comment request of Governors of the Federal Reserve Notice of special flood hazards to AGENCY: Board of Governors of the System, 20th Street and Constitution borrowers and servicers, 0.08 hours; Federal Reserve System Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20551. notice to the Federal Emergency ACTION: Notice However, because paper mail in the Management Agency (FEMA) of Washington area and at the Board of servicer, 0.08 hours; notice to FEMA of SUMMARY: Background. On June 15, Governors is subject to delay, please change of servicer, 0.08 hours; and 1984, the Office of Management and consider submitting your comments by retention of standard FEMA form, 0.04 Budget (OMB) delegated to the Board of e–mail to hours. Governors of the Federal Reserve [email protected], or Number of respondents: 976 System (Board) its approval authority faxing them to the Office of the Small businesses are affected. under the Paperwork Reduction Act, as Secretary at 202–452–3819 or 202–452– General description of report: This per 5 CFR 1320.16, to approve of and 3102. Comments addressed to Ms. information collection is mandatory (12 assign OMB control numbers to Johnson may also be delivered to the U.S.C. 248(a)(1)). Because the Federal collection of information requests and Board’s mail facility in the West Reserve does not collect any of FEMA requirements conducted or sponsored Courtyard between 8:45 a.m. and 5:15 forms this information collection is not

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61887

given confidential treatment. However, Vacherie, Louisiana; Blake J. Falgoust, not have the ability to repay, should any of these records come into Vacherie, Louisiana; Ronald A. particularly students. the possession of the Federal Reserve, Ordoyne, Vacherie, Louisiana; Joan Committee Reports: Council such information may be protected from Ordoyne, as custodian for Luke committees will report on their work. disclosure by exemption 4 and 6 of the Falgoust; Vacherie, Louisiana; Joan Other matters initiated by Council Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. Ordoyne, as custodian for Laura members also may be discussed. 552(b)(4) and (b)(6)). Falgoust, Vacherie, Louisiana; Francois ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to submit Abstract: Regulation H requires state P. Falgoust, Vacherie, Louisiana; Ulger views to the Council on any of the above member banks to notify a borrower and Landry, Vacherie, Louisiana; and Denny topics may do so by sending written servicer when loans secured by real Guillot, Raceland, Louisiana; to acquire statements to Ann Bistay, Secretary of estate are determined to be in a special additional voting shares of One the Consumer Advisory Council, flood hazard area and notify them American Corp., and thereby indirectly Division of Consumer and Community whether flood insurance is available; acquire additional voting shares of First Affairs, Board of Governors of the notify FEMA of the identity of, and any American Bank and Trust, both of Federal Reserve System, Washington, change of, the servicer of a loan secured Vacherie, Louisiana. DC 20551. Information about this by real estate in a special flood hazard meeting may be obtained from Ms. area; and retain a completed copy of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 26, 2002. Bistay, 202–452–6470. Standard Flood Hazard Determination Jennifer J. Johnson, Board of Governors of the Federal Form used to determine whether Reserve System, September 26, 2002. property securing a loan is in a special Secretary of the Board. flood hazard area. [FR Doc. 02–25040 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Jennifer J. Johnson, Board of Governors of the Federal BILLING CODE 6210–01–S Secretary of the Board. Reserve System, September 27, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–25038 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210–01–S Jennifer J. Johnson, FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Secretary of the Board. Consumer Advisory Council [FR Doc. 02–25036 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 pm] DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND BILLING CODE 6210–01–S HUMAN SERVICES ACTION: Notice of Meeting of Consumer Advisory Council Health Resources and Services FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Administration SUMMARY: The Consumer Advisory Change in Bank Control Notices; Council will meet on Thursday, October Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank 24, 2002. The meeting, which will be Program Procedure for Augmenting Holding Companies open to public observation, will take Petitions and Reminder of Termination place at the Federal Reserve Board’s Date of Fund The notificants listed below have offices in Washington, DC, in Dining applied under the Change in Bank Room E on the Terrace level of the AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Martin Building. Anyone planning to Administration, HHS. § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 attend the meeting should, for security ACTION: Notice. CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank purposes, register no later than Tuesday, holding company. The factors that are October 22, by completing the form SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is considered in acting on the notices are found on–line at: http:// to announce the procedure for the set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 www.federalreserve.gov/forms/ augmentation of petitions filed with the U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). cacregistration.cfm. Additionally, Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund The notices are available for attendees must present photo Program, postmarked by the November immediate inspection at the Federal identification to enter the building. 13, 2001, statutory deadline, for which Reserve Bank indicated. The notices an initial payment decision has been also will be available for inspection at The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. and is expected to conclude at 1:00 p.m. made; and to remind the public of the the office of the Board of Governors. November 12, 2003, termination date of Interested persons may express their The Martin Building is located on C Street, NW, between 20th and 21st the Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund. views in writing to the Reserve Bank DATES: The termination date of the indicated for that notice or to the offices Streets. The Council’s function is to advise Ricky Ray Trust Fund is November 12, of the Board of Governors. Comments 2003. must be received not later than October the Board on the exercise of the Board’s responsibilities under various consumer ADDRESSES: All documentation to 16, 2002. augment eligible petitions must be A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta financial services laws and on other submitted to the Ricky Ray Program, (Sue Costello, Vice President) 1000 matters on which the Board seeks its Bureau of Health Professions, Health Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia advice. Time permitting, the Council Resources and Services Administration, 30309–4470: will discuss the following topics: 1. Joseph Bienvue Falgoust, Vacherie, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Room 4–81, Parklawn Building, 5600 Louisiana; Charles J. Falgoust, Vacherie, Act: Discussion of aspects of the Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland Louisiana; Dean T. Falgoust, River proposed revisions by the Department of 20857. Ridge, Louisiana; Marian A. Falgoust, Housing and Urban Development to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Metairie, Louisiana; Michael A. rules implementing the Real Estate T. Clark, Director, Ricky Ray Program, Falgoust, Vacherie, Louisiana; Ronald J. Settlement Procedures Act. Bureau of Health Professions, Health Falgoust, Thibodaux, Louisiana; Rose Identify Theft: Discussion of Resources and Services Administration, Mary Falgoust, Vacherie, Louisiana; deterrence options for identify theft. (301) 443–2330. Susan B. Falgoust, Vacherie, Louisiana; Access to Credit Cards: Discussion of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The order Falgoust Family Holdings, LLC, access to credit by consumers who may of the review and payment decision of

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61888 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

any specific petition filed with the house, rather than waiting until after the of vital statistics, may augment a Ricky Ray Program was based on the filing deadline date, November 13, 2001, petition. postmark date of the petition. The facts to begin making payments. These A petitioner, a petitioner’s personal related to the petition may have decisions addressed a series of Program- representative, or a disinterested third changed over time subsequent to the related factors such as: the mortality of party may augment a petition with payment decision. This document the target population, the initial amount documentation that could affect the addresses how the Ricky Ray Program of $75 million appropriated for the Program’s petition payment decision. will handle new information that Program in fiscal year 2000, and the The documentation or information that becomes available before the Ricky Ray uncertainty of future appropriations. augments the petition must be received Trust Fund terminates on November 12, The Act and its regulations recognize by the Program in sufficient time before 2003, where the new information may that petitions may be affected by November 12, 2003, to allow for review change the payment decision of a circumstances beyond petitioners’ and processing before the Fund petition that has been approved for a control that could impact a payment terminates. payment of less than $100,000, or a decision. Section 130.24 (a) of the Ricky In implementing this procedure with disapproved petition. Ray Program’s Final Rule with regard to payment decisions for This document also reminds the Amendments (66 FR 58667) states that survivors of eligible individuals, the public of the termination date of the where a petition raises an eligibility or Ricky Ray Program will make payments Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund, payment question, ‘‘the Secretary may in accordance with section 103(c)(2)(A) November 12, 2003. This date is require the petitioner to provide other of the Act, which establishes a hierarchy governed by section 101(d) of the Act, documentation, as the Secretary deems of survivors, as follows: which states that the Fund shall appropriate, to resolve issues of 1. Surviving spouse. terminate upon the expiration of the 5- eligibility, or of the procedure for 2. Child(ren) in equal shares if there year period beginning on the date of payment, raised by a petition.’’ This is no surviving spouse. enactment of the Act on November 12, regulatory provision allows a petitioner 3. Parent(s) in equal shares if there are 1998. The unobligated funds remaining to augment a petition with new no surviving spouse or surviving at the end of this period shall be documents or additional information children. deposited in the miscellaneous receipts from any source provided that the account in the Treasury of the United petition was postmarked on or before Documentation Required for States. November 13, 2001. The Act and its Augmentation Background regulations also provide for a two-year The documentation or information period between the final postmark date The Ricky Ray Program implements that the Program may consider when a and the date when the Program’s Trust petitioner, petitioner’s personal the Ricky Ray Hemophilia Relief Fund Fund terminates. This authority permits Act of 1998 (the Act), Pub. Law 105– representative, or the disinterested third the Secretary to review the most recent party augments a petition includes, but 369. The Act provides for documentation available to resolve any compassionate payments to individuals is not limited to: eligibility or payment issue relating to 1. A court order determining that the with blood-clotting disorders, such as an approval or disapproval decision on hemophilia, who were treated with other surviving parent’s parental rights a petition. have been terminated. antihemophilic factor between July 1, The Ricky Ray Program, by statute, is 2. A death certificate of the other 1982 and December 31, 1987, and authorized to pay $100,000 on behalf of eligible survivor(s). contracted human immunodeficiency an eligible individual with HIV. In the 3. Other evidence establishing virus (HIV), as well as to certain persons case of multiple survivors, i.e., children eligibility for the full payment, such as: who contracted HIV from these or parents, the $100,000 payment must (a) An order from a court of competent individuals. In the event individuals be divided in equal shares among that jurisdiction documenting that the eligible for payment are deceased, the class of survivors. There are petitioner survivor is the sole survivor of the Act also provides for payments to survivors whose petitions only included eligible individual; (b) documentation certain survivors of these individuals. documentation that supported their that supports the existence of a Petition payment determinations portion of the payment of $100,000. under the Act are based upon the relationship between a survivor and an documents that were included in a Criteria for Augmentation eligible individual, which may, in some petition as of the date the petition was The following criteria must be met in circumstances, include Social Security, reviewed. As a result, some petitions order for a petition to be eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs or were approved for a payment of less augmentation. Department of Defense benefits to than $100,000 or were disapproved 1. Only a petition postmarked by survivors; (c) documentation that the because the documentation submitted November 13, 2001, and, therefore, medical requirements necessary for with the petition did not support a included in the Ricky Ray Program eligibility have been met. payment of $100,000. system of records, may be augmented. Any documentation submitted by a The Act stipulates that petitions are to The Ricky Ray Program regulations petitioner, a petitioner’s personal be reviewed in the order received. To stipulate that petitions submitted to the representative, or a disinterested third comply with this legislative mandate, Program must be postmarked between party to augment a petition must be the Ricky Ray Program developed and July 31, 2000, and November 13, 2001. received by the Ricky Ray Program in implemented its petition review process Petitions postmarked during this period sufficient time to allow for processing whereby petitions would be randomly of time were given a petition number and payment prior to the Trust Fund’s numbered by the postmark date and and recorded in the Program’s system of termination date of November 12, 2003. reviewed in accordance with the records. No payments will be made after that randomly assigned number. The 2. Only a petitioner, a petitioner’s date. Program also decided to make payments personal representative, or a Examples of how this augmentation as soon as possible after all July 31, disinterested third party, such as a procedure will be implemented are 2000, postmarked petitions were in- court, a hospital, or a state department available on the Ricky Ray Program

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61889

website at: http://www.hrsa.gov/bhpr/ (3) Falsified Western blots and Clinical Cancer Research, published at rickyray. associated claims for Figures 1, 5A, 5B, 6(5):1969–1977, 2000, identifying and and 8 in the following paper: retracting the falsified or fabricated data Paperwork Reduction Act Muenchen, H.J., Lin, D–L., Poncza, P.J., in Figure 3 and Figures 4A and 4B. The The information collection McLean, L.L, Dirette, M.L., Keller, E.T., retraction requirements will remain on requirements for the Ricky Ray and Pienta, K.J. ‘‘Re-expression of the ALERT System until Dr. Muenchen Homphilia Relief Fund (42 CFR part functional androgen receptor in sends, and ORI receives, copies of the 130) have been approved under OMB androgen-independent prostate cancer retraction letters consistent with the No. 0915–0244. cells.’’ Published electronically on above language. Dated: September 24, 2002. November 13, 2000 in the Journal of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Biological Chemistry (JBC) as Online Elizabeth M. Duke, Director, Division of Investigative Manuscript M008934200 (withdrawn Oversight, Office of Research Integrity, Administrator. January 16, 2001); and 5515 Security Lane, Suite 700, [FR Doc. 02–24953 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] (4) Falsified Western blot analyses in Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 443–5330. BILLING CODE 4165–15–P Figures 4A, 4B, and 7 of the original draft submitted for publication on Chris B. Pascal, September 29, 2000, (and the Director, Office of Research Integrity. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND corresponding Figures 5A, 5B, and 8 in [FR Doc. 02–24952 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] HUMAN SERVICES the second draft submitted October 20, BILLING CODE 4150–31–P 2000) of the JBC manuscript. Office of the Secretary Dr. Muenchen was the first and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Findings of Scientific Misconduct corresponding author on the above publications, which were supported in HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. part by Urology Research Training Grant T32 DK07758 and SPORE grant P50 Centers for Disease Control and ACTION: Notice. CA69568. These falsifications are Prevention SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that significant because they misrepresent [Program Announcement 02185] the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) the expression of the androgen receptor, and the Assistant Secretary for Health the necessary control data, the evidence Cooperative Agreement to the have taken final action in the following for ‘‘super-repressor’’ binding and its Association of Immunization case: effect, and the control data for assaying Managers; Notice of Award of Funds apoptosis. These misrepresentations Heather J. Muenchen, Ph.D., A. Purpose University of Michigan: Based on the occurred through a series of separate The Centers for Disease Control and report of an investigation conducted by and specific deceptions in an attempt to Prevention (CDC) announces the the University of Michigan (UM), Dr. obviate the legitimate criticisms of availability of fiscal year (FY) 2002 Muenchen’s admissions, and additional publication reviewers. These funds for a cooperative agreement analysis conducted by ORI in its falsifications were designed to be program for the Association of oversight review, the U.S. Public Health misleading about the experiments’ true Immunization Managers. This program Service (PHS) found that Dr. Muenchen, results and to wrongfully induce addresses the ‘‘Healthy People 2010’’ former postdoctoral fellow at UM, publication of the experiments. Dr. focus area of Immunization and engaged in scientific misconduct in Muenchen’s work could have provided Infectious Diseases. research funded by National Institutes tools for understanding metastasis in prostate cancer and ultimately impact The purpose of the program is to (1) of Health (NIH) Urology Research maintain an effective communication Training Grant T32 DK07758 and on treatment of this disease. Dr. Muenchen has entered into a capacity among the nation’s SPORE grant PSO CA69568. Dr. Voluntary Exclusion Agreement in immunization program managers and Muenchen falsified and fabricated which she has voluntarily agreed: CDC; (2) sustain a capacity to coordinate research data by computer manipulation (1) To exclude herself from any both rapid and comprehensive of 12 Western blot analyses in three contracting or subcontracting with any assessments of problems and publications and two draft manuscripts. agency of the United States Government opportunities faced by immunization Specifically, PHS found that Dr. and from eligibility for, or involvement managers; and (3) establish a capacity to Muenchen: in, nonprocurement transactions (e.g., coordinate the consultations and (1) Falsified Western blot data in grants and cooperative agreements) of collaborations that will enable state and Figures 3, 4A, and 4B in the following the United States Government as local health departments to assimilate paper: Muenchen, H.J., Lin, D–L., defined in 45 CFR part 76 (Debarment and implement the latest programmatic, Walsh, M.A., Keller, E.T., and Pienta, Regulations) for a period of five (5) scientific and technological K.J. ‘‘Tumor necrosis factor-alpha- years, beginning on September 5, 2002; developments and concepts affecting induced apoptosis in prostate cancer (2) To exclude herself from serving in the goal of immunizing our nation’s cells through inhibition of nuclear any advisory capacity to PHS including citizens. factor-kB by an IkBa ‘super-repressor.’’’ but not limited to service on any PHS Clinical Cancer Research 6(5):1969– advisory committee, board, and/or peer B. Eligible Applicants 1977, 2000; review committee, or as a consultant for Assistance will be provided only to (2) Falsified Western blot data in a period of five (5) years, beginning on the Association of Immunization Figures 2 and 3 in the following paper: September 5, 2002; and Mangers (AIM). No other applications Muenchen, H.J., Poncza, P.J., and (3) Within 30 days of the effective are solicited. AIM is the only Pienta, K.J. ‘‘Different docetaxel- date of this Agreement, to submit letters organization that has an established induced apoptotic pathways are present of retraction to the editor of Urology relationship with state and local health in prostate cancer cell lines LNCaP and retracting the paper published at department immunization programs, PC–3.’’ Urology 57(2):366–370, 2001; 57(2):366–370, 2001, and to the editor of access to public health managers and

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61890 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

practitioners involved in the control of D. Where To Obtain Additional DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND vaccine-preventable diseases, and the Information HUMAN SERVICES expertise necessary to carry out this project. AIM is a unique organization This and other CDC announcements, Administration for Children and because its members have technical the necessary applications, and Families expertise in the areas of management, associated forms can be found on the vaccine, information technology, quality CDC home page Internet address—http:/ Proposed Information Collection assurance, health care delivery, health /www.cdc.gov. Click on ‘‘Funding’’ then Activity; Comment Request education and disease surveillance ‘‘Grants and Cooperative Agreements.’’ which is required to ensure effective For business management assistance, Proposed Projects implementation of population-based contact: Peaches Brown, Grants Title: Revised Form OCSE–100, State immunization programs. Management Specialist, Procurement and Grants Office, Centers for Disease Plan for Child Support Under Title IV– Note: Title 2 of the United States Code D of the Social Security Act. section 1611 states that an organization Control and Prevention, 2920 described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Brandywine Road, Room 3000, Atlanta, OMB No.: 0970–0017. Revenue Code that engages in lobbying GA 30341–4146, Telephone number: Description: The state plan preprint activities is not eligible to receive Federal (770) 488–2738, Email address: and amendments serve as a contract funds constituting an award, grant or loan. [email protected]. with OCSE in outlining the activities the C. Availability of Funds For program technical assistance, state will perform as requried by law in contact: Kenneth Sharp, Program order for states to receive federal funds. $150,000 is being awarded in FY Operations Branch, ISD, National We are asking for approval to revise one 2002. It is expected that the award will Immunization Program, Mailstop E–52, state plan preprint page to reflect new begin on or about September 30, 2002 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA 30333, and will be made for a 12-month budget Federal requirements regarding medical Telephone number: (404) 639–8215, support enforcement.. period within a project period of up to Email address: [email protected]. five years. Funding estimates may Respondents: 54. change. Dated: September 24, 2002. Continuation awards within an Sandra R. Manning, approved project period will be made Director, Procurement and Grants Office, on the basis of satisfactory progress as Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. evidenced by required reports and the [FR Doc. 02–24986 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] availability of funds. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Number of re- Average bur- Instrument Number of re- sponses per den hours per Total burden spondents respondent response hours

OCSE–100 ...... 54 1 .72 39 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours ...... 39

In compliance with the requirements proposed collection of information; (c) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the the quality, utility, and clarity of the HUMAN SERVICES Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the information to be collected; and (d) Administration for Children and ways to minimize the burden of the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment collection of information on Families on the specific aspects of the respondents, including through the use information collection described above. Proposed Information Collection of automated collection techniques or Activity; Comment Request Copies of the proposed collection of other forms of information technology. information can be obtained and Consideration will be given to Proposed Projects comments may be forwarded by writing comments and suggestions submitted Title: Child Care Case-Level Report. to the Administration for Children and within 60 days of this publication. OMB No.: 0970–0167. Families, Office of Administration, Dated: September 26, 2002. Description: Section 658K of the Child Office of Information Services, 370 Care and Development Block Grant Act L’Enfant Promanade, SW., Washington, Robert Sargis, of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–508, 42 U.S.C. DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Reports Clearance Officer. 9858) requires that States and Officer. All requests should be [FR Doc. 02–25002 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Territories submit monthly case-level identified by the title information BILLING CODE 4184–01–M data on the children and families collection. receiving direct services under the Child The Department specifically requests Care and Development Fund. The comments on: (a) Whether the proposed implementing regulations for the collection of information is necessary statutorily required reporting are at 45 for the proper performance of the CFR 98.70. Case-level reports, submitted functions of the agency, including quarterly or monthly (at grantee option) whether the information shall have include monthly sample or full practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the population case-level data. The data agency’s estimate of the burden of the elements to be included in these reports

VerDate Sep<04>2002 00:53 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61891

are represented in the ACF–801. child care needs, offer technical Respondents: States, the District of Disaggregate data is used to determine assistance to grantees, meet performance Columbia, and Territories including program and participant characteristics measures, and conduct research. Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, as well as costs and levels of child care Consistent with the statute and American Samoa, and the Northern services provided. This provides ACF regulations, ACF requests extension of Marianna Islands. with the information necessary to make the ACF–801. reports to Congress, address national

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Number of re- Average bur- Instrument Number of re- sponses per den hours per Total burden spondents respondent response hours

ACF–801 ...... 56 D4 20 4,480 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours ...... 4,480

In compliance with the requirements practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the HUMAN SERVICES Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the proposed collection of information; (c) Administration for Children and the quality, utility, and clarity of the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment information to be collected; and (d) Families on the specific aspects of the ways to minimize the burden of the information collection described above. Proposed Information Collection collection of information on Activity; Comment Request Copies of the proposed collection of respondents, including through the use information can be obtained and of automated collection techniques or Proposed Projects comments may be forwarded by writing other forms of information technology. Title: Online Interstate Referral Guide to the Administration for Children and Consideration will be given to Families, Office of Administration, (IRG). comments and suggestions submitted Office of Information Services, 370 OMB No.: 0970–0209. within 60 days of this publication. L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, Description: The IRG is an essential DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Dated: September 26, 2002. reference maintained by OCSE that Officer. All requests should be Robert Sargis, provides States with an effective and identified by the title of the information Reports Clearance Officer. efficient way of viewing and updating State profile, address, and FIPS code collection. [FR Doc. 02–25003 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] The Department specifically requests information by consolidating data comments on: (a) Whether the proposed BILLING CODE 4184–01–M available through numerous discrete collection of information is necessary sources into a single centralized, for the proper performance of the automated repository. functions of the agency, including Respondents: State IV–D Child whether the information shall have Support Programs.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES

Number of re- Average bur- Total Instrument Number of re- sponses per den hours per burden spondents respondents response hours

Online IRG ...... 54 18 .3 292 Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours ...... 292

In compliance with the requirements Officer. All requests should be collection of information on of Section 3056(c)(2)(A) of the identified by the title of the information respondents, including through the use Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the collection. of automated collection techniques or Administration for Children and The Department specifically requests other forms of information technology. Families is soliciting public comment comments on: (a) Whether the proposed Consideration will be given to on the specific aspects of the collection of information is necessary comments and suggestions submitted information collection described above. for the proper performance of the within 60 days of this publication. Copies of the proposed collection of functions of the agency, including Dated: September 26, 2002. information can be obtained and whether the information shall have Robert Sargis, comments may be forwarded by writing practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Reports Clearance Officer. to the Administration for Children and agency’s estimate of the burden of the [FR Doc. 02–25004 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Families, Office of Administration, proposed collection of information; (c) Office of Information Services, 370 the quality, utility, and clarity of the BILLING CODE 4184–01–M L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, information to be collected; and (d) DC 20447, Attn: AFC Reports Clearance ways to minimize the burden of the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61892 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, FDA or its contractor will collect and HUMAN SERVICES 301–827–1223. use information gathered from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the telephone, mail, shopping mall Food and Drug Administration PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal intercept or Internet surveys to evaluate agencies must obtain approval from the how consumers understand and [Docket No. 02N–0063] Office of Management and Budget respond to existing label statements, (OMB) for each collection of label statements proposed by industry Agency Information Collection information they conduct or sponsor. or consumers, and other label Activities; Proposed Collection; ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined Comment Request: Consumer Surveys statements that are under consideration in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR as part of FDA’s policy development on Food and Dietary Supplement 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests Labeling Issues process. Potential respondents to the or requirements that members of the surveys will be individual consumers AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, public submit reports, keep records, or either randomly chosen to represent HHS. provide information to a third party. specified populations or randomly Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 assigned to experimental treatment ACTION: Notice. U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal conditions to control for the effects of agencies to provide a 60-day notice in SUMMARY: The Food and Drug the Federal Register concerning each individual differences in the population Administration (FDA) is announcing an proposed collection of information, on the interpretation of label statements. opportunity for public comment on the including each proposed extension of an In all instances, FDA will strive to proposed collection of certain existing collection of information, collect a representative sample of information by the agency. Under the before submitting the collection to OMB individuals from the overall population Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the for approval. To comply with this or from relevant population groups, as PRA), Federal agencies are required to requirement, FDA is publishing notice appropriate. FDA’s general selection publish notice in the Federal Register of the proposed collection of method will use stratification, with concerning each proposed collection of information set forth in this document. random sampling within the strata, to information, including each proposed With respect to the following achieve representativeness for both extension of an existing collection of collection of information, FDA invites overall populations and sensitive information, and to allow 60 days for comments on: (1) Whether the proposed subpopulations, such as at-risk public comment in response to the collection of information is necessary individuals or user segments. In the rare notice. This notice solicits comments on for the proper performance of FDA’s surveys to study consumers’ cases where geography is a limiting functions, including whether the factor, FDA will use population-based understanding of specific label information will have practical utility; statements for conventional foods and cluster sampling to limit Government (2) the accuracy of FDA’s estimate of the expense while preserving the statistical dietary supplements and the impact of burden of the proposed collection of properties of the sample. such labeling on consumer practices, information, including the validity of knowledge levels, and attitudes. In the the methodology and assumptions used; Respondents will provide background Federal Register of July 8, 2002 (67 FR (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, information and respond to package 45128), FDA published a notice and clarity of the information to be labels that contain the variations of label announcing OMB’s approval of this collected; and (4) ways to minimize the statements to be tested. Measures will collection of information (OMB control burden of the collection of information include both self-reported number 0910–0492). Because this was on respondents, including through the comprehension and acceptance as well an emergency approval that will expire use of automated collection techniques, as direct behavioral measures of on December 31, 2002, FDA in this when appropriate, and other forms of consumer use and understanding of the notice is following the normal PRA information technology. package labeling. clearance procedures by issuing this notice. Consumer Surveys on Food and Dietary FDA will use the information from the Supplement Labeling Issues (OMB surveys in evaluating regulatory and DATES: Submit written or electronic Control Number 910–0492)—Extension policy options with respect to labeling. comments on the collection of The agency often lacks empirical data information by December 2, 2002. FDA is requesting an extension of the OMB approval of consumer surveys to about how consumers understand and ADDRESSES: Submit electronic help FDA’s Center for Food Safety and respond to statements they might see in comments on the collection of Applied Nutrition formulate decisions product labeling. The information information to http:// and policies affecting the labeling of gathered from such surveys can be used www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/ conventional foods and dietary to test consumer comprehension and dockets/edockethome.cfm. Submit supplements. Determining how behavioral impact of various label written comments on the collection of consumers are likely to interpret various statements and formats, taking into information to the Dockets Management kinds of claims, disclaimers, warnings, Branch (HFA–305), Food and Drug account the existing distribution of caution statements, and notice behavior, knowledge and attitudes in Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. statements that might appear in labeling 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All the population that provides the context is critical to agency decisionmaking for understanding such statements. The comments should be identified with the under the Federal Food, Drug, and surveys will help FDA assess consumer docket number found in brackets in the Cosmetic Act and the first amendment. reactions to existing and proposed label heading of this document. It is often necessary to test actual or statements. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: proposed labeling statements in realistic Peggy Schlosburg, Office of Information situations with typical consumers to FDA estimates the burden of this Resources Management (HFA–250), determine what these label statements collection of information as follows: Food and Drug Administration, 5600 are communicating to consumers.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61893

TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN1

No. of Annual Frequency per Total Annual Hours per Type of Survey Respondents Response Responses Response Total Hours

Mail questionnaire 1,000 1 1,000 1 1,000 Telephone survey 2,000 1 2,000 .5 1,000 Internet or mall intercept survey 4,000 1 4,000 .5 2,000 Total 4,000 1There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

These estimates assume that as many ‘‘Modifications to the List of Recognized In Federal Register notices published as one mail survey project, one Standards, Recognition List Number: on October 16, 1998 (63 FR 55617); July telephone survey project, and two 007’’ to the Division of Small 12, 1999 (64 FR 37546); November 15, internet or mall intercept survey Manufacturers Assistance (DSMA), 2000 (65 FR 69022); May 7, 2001 (66 FR projects may be done on an annual Center for Devices and Radiological 23032), and January 14, 2002 (67 FR basis. Estimates are based on the Health (CDRH) (HFZ–220), Food and 1774), FDA modified its initial list of expected number of respondents Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., recognized standards. These notices necessary to obtain a statistically Rockville, MD 20850. Send two self- described the addition, withdrawal, and significant representation of important addressed adhesive labels to assist that revision of certain standards recognized consumer segments (e.g., users of office in processing your requests, or fax by FDA. relevant regulated products, at risk your request to 301–443–8818. Submit FDA maintains the agency’s current population groups) and the number of written comments concerning this list of ‘‘FDA Recognized Consensus labeling options that may need to be document to the contact person (see FOR Standards’’ in a searchable database that tested. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Identify may be accessed directly at FDA’s Dated: September 24, 2002.. comments with the docket number Internet site at http:// Margaret M. Dotzel, found in brackets in the heading of this www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/ document. You may access this Associate Commissioner for Policy. cfdocs/cfStandards/search.cfm. FDA document on FDA’s Internet site at will incorporate the modifications and [FR Doc. 02–25079 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/fedregin.html. minor revisions described in this notice BILLING CODE 4160–01–S See section V of this document for into the database and this recognition of electronic access to the searchable consensus standards will be effective database for the current list of ‘‘FDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND upon publication in the Federal HUMAN SERVICES Recognized Consensus Standards,’’ Register. FDA will announce additional including recognition list number: 007 modifications and minor revisions to Food and Drug Administration modifications, and other standards the list of recognized consensus related information. standards, as needed, in the Federal [Docket No. 97D–0530] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Register once a year, or more often, if FDA Modernization Act of 1997: Carol L. Herman, Center for Devices and necessary. Modifications to the List of Recognized Radiological Health (HFZ–84), Food and For each of the recognized standards, Standards, Recognition List Number: Drug Administration, 2094 Gaither Rd., FDA provides in the database a 007 Rockville, MD 20850, 301–594–4766, supplementary information sheet that ext. 156. includes information such as: AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. Devices affected by the standard; HHS. 2. Processes affected by the standard ACTION: Notice. I. Background (premarket notification (510(k), Section 204 of the Food and Drug premarket approval (PMA), SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of investigational device exemption (IDE), Administration (FDA) is announcing a 1997 (FDAMA) (Public Law 105–115) product development protocol (PDP), publication containing modifications amended section 514 of the Federal and quality systems regulation (QSR)); the agency is making to the list of Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) 3. Extent of recognition (all or part of standards FDA will recognize for use in (21 U.S.C. 360d). Amended section 514 the standard, for what purpose the premarket reviews (FDA Recognized of the act allows FDA to recognize standard is recognized); Consensus Standards). This publication, consensus standards, developed by 4. Related citations in the Code of entitled ‘‘Modifications to the List of international and national Federal Regulations that identify the Recognized Standards, Recognition List organizations, for use in satisfying devices covered; Number: 007’’ (recognition list number: portions of device premarket review 5. Related product codes that are used 007), will assist manufacturers who submissions or other requirements. by FDA to identify the devices covered; elect to declare conformity with In a notice published in the Federal and consensus standards to meet certain Register of February 25, 1998 (63 FR 6. Guidances relevant to the devices requirements for medical devices. 9561), FDA announced the availability affected by the standard. DATES: The recognition of standards of guidance entitled ‘‘Recognition and announced in this document will Use of Consensus Standards.’’ This II. Modifications to the List of become effective October 2, 2002. notice described how FDA will Recognized Standards, Recognition List Submit written comments concerning implement its standards program Number: 007 this document at any time. recognizing the use of certain standards FDA is announcing the addition, ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for and provided the initial list of withdrawal, correction, and revision of single copies on a 3.5″ diskette of recognized standards. certain consensus standards the agency

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61894 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

will recognize for use in satisfying making to the list of recognized • Devices affected portions of premarket review standards. These changes include: • • Devices affected and type of submissions for devices. FDA will Withdrawn and replaced with a standard incorporate these modifications in the newer version • The following tables are divided by list of ‘‘FDA Recognized Consensus Withdrawn and transferred to standards categories, include the two Standards’’ in the agency’s searchable materials • Contact person new categories of materials and tissue database. FDA is also establishing two • Transition statement added to the engineering standards, and identify the new categories of recognized standards: extend of recognition old item number, the name of the (1) ‘‘Materials’’ and (2) ‘‘tissue • Citations and product codes standard, the specific change, and the engineering’’ standards. The tables • Withdrawn new replacement number, if any. below reflect the changes FDA is • Title correction • Product codes and relevant guidance A. Biocompatibility

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

12 ASTM F813–01, Standard Practice for Direct Withdrawn and replaced with Contact Cell Culture Evaluation of Materials newer version 56 for Medical Devices

13 ASTM E895–84 (2001)e1, Standard Test Withdrawn and replaced with 57 Method for Agar Diffusion Cell Culture newer version Screening for Cytotoxicity

46 USP 25—NF20, Biological Tests <87>, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 58 logical Reactivity Test, In Vitro—Direct Con- newer version tact Test

47 USP 25—NF20, Biological Tests <88>, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 59 logical Reactivity Test, In Vitro—Elution newer version Test

48 USP 25—NF20, Biological Tests <88>, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 60 logical Reactivity Test, In Vivo, Classifica- newer version tion of Plastics—Simple Preparation

49 USP 25—NF20, Biological Tests <88>, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 61 logical Reactivity Test, In Vivo— newer version Intracutaneous Test

50 USP 25—NF20, Biological Tests <88>, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 62 logical Reactivity Test, In Vivo—Systemic newer version Injection Test

55 ANSI/AAMI/ISO 10993–6:1995/(R)2001: Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 63 logical evaluation of medical devices—Part newer version 6: Test for local effects after implantation

54 ANSI/AAMI/ISO 10993–5: Biological evalua- Withdrawn and replaced with 64 tion of medical devices—Part 5: Tests for in change in extent of rec- vitro cytotoxicity ognition

B. Cardiovascular/Neurology

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

12 ASTM F961–96, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Cobalt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molyb- materials denum Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants [UNS R30035]

21 ASTM F75–01, Standard Specification for Co- Withdrawn and transferred to balt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy materials Castings and Casting Alloy for Surgical Im- plant (UNS R30075)

22 ASTM F90–01, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten- materials 10 Nickel Alloy for Surgical Implant Applica- tions (UNS R30605)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61895

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

24 ASTM F560–98, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Unalloyed Tantalum for Surgical Implant materials Applications (UNS R05200, UNS R05400)

28 ASTM F1058–97, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-Chromium-Nickel-Molyb- materials denum-Iron Alloy for Surgical Implant Appli- cations

34 ASTM F138–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought 18 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molyb- materials denum Stainless Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

35 ASTM F562–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 materials Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Ap- plications

36 ASTM F136–98e1, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium materials ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy (UNS R56401) for Surgical Implant Applications

C. Dental/ENT

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

01 ASTM F67–00, Standard Specification for Unalloyed Ti- Withdrawn and trans- tanium for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS ferred to materials R50250, UNS R50550, UNS R50700)

02 ASTM F75–01, Standard Specification for Cobalt-28 Withdrawn and trans- Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Castings and Casting ferred to materials Alloy for Surgical Implant (UNS R 30075)

03 ASTM F90–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Withdrawn and trans- balt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten-10 Nickel Alloy for ferred to materials Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R30605)

04 ASTM F136–98e1, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium ELI (Extra Low In- ferred to materials terstitial) Alloy (UNS R56401) for Surgical Implant Ap- plications

05 ASTM F138–00, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Withdrawn and trans- Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Bar ferred to materials and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

06 ASTM F139–00, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Withdrawn and trans- Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel ferred to materials Sheet and Strip for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

07 ASTM F562–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Withdrawn and trans- balt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molybdenum Alloy for ferred to materials Surgical Implant Applications

08 ASTM F620–00, Standard Specification for Alpha Beta Withdrawn and trans- Titanium Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants ferred to materials

09 ASTM F621–97, Standard Specification for Stainless Withdrawn and trans- Steel Forgings for Surgical Implants ferred to materials

10 ASTM F688–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Withdrawn and trans- balt-35 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Alloy Plate, Sheet, ferred to materials and Foil for Surgical Implants (UNS R30035)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61896 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

11 ASTM F745–00, Standard Specification for 18 Chro- Withdrawn and trans- mium-12.5 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel for ferred to materials Cast and Solution-Annealed Surgical Implant Applica- tions

12 ASTM F799–99, Standard Specification for Cobalt-28 Withdrawn and trans- Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings for Surgical ferred to materials Implants (UNS R31537, R31538, R31539)

13 ASTM F961–96, Standard Specification for Cobalt-35 Withdrawn and trans- Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings ferred to materials for Surgical Implants [UNS R30035]

14 ASTM F1088–87 (1992)e1, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and trans- Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate for Surgical Implantation ferred to materials

15 ASTM F1091–91(2000), Standard Specification for Withdrawn and trans- Wrought Cobalt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten-10 Nickel ferred to materials Alloy Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS R 30605)

16 ASTM F1108–97a, Standard Specification for Ti6A14V Withdrawn and trans- Alloy Castings for Surgical Implants (UNS R56406) ferred to materials

17 ASTM F1185–88(1993)e1, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and trans- Composition of Ceramic Hydroxylapatite for Surgical ferred to materials Implants

18 ASTM F1295–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Titanium-6 Aluminum-7 Niobium Alloy for Surgical Im- ferred to materials plant Applications (UNS R56700)

19 ASTM F1314–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Nitrogen Strengthened 22 Chromium-13 Nickel-5 ferred to materials Manganese-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel Alloy Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S20910)

20 ASTM F1341–99, Standard Specification for Unalloyed Withdrawn and trans- Titanium Wire UNS R50250, UNS R50400, UNS ferred to materials R50500, UNS R50700, for Surgical Implant Applica- tions

21 ASTM F1350–01, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Withdrawn and trans- Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5, Molybdenum Stainless Steel ferred to materials Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS S31673)

23 ASTM F1472–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium Alloy (UNS ferred to materials R56400) for Surgical Implant Applications

24 ASTM F1537–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Cobalt-28-Chromium-6-Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical ferred to materials Implants (UNS R31537, UNS R31538, and UNS R31539)

25 F1580–95e1, Standard Specification for Titanium and Withdrawn and trans- Titanium-6% Aluminum-4% Vanadium Alloy Powders ferred to materials for Coatings of Surgical Implants

26 ASTM F1586–02, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Nitrogen Strengthened 21 Chromium-Nickel-3 Man- ferred to materials ganese-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar for Sur- gical Implants (UNS S31675)

27 ASTM F1609–95, Standard Specification for Calcium Withdrawn and trans- Phosphate Coatings for Implantable materials ferred to materials

28 ASTM F1713–96, Standard Specification for Wrought Withdrawn and trans- Titanium-13 Niobium-13 Zirconium Alloy for Surgical ferred to materials Implant Applications

42 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 3:1994, Dental Impression Contact person 42 Compound

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61897

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

44 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 11:1968, Agar Impression Contact person 44 Material

45 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 13:1981, Denture Cold-Cur- Contact person 45 ing Repair Resin

48 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 16:1989, Dental Impression Contact person 48 Paste Zinc Oxide Eugenol Type

49 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 17:1983, Denture Base Contact person 49 Temporary Relining Resin

50 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 18:1992, Alginate Impres- Contact person 50 sion Materials

51 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 20:1968, Dental Duplicating Contact person 51 Material

52 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 27:1993, Resin-Based Fill- Contact person 52 ing Materials

53 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 30:1990, Dental Zinc Contact person 53 Oxide-Eugenol and Zinc Oxide Non-Eugenol Cements

55 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 48:1983, Ultraviolet Acti- Contact person, update to 55 vator and Disclosing Lights processes impacted to include quality system regulation

56 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 57:1993, Endodontic Seal- Contact person, update to 56 ing Materials processes impacted to include quality system regulation

59 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 80:2001, Color Stability Withdrawn and replaced 91 Test Procedures with newer version, up- date to processes im- pacted to include qual- ity system regulation

60 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 96:1994, Dental-Water- Contact person, update to 60 Based Cements processes impacted to include quality system regulation

62 ISO 1563:1990, Dental Alginate Impression Material Contact person, update to 62 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

63 ISO 1564:1995, Dental Aqueous Impression Materials Contact person, update to 63 Based on Agar processes impacted to include quality system regulation

64 ISO 3107:1998, Dental Zinc Oxide Eugenol Cements Contact person, update to 64 and Zinc Oxide Non-Eugenol Cements processes impacted to include quality system regulation

65 ISO 3336:1993, Dentistry—Synthetic Polymer Teeth Contact person, update to 65 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

66 ISO 4049:1998, Dentistry—Resin-Based Filling Mate- Contact person, update to 66 rials processes impacted to include quality system regulation

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61898 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

69 ISO 6872:1995, Amendment 1-1997 Dental Ceramic Contact person, update to 69 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

71 ISO 6876:1986, Dental Root Canal Sealing Materials Contact person, update to 71 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

72 ISO 6877:1995, Dental Root Canal Obturating Points Contact person, update to 72 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

80 ISO 9917:1991, Dental Water-Based Cements Contact person, update to 80 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

81 ISO 10139-1:1991, Dentistry—Resilient Lining Materials Contact person, Update to 81 for Removable Dentures Part 1: Short Term Materials CDRH Offices to in- clude OC/DE2, and up- date to processes im- pacted to include qual- ity system regulation

82 ISO 10477:1998, Dentistry—Polymer-Based Crown and Contact person, update to 82 Bridge Materials processes impacted to include quality system regulation

85 ANSI/ADA Specification 15:1999, Synthetic Resin Teeth Contact person, update to 85 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

86 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 38:2000, Metal-Ceramic Contact person, update to 86 System processes impacted to include quality system regulation

87 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 69:1999, Dental Ceramic Contact person, update to 87 processes impacted to include quality system regulation

88 ANSI/ADA Specification No. 78:2000, Endodontic Contact person 88 Obturating Points

89 ANSI/ASA Specification No. 53:1999, Polymer-Based Contact Person, update to 89 Crown and Bridge Resins processes impacted to include quality system regulation

D. General

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

28 IEC 60601–1–2 (Second Edition, 2001), Med- Transition statement added 28 ical Electrical Equipment—Part1: General to the extent of recognition Requirements for Safety; Electomagnetic Compatibility—Requirements and Tests

E. General Hospital/General Plastic Surgery

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61899

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

13 ISO 595/1 First Edition 1986–12–15, Reus- Citations and product codes 13 able All Glass or Metal-and-Glass Syringes for Medical Use, Part 1: Dimensions

49 ASTM D6355–98, Standard Test Method for Withdrawn Human Repeat Insult Patch Testing of Med- ical Gloves

57 USP 24 <11>, Sterile Water for Injection Withdrawn

62 ISO 8536–6, First Edition, 1996–04–01, Infu- Citations and product codes 62 sion Equipment for Medical Use—Part 6: Freeze Drying Closures for Infusion Bottles

63 ISO 8536–7, Second Edition, 1999–09–01, In- Citations and product codes 63 fusion Equipment, Caps made of Alu- minum-Plastic Combinations for Infusion Bottles

76 ISO 1135–4, Second Edition, 1998–03–15, Citations and product codes 76 Transfusion Equipment for Medical Use— Part 4: Transfusion Sets for Single Use

80 ASTM E1112–00, Standards Specification for Contact person 80 Electronic Thermometers for Intermittent Determinations of Patient Temperatures

41 USP 25, Nonabsorbable Surgical Sutures Withdrawn and replaced with 82 newer version

50 ASTM D6319–00ae3, Standard Specification Withdrawn and replaced with 83 for Nitrile Examination Gloves for Medical newer version Application

51 ASTM D6124–01, Standard Test Method for Withdrawn and replaced with 84 Residual Powder on Medical Globes newer version

52 ASTM D5250–00e4, Standard Specification Withdrawn and replaced with 85 for Poly (vinyl chloride) Gloves for Medical newer version Application

54 ASTM D3578–01ae2, Standard Specification Withdrawn and replaced with 86 for Rubber Examination Gloves newer version

55 ASTM D3577–01ae2, Standard Specification Withdrawn and replaced with 87 for Rubber Surgical Gloves newer version

56 USP 25 <11>, Sterile Sodium Chloride for Irri- Withdrawn and replaced with 88 gation newer version

58 USP 25, Absorbable Surgical Sutures Withdrawn and replaced with 89 newer version

59 USP 25 <881>, Tensile Strength Withdrawn and replaced with 90 newer version

60 USP 25 <861>, Sutures—Diameter Withdrawn and replaced with 91 newer version

61 USP 25 <871>, Sutures Needle Attachment Withdrawn and replaced with 92 newer version

F. Materials

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

Dental 01, Ortho 123 ASTM F67–00, Standard Specification for Unalloyed Ti- Transferred from dental/ 01 tanium for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS ENT and orthopaedics R50250, UNS R50550, UNS R 50700)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61900 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

Cardio 21, Dental 02, Ortho 86 ASTM F75–01, Standard Specification for Cobalt-28 Transferred from cardio- 02 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Castings and Casting vascular/neurology den- Alloy for Surgical Implant (UNS R30075) tal/ENT and orthopaedics

Cardio 22, Dental 03, Ortho 87 ASTM F90–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Transferred from cardio- 03 balt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten-10 Nickel Alloy for vascular neurology, Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R30605) dental/ENT and orthopaedics

Cardio 36, Dental 04, Ortho 88 ASTM F136–98e1, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from cardio- 04 Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium ELI (Extra Low In- vascular/neurology, terstitial) Alloy (UNS R56401) for Surgical Implant Ap- dental/ENT and plications orthopaedics

Cardio 34, Dental 05, Ortho 144 ASTM F138–00, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Transferred from cardio- 05 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Bar vascular/neurology, and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673) dental/ENT and orthopaedics

Dental 06, Ortho 125 ASTM F139–00, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Transferred from dental/ 06 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel ENT and orthopaedics Sheet and Strip for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

Cardio 24, Ortho 90 ASTM F560–98, Standard Specification for Unalloyed Transferred from cardio- 07 Tantalum for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS vascular/neurology and R05200, UNS R05400) orthopaedics

Cardio 35, Dental 07, Ortho 127 ASTM F562–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Transferred from cardio- 08 balt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molybdenum Alloy for vascular/neurology, Surgical Implant Applications dental/ENT and orthopaedics

Ortho 146 ASTM F603–00, Standard Specification for High-Purity Transferred from 10 Dense Aluminum Oxide for Surgical Implant Applica- orthopaedics tion

Dental 08, Ortho 147 ASTM F620–00, Standard Specification for Alpha Beta Transferred from dental/ 11 Titanium Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants ENT and orthopaedics

Dental 09, Ortho 97 ASTM F621–97, Standard Specification for Stainless Transferred from dental/ 12 Steel Forgings for Surgical Implants ENT and orthopaedics

Ortho 148 ASTM F648–00, Standard Specification for Ultra-High- Transferred from 13 Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Powder and Fab- orthopaedics ricated Form for Surgical Implants

Dental 10, Ortho 128 ASTM F688–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Co- Transferred from dental/ 14 balt-35 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Alloy Plate, Sheet, ENT and orthopaedics and Foil for Surgical Implants (UNS R30035)

Dental 11, Ortho 129 ASTM F745–00, Standard Specification for 18 Chro- Transferred from dental/ 15 mium-12.5 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel for ENT and orthopaedics Cast and Solution-Annealed Surgical Implant Applica- tions

Ortho 149 ASTM F746–87 (1999), Standard Test Method for Pit- Transferred from 16 ting or Crevice Corrosion of Metallic Surgical Implant orthopaedics Materials

Dental 12, Ortho 130 ASTM F799–99, Standard Specification for Cobalt-28 Transferred from dental/ 17 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings for Surgical ENT and orthopaedics Implants (UNS R31537, R31538, R31539)

Ortho 27 ASTM F899–95, Standard Specification for Stainless Transferred from 18 Steel Billet, Bar, and Wire for Surgical Instruments orthopaedics

Cardio 12, Dental 13, Ortho 28 ASTM F961–96, Standard Specification for Cobalt-35 Transferred from cardio- 19 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings vascular/neurology, for Surgical Implants [UNS R30035] dental/ENT and orthopaedics

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61901

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

Cardio 28 ASTM F1058–97, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from cardio- 20 Cobalt-Chromium-Nickel-Molybdenum-Iron Alloy for vascular/neurology Surgical Implant Applications

Dental 14, Ortho 132 ASTM F1088–87 (1992)e1, Standard Specification for Transferred from dental/ 21 Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate for Surgical Implantation ENT and orthopaedics

Dental 15, Ortho 151 ASTM F1091–91(2000), Standard Specification for Transferred from dental/ 22 Wrought Cobalt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten-10 Nickel ENT and orthopaedics Alloy Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS R 30605)

Dental 16, Ortho 133 ASTM F1108–97a, Standard Specification for Ti6A14V Transferred from dental/ 23 Alloy Castings for Surgical Implants (UNS R56406) ENT and orthopaedics

Dental 17, Ortho 109 ASTM F1185–88(1993)e1, Standard Specification for Transferred from dental/ 24 Composition of Ceramic Hydroxylapatite for Surgical ENT and orthopaedics Implants

Dental 18, Ortho 134 ASTM F1295–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental/ 25 Titanium-6 Aluminum-7 Niobium Alloy for Surgical Im- ENT and orthopaedics plant Applications (UNS R56700)

Dental 19, Ortho 40 ASTM F1314–01, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental/ 26 Nitrogen Strengthened 22 Chromium-13 Nickel-5 ENT and orthopaedics Manganese-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel Alloy Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S20910)

Dental 20, Ortho 135 ASTM F1341–99, Standard Specification for Unalloyed Transferred for dental/ 27 Titanium Wire UNS R50250, UNS R50400, UNS ENT and orthopaedics R50500, UNS R50700, for Surgical Implant Applica- tions

Dental 21, Ortho 154 ASTM F1350–01, Standard Specification for Wrought 18 Transferred from dental/ 28 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5, Molybdenum Stainless Steel ENT and orthopaedics Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS S31673)

Dental 23, Ortho 136 ASTM F1472–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental/ 29 Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium Alloy (UNS ENT and orthopaedics R56400) for Surgical Implant Applications

Dental 24, Ortho 137 ASTM F1537–00, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental/ 30 Cobalt-28-Chromium-6-Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical ENT and orthopaedics Implants (UNS R31537, UNS R31538, and UNS R31539)

Dental 25, Ortho 139 ASTM F1580–95e1, Standard Specification for Titanium Transferred from dental/ 31 and Titanium-6% Aluminum-4% Vanadium Alloy Pow- ENT and orthopaedics ders for Coatings of Surgical Implants

Dental 26, Ortho 50 ASTM F1586–02, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental/ 32 Nitrogen Strengthened 21 Chromium-Nickel-3 Man- ENT and orthopaedics ganese-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar for Sur- gical Implants (UNS S31675)

Dental 27, Ortho 51 ASTM F1609–95, Standard Specification for Calcium Transferred from dental/ 33 Phosphate Coatings for Implantable Materials ENT and orthopaedics

Ortho 54 ASTM F1659–95, Standard Test Method for Bending Transferred from 34 and Shear Testing of Calcium Phosphate Coatings on orthopaedics Solid Metallic Substrates

Dental 28, Ortho 56 ASTM F1713–96, Standard Specification for Wrought Transferred from dental 35 Titanium-13 Niobium-13 Zirconium Alloy for Surgical /ENT and orthopaedics Implant Applications

Ortho 116 ASTM F1801–97, Standard Recommended Practice for Transferred from 36 Corrosion Fatigue Testing of Metallic Implant Mate- orthopaedics rials

Rad 65 ASTM F2052–00, Standard Test Method for Measure- Transferred from radi- 39 ment of Magnetically Induced Displacement Force on ology Passive Implants in the Magnetic Resonance Environ- ment

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61902 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

G. Obstetrics and Gynecology (OB- GYN)/Gastroenterology

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

08 ISO 4047–1: 1996(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 1: Requirements newer version

09 ISO 4074–2: 1994(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 2: Determination of Length newer version

10 ISO 4047–3: 1994(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 3: Determination of Width newer version

11 ISO 4047–5: 1996(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 5: Testing for Holes—Water Leak Test newer version

12 ISO 4074–6: 1996(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 6: Determination of Bursting Volume newer version and Pressure

13 ISO 4074–7: 1996(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 7: Oven Conditioning newer version

14 ISO 4047–9: 1996(E): Rubber Condoms— Withdrawn and replaced with 26 Part 9: Determination of Tensile Properties newer version

H. Orthopaedics

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

27 ASTM F899–95, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Stainless Steel Billet, Bar, and Wire for Sur- materials gical Instruments

28 ASTM F961–96, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Cobalt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 Molyb- to materials denum Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants [UNS R30035]

40 ASTM F1314–01, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Wrought Nitrogen Strengthened 22 Chro- to materials mium-13 Nickel-5 Manganese-2.5 Molyb- denum Stainless Steel Alloy Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S20910)

50 ASTM F1586–02, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Wrought Nitrogen Strengthened 21 Chro- to materials mium-Nickel-3 Manganese-2.5 Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar for Surgical Implants (UNS S31675)

51 ASTM F1609–95, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Calcium Phosphate Coatings for to materials Implantable Materials

54 ASTM F1659–95, Standard Test Method for Withdrawn and Transferred Bending and Shear Testing of Calcium to materials Phosphate Coatings on Solid Metallic Sub- strates

56 ASTM F1713–96, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Wrought Titanium-13 Niobium-13 Zirconium to materials Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications

86 ASTM F75–01, Standard Specification for Co- Withdrawn and transferred to balt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Materials Castings and Casting Alloy for Surgical Im- plant (UNS R30075)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61903

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

87 ASTM F90–01, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Wrought Cobalt-20 Chromium-15 Tungsten- to materials 10 Nickel Alloy for Surgical Implant Applica- tions (UNS R30605)

88 ASTM F136–98e1, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium Materials ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy (UNS R56401) for Surgical Implant Applications

90 ASTM F560–98, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Unalloyed Tantalum for Surgical Implant to materials Applications (UNS R05200, UNS R05400)

97 ASTM F621–97, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and Transferred Stainless Steel Forgings for Surgical Im- to materials plants

109 ASTM F1185–88(1993)e1, Standard Speci- Withdrawn and transferred to fication for Composition of Ceramic Materials Hydroxylapatite for Surgical Implants

116 ASTM F1801–97, Standard Recommended Withdrawn and transferred to Practice for Corrosion Fatigue Testing of materials Metallic Implant Materials

123 ASTM F67–00, Standard Specification for Un- Withdrawn and transferred to alloyed Titanium for Surgical Implant Appli- materials cations (UNS R50250, UNS R50550, UNS R 50700)

125 ASTM F139–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought 18 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molyb- materials denum Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

127 ASTM F562–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-35 Nickel-20 Chromium-10 materials Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Ap- plications

128 ASTM F688–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-35 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum materials Alloy Plate, Sheet, and Foil for Surgical Im- plants (UNS R30035)

129 ASTM F745–00, Standard Specification for 18 Withdrawn and transferred to Chromium-12.5 Nickel-2.5 Molybdenum materials Stainless Steel for Cast and Solution-An- nealed Surgical Implant Applications

130 ASTM F799–99, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Materials Forgings for Surgical Implants (UNS R31537, R31538, R31539)

132 ASTM F1088–87 (1992)e1, Standard Speci- Withdrawn and transferred to fication for Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate for materials Surgical Implantation

133 ASTM F1108–97a, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Ti6A14V Alloy Castings for Surgical Im- materials plants (UNS R56406)

134 ASTM F1295–01, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Titanium-6 Aluminum-7 Niobium materials Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R56700)

135 ASTM F1341–99, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Unalloyed Titanium Wire UNS R50250, materials UNS R50400, UNS R50500, UNS R50700, for Surgical Implant Applications

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61904 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

136 ASTM F1472–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium materials Alloy (UNS R56400) for Surgical Implant Applications

137 ASTM F1537–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought Cobalt-28-Chromium-6-Molyb- materials denum Alloy for Surgical Implants (UNS R31537, UNS R31538, and UNS R31539)

138 ASTM F1541–01, Standard Specification and Withdrawn and replaced with 158 Test Methods for External Skeletal Fixation newer version Devices

139 F1580–95e1, Standard Specification for Tita- Withdrawn and transferred to nium and Titanium-6% Aluminum-4% Vana- materials dium Alloy Powders for Coatings of Surgical Implants

144 ASTM F138–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought 18 Chromium-14 Nickel-2.5 Molyb- materials denum Stainless Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)

146 ASTM F603–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to High-Purity Dense Aluminum Oxide for Sur- materials gical Implant Application

147 ASTM F620–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Alpha Beta Titanium Alloy Forgings for Sur- materials gical Implants

148 ASTM F648–00, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene materials Powder and Fabricated Form for Surgical Implants

149 ASTM F746–87 (1999), Standard Test Meth- Withdrawn and transferred to od for Pitting or Crevice Corrosion of Metal- materials lic Surgical Implant Materials

151 ASTM F1091–91(2000), Standard Specifica- Withdrawn and transferred to tion for Wrought Cobalt-20 Chromium-15 Materials Tungsten-10 Nickel Alloy Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS R 30605)

154 ASTM F1350–01, Standard Specification for Withdrawn and transferred to Wrought 18 Chromium-14 Nickel–2.5, Mo- materials lybdenum Stainless Steel Surgical Fixation Wire (UNS S31673)

I. Physical Medicine

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

21 ISO 7176–6:2001, Wheelchairs—Part 6: De- Withdrawn and replaced with 29 termination of Maximum Speed, Accelera- newer version tion and Deceleration of Electric Wheel- chairs

22 ISO 7176–9:2001, Wheelchairs—Part 9: Cli- Withdrawn and replaced with 30 matic Tests for Electric Wheelchair newer version

J. Radiology

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61905

Old Item No. Standard Change Replacement Item No.

9 NEMA NU 1–2001, Perform- Withdrawn and replaced with newer 75 ance Measurements of Scin- version tillation Cameras

18 NEMA NU 2–2001, Perform- Withdrawn and replaced with newer 76 ance Measurement of version Positron Emission Tomographs

46 AIUM RTD1—1998, Standard Title correction 46 for Real-Time Display of Thermal and Mechanical Acoustic Output Indices on Diagnostic Ultrasound Equip- ment Revision 1

61 UL 122–2001, Standard for Title correction 61 Safety of Photographic Equipment—Fourth Edition

62 UL 187–1998, Standard for Title correction 62 Safety X-ray Equipment— Seventh Edition

64 IEC 60601–2–45, Ed. 2.0, Med- Title correction 64 ical Electrical Equipment: Part 2–45: Particular Require- ment for the Safety of Mam- mographic X-ray Equipment and Mammographic Stereotactic Devices

66 MUS (R 1999), Medical Title correction 66 Ultrasound Safety

67 NEMA MS–1–2001, Determina- Withdrawn and replaced with newer 77 tion of Signal to Noise Ratio version (SNR) in Diagnostic Magnetic Resonance Images

70 NEMA PS 3.15 2000, Digital Withdrawn and replaced with newer 78 Imaging and Communication version in Medicine (DICOM) Part 15: Security Profile

73 UL–122 (R2001), Standard for Withdrawn Safety, Photographic Equip- ment

K. Sterility

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

01 AOAC 6.2.01:1995, Official Method 955.24, Product codes 01 Testing Disinfectants Against Salmonella choleraesuis, Use-Dilution Method

02 AOAC 6.2.02:1995, Official Method 991.47, Product codes 02 Testing Disinfectants Against Salmonella choleraesuis, Hard Surface Carrier Test Method

03 AOAC 6.2.03:1995, Official Method 991.48, Product codes 03 Testing Disinfectants Against Staphy- lococcus aureus, Hard Surface Carrier Test Method

04 AOAC 6.2.04:1995, Official Method 955.15, Product codes 04 Testing Disinfectants Against Staphy- lococcus aureus, Use-Dilution Method

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61906 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

05 AOAC 6.2.05:1995, Official Method 991.49, Product codes and relevant 05 Testing Disinfectants Against Pseudomonas guidance aeruginosa, Hard Surface Carrier Test Methods

06 AOAC 6.2.06:1995, Official Method 964.02, Product codes and relevant 06 Testing Disinfectants Against Pseudomonas guidance aeruginosa, Use-Dilution Method

07 AOAC 6.3.02:1995, Official Method 955.17, Product codes and relevant 07 Fungicidal Activity of Disinfectants Using guidance Trichophyton mentagrophytes

08 AOAC 6.3.05:1995, Official Method 966.04, Product codes and relevant 08 Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants guidance

09 AOAC 6.3.06:1995, Official Method 965.12, Product codes and relevant 09 Tuberculocidal Activity of Disinfectants guidance

10 ANSI/AAMI ST8: 2001, Hospital Steam Steri- Withdrawn and replaced with 71 lization newer version

11 ANSI/AAMI ST19:1994, Biological Indicators Withdrawn for Saturated Steam Sterilization

12 ANSI/AAMI ST21:1994, Biological Indicators Withdrawn for Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Processes in Health Care Facilities

14 AAMI/ANSI ST33:1992, Guidance for the Se- Devices affected 72 lection and Use of Reusable Rigid Steriliza- tion Container Systems for Ethylene Oxide Sterilization and Steam Sterilization in Health Care Facilities

19 AAMI/ANSI ST46:1992, Good Hospital Prac- Devices affected, correction 73 tice Steam Sterilization and Sterility Assur- to type of standard, and ance relevant guidance

22 ANSI/AAMI ST60:1996, Sterilization of Health Extent of Recognition and 74 Care Products—Chemical Indicators—Part relevant guidance 1: General Requirements

25 AAMI/ANSI/ISO 11135:1994, Medical De- Relevant guidance 25 vices—Validation and Routine Control of Ethylene Oxide Sterilization

26 AAMI/ANSI/ISO 11137:1994, Sterilization of Withdrawn and replaced with 75 Health Care Products—Requirements for newer version, relevant Validation and Routine Control-Radiation guidance Sterilization and ISO 11137:1995 (AMEND- MENT 1:2001)

37 AAMI/ANSI/ISO 10993–7:1995(R) 2001, Bio- Withdrawn and replaced with 76 logical evaluation of medical devices—Part newer version, relevant 7: Ethylene oxide sterilization residuals guidance

38 ANSI/AAMI ST24:1999, Automatic General Devices affected and type of 77 Purpose Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers and standard Ethylene Oxide Sterilant Sources Intended for Use in Health Care Facilities

39 USP 25:2002, Biological Indicator for Dry- Withdrawn and replaced with 78 Heat Sterilization Paper Carrier newer version

40 USP 25:2002, Biological Indicator for Ethylene Withdrawn and replaced with 79 Oxide Sterilization, Paper Carrier newer version

41 USP 25:2002, Biological Indicator for Steam Withdrawn and replaced with 80 Sterilization, Paper Carrier newer version

42 USP 25:2002, <61> Microbial Limits Test Withdrawn and replaced with 81 newer version

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61907

Replacement Item Old Item No. Standard Change No.

43 USP 25:2002, Sterility Test <71> Withdrawn and replaced with 82 newer version

44 USP 25:2002, <85>, Biological Tests and As- Withdrawn and replaced with 83 says, Bacterial Endotoxin Test (LAL) newer version

45 USP:2002 <151> Pyrogen Test (USP Rabbit Withdrawn and replaced with 84 Test) newer version

46 USP:2002 <1211> Sterilization and Sterility Withdrawn and replaced with 85 Assurance of Compendial Articles newer version

49 AAMI/ANSI ST41:1999, Ethylene Oxide Steri- Citations, product codes and 49 lization in Health Care Facilities: Safety and relevant guidance Effectiveness

52 ANSI/AAMI ST59:1999, Sterilization of Health Relevant guidance 52 Care Products—Biological Indicators Part 1: General Requirements

53 AAMI/ANSI ST 66:1999, Sterilization of Health Relevant guidance 53 Care Products—Chemical Indicators—Part 2: Class 2 Indicators for Air Removal Test Sheets and Packs

65 ASTM F1980:2002, Standard Guide for Accel- Withdrawn and replaced with 86 erated Aging of Sterile Medical Device newer version Packages

66 USP 25:2002, <161> Transfusion and Infu- Withdrawn and replaced with 87 sion Assemblies and Similar Medical De- newer version vices

III. Listing of New Entries A. Biocompatibility FDA is adding new entries to the list of recognized standards as follows:

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

65 Standard Practice for Testing for Alternative Pathway ASTM F2065–00 Complement Activation in Serum by Solid Materials

66 Standard Practice for Evaluation of Delayed Contact ASTM F2148–01 Hypersensitivity Using the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA)

67 Standard Practice for Assessment of Hemolytic Prop- ASTM F756–00 erties of Materials

B. Cardiovascular/Neurology

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

45 Testing and Reporting Performance Results of Cardiac ANSI/AAMI EC57–98 Rhythm and ST-Segment Measurement Algorithms

46 Standard Test Method for Measuring Recoil of Bal- ASTM F2079–00 loon-Expandable Stents

47 Standard Guide for Characterization and Presentation ASTM F2081–02 of the Dimensional Attributes of Vascular Stents

48 Test Method for Conducting Cyclic Potentiodynamic ASTM F2129–01 Polarization Measurements to Determine the Corro- sion Susceptibility of Small Implant Devices

C. Dental/Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61908 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

92 Dental Brazing Alloys ANSI/ADA Specification No. 88:2000

93 Methods of Measurement of Compatibility Be- ANSI C63.19:2001 tween Wireless Communication Devices and Hearing Aids

D. General Hospital/General Plastic Surgery

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

93 Sterlie Water for Irrigation USP 25

94 Heparin Lock Flush Solution USP 25

95 Sodium Chloride Injection USP 25

96 Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Bacterial Fil- ASTM F2101–01 tration Efficiency (BFE) of Medical Face Mask Mate- rials, Using a Biological Aerosol of Staphylococcus aureus

E. In Vitro Devices

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

62 Laboratory Automation: Systems Operational Re- NCCLS: AUTO04–A quirements, Characteristics, and Information Elements; Approved Standard

63 Laboratory Automation: Electromechanical Inter- NCCLS: AUTO05–A faces; Approved Standard

64 Point-of-Care Connectivity; Approved Standard NCCLS: POCT1–A

F. Materials

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

09 Standard Specification for Wrought Cobalt-20 ASTM F563–00 Nickel-20 Chromium-3.5 Molybdenum-3.5 Tungsten-5 Iron Alloy for Surgical Implant Ap- plications (UNS R30563)

37 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-12 ASTM F1813–01 Molybdenum-6 Zirconium-2 Iron Alloy for Sur- gical Implant (UNS R58120)

38 Standard Terminology for Nickel-Titanium Shape ASTM F2005–00 Memory Alloys

40 Standard Specification for Wrought Nickel-Tita- ASTM F2063–00 nium Shape Memory Alloys for Medical De- vices and Surgical Implants

41 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-15 ASTM F2066–01 Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Applica- tions (UNS R58150)

42 Standard Test Method for Evaluation of MR ASTM F2119–01 Image Artifacts from Passive Implants

43 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-3 ASTM F2146–01 Aluminum-2.5 Vanadium Alloy Seamless Tub- ing for Surgical Implant Applications (UNS R56320)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61909

G. OB-GYN/Gastroenterology

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

26 Natural Latex Rubber Condoms—Requirements and Test ISO 4074:2000(E) methods

27 Standard Test Methods for Male Condoms Made from ASTM D6324–99a Synthetic Materials

H. Ophthalmic

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

30 Intraocular Lenses ANSI Z80.7:2001

I. Radiology

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

79 High Voltage X-ray Cables and Receptacles NEMA XR 7–1995 (R2000)

80 Power Supply Guidelines for X-ray Machines NEMA XR 9–1984 (R1994, R2000)

81 Mechanical Safety Standard for Power Driven NEMA XR 13–1990 (R1995, R2000) Motions of Electromedical Equipment

82 Recommended Practices for Load Bearing Me- NEMA XR 14–1990 (R1995, R2000) chanical Assemblies Used in Diagnostic Imag- ing

83 Medical Electrical Equipment, Part 2–37: Par- IEC 60601–2–37 (2001–07) ticular Requirements for the Safety of Ultra- sonic Medical Diagnostic and Monitoring Equip- ment

84 Consol. Ed. 1.2 (incl. am1+am2), Safety of Laser IEC 60825–1 (2001–08) Products—Part 1: Equipment Classification, Requirements and User’s Guide

85 Ed. 2.0, Medical Electrical Equipment—Part 2: IEC 60601–2–22 (1995–11) Particular Requirements for the Safety of Diag- nostic and Therapeutic Laser Equipment

J. Sterility

Item No. Title of Standard Reference No. and Date

88 Sterilization of Health Care Products—General ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14937:2000 Requirements for Characterization of a Steri- lizing Agent and the Development, Validation, and Routine Control of a Sterilization Process for Medical Devices

89 Standard Test Method for Burst Testing of Flexi- ASTM F2054–00 ble Package Seals Using Internal Air Pressur- ization Within Restraining Plates

90 Standard Test Methods for Pressure Decay Leak ASTM F2095–01 Test for Nonporous Flexible Packages With and Without Restraining Plates

91 Standard Test Method for Detecting Gross Leaks ASTM F2096–1 in Porous Medical Packaging by Internal Pres- surization (Bubble Test)

92 Standard Guide for Design and Evaluation of Pri- ASTM F2097–01 mary Packaging for Medical Products

93 Biological Indicator for Steam Sterilization—Self USP 25:2002 Contained

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61910 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

IV. Recommendation of Standards for VI. Submission of Comments ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for Recognition by FDA You may, at any time, submit to the single copies of this draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information (HFD– Any person may recommend contact person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) written 240), Center for Drug Evaluation and consensus standards as candidates for Research, Food and Drug recognition under section 514 of the act comments regarding this document. You should submit two copies of any Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, by submitting such recommendations, Rockville, MD 20857 Office of with reasons for the recommendation, to comments, except that individuals may submit one copy. You must identify Communication, Training, and the contact person (see FOR FURTHER Manufacturers Assistance (HFM–40), INFORMATION CONTACT). To be properly comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this Center for Biologics Evaluation and considered, such recommendations Research (CBER), Food and Drug should contain, at a minimum, the document. FDA will consider any comments received in determining Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, following information: (1) Title of the Rockville, MD 20852–1448. Send one standard, (2) any reference number and whether to amend the current listing of ‘‘Modifications to the List of Recognized self-addressed adhesive label to assist date, (3) name and address of the the office in processing your requests. Standards, Recognition List Number: national or international standards The document may also be obtained by 007.’’ development organization, (4) a mail by calling the CBER Voice proposed list of devices for which a Dated: September 18, 2002. Information System at 1–800–835–4709 declaration of conformity to this Linda S. Kahan, or 301–827–1800, or by fax by calling standard should routinely apply, and (5) Deputy Director, Center for Devices and the FAX Information System at 1–888– a brief identification of the testing or Radiological Health. CBER-FAX or 301–827–3844. Send one performance or other characteristics of [FR Doc. 02–24954 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] self-addressed adhesive label to assist the device(s) that would be addressed BILLING CODE 4160–01–S that office in processing your requests. by a declaration of conformity. Submit written comments on the V. Electronic Access guidance to the Dockets Management DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Branch (HFA–305), Food and Drug In order to receive ‘‘Guidance on the HUMAN SERVICES Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. Recognition and Use of Consensus 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. See the Standards’’ via your fax machine, call Food and Drug Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for the CDRH Facts-On-Demand system at [Docket No. 02D–0389] electronic access to the guidance 800–899–0381 or 301–827–0111 from a document. touch-tone telephone. Press 1 to enter Draft Guidance for Industry on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the system. At the second voice prompt Nonclinical Studies for Development of Robert E. Osterberg, Center for Drug press 1 to order a document. Enter the Pharmaceutical Excipients; Availability Evaluation and Research (HFD–024), document number 321 followed by the AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 # pound sign ( ). Follow the remaining HHS. Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, voice prompts to complete your request. ACTION: Notice. 301–594–5482, or Martin D. Green, You may obtain a copy of ‘‘Guidance Center for Biologics Evaluation and on the Recognition and Use of SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Research (HFM–579), Food and Drug Consensus Standards’’ by using the Administration (FDA) is announcing the Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Internet. CDRH maintains a site on the availability of a draft guidance for Rockville, MD 20852–1448, 301–827– Internet for easy access to information industry entitled ‘‘Nonclinical Studies 5349. including text, graphics, and files that for Development of Pharmaceutical SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: you may download to a personal Excipients.’’ The draft guidance computer with access to the Internet. document provides guidance I. Background Updated on a regular basis, the CDRH concerning development of safety FDA is announcing the availability of home page includes this guidance as profiles to support use of new a draft guidance for industry entitled well as the current list of recognized excipients as components of drug or ‘‘Nonclinical Studies for Development standards and other standards related biological products. It is intended for of Pharmaceutical Excipients.’’ documents. After publication in the use by reviewers within both the Center Excipients are potential toxicants. It is Federal Register, this notice for Drug Evaluation and Research important to perform risk-benefit announcing ‘‘Modifications to the List (CDER) and the Center for Biologics assessments on excipients for use in of Recognized Standards, Recognition Evaluation and Research (CBER) and by drug products and to establish List Number: 007’’ will be available on interested individuals in industry. The permissible limits for these compounds. the CDRH home page. You may access goals of this document are to foster and These activities necessitate the the CDRH home page at http:// expedite the development of new availability of safety data. Consequently, www.fda.gov/cdrh. You may access excipients, communicate to industry there is a perception that development ‘‘Guidance on the Recognition and Use current CDER and CBER thoughts of new excipients is resource intensive. of Consensus Standards,’’ and the pertaining to safety data needed to With proper planning, however, it is searchable data base for ‘‘FDA support excipient development, and often possible to assess the toxicology of Recognized Consensus Standards,’’ increase uniformity within CDER and an excipient in a relatively efficient through hyperlinks at http:// CBER on expectations for the manner. Moreover, CDER and CBER www.fda.gov/cdrh/stdsprog.html. This nonclinical development of excipients. recognize that existing human data for Federal Register notice of modifications DATES: Submit written or electronic some excipients may substitute for in FDA’s recognition of consensus comments on the draft guidance by nonclinical safety data, and use in standards will be available, upon December 31, 2002. General comments previously approved products or GRAS publication, at http://www.fda.gov/ on agency guidance documents are status as a food additive will continue cdrh/fedregin.html. welcome at any time. to receive consideration. This draft

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61911

guidance describes the nonclinical data Sciences (NIEHS), the National of 50,000 women. In addition, we will that should be generated to support the Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted enroll and follow 1,500 of the index safety of an inactive ingredient in the to the Office of Management and Budget sisters (1125 during the first 3 years) amounts administered if adequate, (OMB) a request for review and whose breast cancer diagnosis was relevant prior human use cannot be approval of the information collection within four months prior to enrollment. documented. listed below. This proposed information These ‘‘index’’ cases will allow This draft guidance is being issued collection was previously published in comparison of case-control pairs of consistent with FDA’s good guidance the Federal Register on June 20, 2001, sisters and prospective study of the practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). page 33103–4 and allowed 60-days for impact of environmental exposures and The draft guidance, when finalized, will public comment. No public comments genes on prognosis. represent the agency’s current thinking were received. The purpose of this Frequency of Response: On occasion. on nonclinical studies for development notice is to allow an additional 30 days For those who qualify and enroll: one of pharmaceutical excipients. It does not for public comment. The National initial 15-minute screening contact create or confer any rights for or on any Institutes of Health may not conduct or [telephone or internet, one 2-hour person and does not operate to bind sponsor, and the respondent is not telephone interview, one mailed self- FDA or the public. An alternative required to respond to, an information administered questionnaire (1.5 hours), approach may be used if such approach collection that has been extended, biological and environmental specimen satisfies the requirements of the revised, or implemented on or after collection (1 hours), and annual follow- applicable statutes and regulations. October 1, 1995, unless it displays a up questionnaires (0.5 hours). for those currently valid OMB number. II. Comments who don’t enroll: one 15-minute Interested persons may submit written Proposed Collection screening contact (internet or phone). comments on the guidance to the Title: The Sister Study: For women with breast cancer or who Dockets Management Branch (address Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors develop breast cancer during follow-up: above). Two copies of any comments are for Breast Cancer. Type of Information validation of diagnosis through doctor’s to be submitted, except that individuals Collection Request: New. Need and Use office. Affected Pubic: Individuals or may submit one copy. Comments are to of Information Collection: We will study households, doctor’s office. Types of be identified with the docket number environmental and genetic risk factors Respondents: Unaffected sisters of found in brackets in the heading of this for the development of breast cancer in women diagnosed with breast cancer, document. The draft guidance and a cohort of sisters of women who have aged 35–74, from all socioeconomic received comments are available for had breast cancer. In the United States, backgrounds and ethnicities and women public examination in the Dockets approximately 192,000 new cases were with recently diagnosed breast cancer. Management Branch between 9 a.m. and diagnosed in 2001, accounting for 30% The annual reporting burden in as 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. of all new cancer cases among women. follows: Estimated Number of III. Electronic Access The etiology of breast cancer in Respondents: 151,800–50,000 study complex, with both genetic and respondents per year, of whom 12,875 Persons with access to the Internet environmental factors likely playing a will qualify and enroll—including may obtain the document at http:// role. Environmental risk factors, 12,500 unaffected women plus 500 www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm, however, have been difficult to identify. index cases of incident breast cancer. http://www.fda.gov/cber/ Sisters of women with breast cancer (Note: Total cohort enrollment of 50,000 guidelines.htm, or http://www.fda.gov/ have nearly twice the risk of developing cancer-free sisters and 1,500 index cases ohrms/dockets/default.htm. breast cancer themselves. By focusing of incident breast cancer will take 4 Dated: September 23, 2002. on a susceptible population, more years to achieve, requiring an estimated Margaret M. Dotzel, precise estimates of the contribution of 2000, 000 respondents in all.) In Associate Commissioner for Policy. environmental and other non-genetic addition, there will be a total of 1,575 [FR Doc. 02–24985 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] factors to disease risk may be doctor office respondents to validate BILLING CODE 4160–01–S possible.The increased risk of cancer, diagnoses. The first year cost per and the expected higher prevalence of women who enrolls in the study is both relevant genes and exposures (both estimated to be $95 (based on 4.75 hours DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND shared with their sister who had breast of $20 hourly wage). Cost equivalent per HUMAN SERVICES cancer) will facilitate the study of gene- follow-up year for enrolled women is environment interactions. Once $10. Total cost to women who don’t National Institutes of Health assembled, the cohort will be useful for enroll is $5. Cost to doctor’s offices is $10 (assuming $40 per hour). Estimated National Institute of Environmental studying other diseases in women. We Number of Responses per Respondent Health Sciences; Submission for OMB will enroll a cohort of 50,000 women See table below. Average Burden Hours review; comment request; The Sister who have not had breast cancer over a Per Response: See table below. Study: Environmental and Genetic 4-year period, with 37,500 enrolled Estimated Total Burden Hours Risk Factors for Breast Cancer during the first 3 years of the study. These breast cancer-free sisters will be Requested: 231,240 over 3 years (see SUMMARY: Under the provisions of followed annually for the development table). There are no Capital Costs to section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork of breast cancer and other diseases. We report. There are no Operating or Reduction Act of 1995, the National expect 300 cases of breast cancer per Maintenance Costs to report. Institute of Environmental Health year (on average) to develop in a cohort BILLING CODE 4140–01–M

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61912 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

BILLING CODE 4140–01–C

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 EN02OC02.000 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61913

Request for Comments is hereby given of a meeting of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Written comments and/or suggestions National Cancer Institute Director’s HUMAN SERVICES from the public and affected agencies Consumer Liaison Group. National Institutes of Health are invited on one or more of the The meeting will be open to the following points: (1) Whether the public, with attendance limited to space National Institute of Dental & proposed collection of information is available. Individuals who plan to Craniofacial Research; Notice of necessary for the proper performance of attend and need special assistance, such Closed Meeting the function of the agency, including as sign language interpretation or other whether the information will have reasonable accommodations, should Pursuant to section 10(d) of the practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the notify the Contact Person listed below Federal Advisory Committee Act, as agency’s estimate of the burden of the in advance of the meeting. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice proposed collection of information, is hereby given of the following Name of Committee: National Cancer including the validity of the meetings. Institute Director’s Consumer Liaison Group. The meetings will be closed to the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Date: October 22, 2002. public in accordance with the ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Time: 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. clarity of the information to be Agenda: To debrief on September 12, 2002 provisions set forth in sections collected; and (4) ways to minimize the meeting with Dr. von Eschenbach and to get 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., burden of the collection of information updates from the working group. as amended. The grant applications and on those who are to respond, including Place: 6116 Executive Blvd., Rockville, MD the discussions could disclose the use of appropriate automated, 20852, (Telephone Conference Call). confidential trade secrets or commercial electronic, mechanical, or other Contact Person: Elaine Lee, Executive property such as patentable material, technological collection techniques or Secretary, Office of Liaison Activities, and personal information concerning other forms of information technology. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which Direct Comments to OMB Institute, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Suite 300 C, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301/594–3194. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Written comments and/or suggestions Any member of the public interested in invasion of personal privacy. regarding the items(s) contained in this presenting oral comments to the committee Name of Committee: National Institute of notice, especially regarding the may notify the Contact Person listed on this Dental and Craniofacial Research Special estimated public burden and associated notice at least 10 days in advance of the Emphasis Panel, 03–18, Review of R44 response time, should be directed to the: meeting. Interested individuals and Grants. Office of Management and Budget, representatives of organizations may submit Date: October 8, 2002. Office of Regulatory Affairs, New a letter of intent, a brief description of the Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Executive Office Building, Room 10235, organization represented, and a short Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk description of the oral presentation. Only one applications. Officer for NIH. To request more representative of an organization may be Place: 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD information on the proposed project or allowed to present oral comments and if 20892. (Telephone Conference Call). accepted by the committee, presentations Contact Person: Philip Washko, PhD, DMD, to obtain a copy of the data collection Scientific Review Administrator, 45 Center plans and instruments, contact: Dr. Dale may be limited to five minutes. Both printed and electronic copies are requested for the Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, Sandler, Acting Chief, Epidemiology record. In addition, any interested person National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892. (301) 594–2372. Branch, NIEHS, Building 101, A–304, may file written comments with the P.O. Box 122233, Research Triangle committee by forwarding their statement to Name of Committee: National Institute of Park, NC 27709 or call non-toll-free the Contact Person listed on this notice. The Dental and Craniofacial Research Special number (919) 541–4668 or E-mail your statement should include the name, address, Emphasis Panel, 03–15, Review of R44 Grants. request, including your address to: telephone number and when applicable, the Date: October 17, 2002. [email protected]. business or professional affiliation of the Time: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Comments Due Date interested person. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Information is also available on the Comments regarding this information applications. Institute’s/Center’s home page: http:// Place: 45 Center Drive, Natcher Building, collection are best assured of having deainfo.nci.gov/advisory/dclg/dclg.htm, Room 3AN12, Bethesda, MD 20892. their full effect if received within 30 where an agenda and any additional (Telephone Conference Call). days of the date of this publication. information for the meeting will be posted Contact Person: Philip Washko, PhD, DMD, Dated: September 3, 2002. when available. Scientific Review Administrator, 45 Center Francine Little, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD NIEHS, Associate Director for Management. Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention 20892. (301) 594–2372. [FR Doc. 02–24965 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Name of Committee: National Institute of BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Emphasis Panel, 03–03, Review of RFA DE– Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 03–001. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Date: November 10–11, 2002. HUMAN SERVICES Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant HHS) National Institutes of Health applications. Dated: September 24, 2002. Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill National Cancer Institute; Notice of LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. Contact Person: Yujing Liu, MD, PhD, Meeting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Scientific Review Administrator, National Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Res., 45 Federal Advisory Committee Act, as [FR Doc. 02–24970 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Center Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Bethesda, MD 20892. (301) 594–2372.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61914 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Name of Committee: National Institute of Disorders Research, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Health, HHS) applications. Emphasis Panel, 03–22, Review of R42 Place: Wyndham City Center Hotel, Grants. Dated: September 21, 2002. Dupont Room, 1143 New Hampshire Avenue, Date: November 15, 2002. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Director, Office of Federal Advisory Contact Person: Khursheed Asghar, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Committee Policy. Chief, Basic Sciences Review Branch, Office applications. of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on [FR Doc. 02–24967 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Place: 45 Center Drive, Natcher Building, Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Room 3AN12, Bethesda, MD 20892. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC (Telephone Conference Call). 9547, Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, (301) 443– Contact Person: Philip Washko, PhD, DMD, 2620. Scientific Review Administrator, 45 Center DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: National Institute on Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, HUMAN SERVICES Drug Abuse Initial Review Group, Training National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD and Career Development Subcommittee. 20892. (301) 594–2372. National Institutes of Health Date: November 12–14, 2002. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Time: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and National Institute on Drug Abuse; Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Disorders Research, National Institutes of Notice of Closed Meetings applications. Health, HHS) Place: Hyatt Arlington, 1325 Wilson Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22209. Dated: September 21, 2002. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Contact Person: Mark Swieter, PhD, Health LaVerne Y. Stringfield, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Scientist Administrator, Office of Extramural Director, Office of Federal Advisory is hereby given of the following Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Committee Policy. meetings. National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 [FR Doc. 02–24966 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] The meetings will be closed to the Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 9547, Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, (301) 435–1389. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel Centers 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Review Committee. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as amended. The grant applications and Date: November 18–19, 2002. HUMAN SERVICES the discussions could disclose Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. confidential trade secrets or commercial Agenda: To review and evaluate grant National Institutes of Health property such as patentable material, applications. Place: Ritz Carlton—Pentagon City, 1250 National Institute of Dental & and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202. Craniofacial Research; Notice of Contact Person: Rita Liu, PhD, Health Closed Meeting applications, the disclosure of which Scientist Administrator, Office of Extramural would constitute a clearly unwarranted Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the invasion of personal privacy. National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: National Institute on Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 9547, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Drug Abuse and Initial Review Group Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, (301) 435–1388. is hereby given of the following Treatment Research Subcommittee. meeting. Date: October 8–9, 2002. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance The meeting will be closed to the Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Program Nos. 93.277, Drug Abuse Scientist Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist public in accordance with the Development Awards, and Research Scientist provisions set forth in sections applications. Place: Radisson Barcelo Hotel, 2121 P Awards; 93.278, Drug Abuse National 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Research Service Awards for Research as amended. The grant applications and Contact Person: Kesinee Nimit, MD, Health Training; 93.279, Drug Abuse Research the discussions could disclose Scientist Administrator, Office of Extramural Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS) confidential trade secrets or commercial Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Dated: September 21, 2002. property such as patentable material, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 LaVerne Y. Stringfield, and personal information concerning Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 9547, Director, Office of Federal Advisory individuals associated with the grant Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, (301) 435–1432. Committee Policy. applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: National Institute on [FR Doc. 02–24969 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] would a clearly unwarranted invasion of Drug Abuse Initial Review Group Health BILLING CODE 4140–01–M personal privacy. Services Research Subcommittee. Date: October 8–9, 2002. Name of Committee: NIDCR Special Grants Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Review Committee, 03–01, Review of R03s, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Ks and T Grants. applications. HUMAN SERVICES Date: October 17–18, 2002. Place: Radisson Barcelo Hotel, 2121 P Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Marina L. Volkov, PhD, applications. Health Scientist Administrator, Office of National Institute of Dental & Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Craniofacial Research; Notice of Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Closed Meetings Contact Person: Lynn M. King, PhD, DHHS, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific 3158, MSC 9547, Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Review Branch, 45 Center Dr., Rm 4AN–38K, (301) 435–1433. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Name of Committee: National Institute on amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Research, National Institutes of Health, Drug Abuse Initial Review Group Medication is hereby given of the following Bethesda, MD 20892–6402. 301–594–5006. Development Research Subcommittee. meetings. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Date: October 21–22, 2002. The meetings will be closed to the Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. public in accordance with the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61915

provisions set forth in sections discussions could disclose confidential The meetings will be closed to the 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., trade secrets or commercial property public in accordance with the as amended. The grant applications and such as patentable material, and provisions set forth in sections the discussions could disclose personal information concerning 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., confidential trade secrets or commercial individuals associated with the grant as amended. The grant applications and property such as patentable material, applications, the disclosure of which the discussions could disclose and personal information concerning would constitute a clearly unwarranted confidential trade secrets or commercial individuals associated with the grant invasion of personal privacy. property such as patentable material, applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: National Institute of and personal information concerning would constitute a clearly unwarranted Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special individuals associated with the grant invasion of personal privacy. Emphasis Panel, HIV Vaccine Research and applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: National Institute of Design Program. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Date: October 21, 2002. invasion of personal privacy. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Emphasis Panel 03–04, Review of R01 Name of Committee: National Institute of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Grants. Dental and Craniofacial Research Special applications. Date: October 15, 2002. Emphasis Panel 03–17, Review of T14 Place: Holiday Inn—Georgetown, 2101 Time: 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. Grants. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Date: October 9, 2002. applications. 20007. Time: 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Place: 45 Natcher Bldg, Rm 5As.25u, Contact Person: Hagit David, PhD, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific applications. Call). Review Program, Division of Extramural Place: Natcher Building, Rm. 5AN55, Contact Person: H. George Hausch, PhD, Activities, NIAID, NIH, Room 2117, 6700–B Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Acting Director, 4500 Center Drive, Natcher Rockledge Drive, MSC 7610, Bethesda, MD Call). Building, Rm. 4AN44F, National Institutes of 20892–7610, 301–496–2550, Contact Person: H. George Hausch, PhD., Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2372. [email protected]. Acting Director, 4500 Center Drive, Natcher Name of Committee: National Institute of Name of Committee: National Institute of building, Rm. 4AN44F, National Institutes of Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2372. Emphasis Panel 03–12, Review of R44 Emphasis Panel, ‘‘Integrated Pre-Clinical/ This notice is being published less than 15 Grants. Clinical AIDS Vaccine Development’’. days prior to the meeting due to the timing Date: November 21, 2002. Date: October 22, 2002. limitations imposed by the review and Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. funding cycle. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of applications. applications. Dental and Craniofacial Research Special Place: 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD Place: Holiday Inn—Georgetown, 2101 Emphasis Panel 03–23, Review of R01 20892, (Telephone Conference Call). Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Grants. Contact Person: Philip Washko, PhD, DMD, 20007. Date: October 28, 2002. Scientific Review Administrator, 45 Center Contact Person: Hagit David, PhD, Time: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD Review Program, Division of Extramural applications. 20892, (301) 594–2372, Activities, NIAID, NIH, Room 2117, 6700–B Place: Natcher Building, Rm. 5AN55, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Rockledge Drive, MSC 7610, Bethesda, MD Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Program Nos. 93.121. Oral Diseases and 20892–7610, 301–496–2550, Call). Disorders Research, National Institutes of [email protected]. Contact Person: H. George Hausch, PhD., Health, HHS) (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Acting Director, 4500 Center Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, National Institutes of Dated: September 24, 2002. Progam Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2372. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, and Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Director, Office of Federal Advisory Infectious Diseases Research, National Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Committee Policy. Institutes of Health, HHS) Disorders Research, National Institutes of [FR Doc. 02–24971 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Health, HHS) Dated: September 25, 2002. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Dated: September 25, 2002. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Director, Office of Federal Advisory DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Committee Policy. Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. HUMAN SERVICES [FR Doc. 02–24972 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 02–24973 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–M National Institutes of Health BILLING CODE 4140–01–M

National Institutes of Allergy and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Meetings URBAN DEVELOPMENT National Institutes of Health Pursuant to section 10(d) of the [Docket No. FR–4734–N–54] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as National Institute of Dental & amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Notice of Submission of Proposed Craniofacial Research; Notice of Information Collection to OMB: is hereby given of the following Closed Meeting meetings. Contractor’s Requisition—Project The meetings will be closed to the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Mortgages public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information provisions set forth in sections amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Officer, HUD. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., is hereby given of the following ACTION: Notice as amended. The grant applications and meetings.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61916 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

SUMMARY: The proposed information 20410; e-mail [email protected]; response, and hours of response; (9) collection requirement described below telephone (202) 708–2374. This is not a whether the proposal is new, an has been submitted to the Office of toll-free number. Copies of the proposed extension, reinstatement, or revision of Management and Budget (OMB) for forms and other available documents an information collection requirement; review, as required by the Paperwork submitted to OMB may be obtained and (10) the name and telephone Reduction Act. The Department is from Mr. Eddins. number of an agency official familiar soliciting public comments on the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The with the proposal and of the OMB Desk subject proposal. Department has submitted the proposal Officer for the Department. This Notice DATES: Comments Due Date: November for the collection of information, as also lists the following information: 1, 2002. described below, to OMB for review, as Title of Proposal: Contractor’s ADDRESSES: Interested persons are required by the Paperwork Reduction Requisition—Project Mortgages. invited to submit comments regarding Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The Notice OMB Approval Number: 2502–0028. this proposal. Comments should refer to lists the following information: (1) The Form Numbers: 92448. the proposal by name and/or OMB title of the information collection Description of the Need for the approval number (2502–0028) and proposal; (2) the office of the agency to Information and its Proposed Use: should be sent to: Lauren Wittenberg, collect the information; (3) the OMB Contractors application for distribution OMB Desk Officer, Office of approval number, if applicable; (4) the of insured mortgage proceeds for Management and Budget, Room 10235, description of the need for the construction costs. Multifamily Hub New Executive Office Building, information and its proposed use; (5) Centers ensure that work is actually Washington, DC 20503; Fax number the agency form number, if applicable; completed satisfactorily. The prevailing (202) 395–6974; E-mail (6) what members of the public will be wages certification ensures compliance _ Lauren [email protected]. affected by the proposal; (7) how with prevailing wage rate. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: frequently information submissions will Respondents: Business or other for- Wayne Eddins, Reports Management be required; (8) an estimate of the total profit, Not-for-profit institutions, Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing number of hours needed to prepare the Federal Government. and Urban Development, 451 Seventh information submission including Frequency of Submission: On Street, Southwest, Washington, DC number of respondents, frequency of occasion.

Number of re- Annual re- × Hours per Burden spondents sponses response = hours

Reporting Burden ...... 1,000 12 6 72,000

Total Estimated Burden Hours: soliciting public comments on the lists the following information: (1) The 72,000. subject proposal. title of the information collection Status: Reinstatement, with change. DATES: Comments Due Date: November proposal; (2) the office of the agency to Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork 1, 2002. collect the information; (3) the OMB approval number, if applicable; (4) the Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as ADDRESSES: Interested persons are description of the need for the amended. invited to submit comments regarding information and its proposed use; (5) Dated: September 24, 2002. this proposal. Comments should refer to the agency form number, if applicable; Wayne Eddins, the proposal by name and/or OMB (6) what members of the public will be approval number (2502–0446) and Departmental Reports Management Officer, affected by the proposal; (7) how Office of the Chief Information Officer. should be sent to: Lauren Wittenberg, frequently information submissions will OMB Desk Officer, Office of [FR Doc. 02–24958 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] be required; (8) an estimate of the total Management and Budget, Room 10235, BILLING CODE 4210–72–M number of hours needed to prepare the New Executive Office Building, information submission including Washington, DC 20503; Fax number number of respondents, frequency of DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND (202) 395–6974; E-mail response, and hours of response; (9) URBAN DEVELOPMENT [email protected]. whether the proposal is new, an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: extension, reinstatement, or revision of [Docket No. FR–4734–N–55] Wayne Eddins, Reports Management an information collection requirement; Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and (10) the name and telephone Notice of Submission of Proposed and Urban Development, 451 Seventh number of an agency official familiar Information Collection to OMB: Street, Southwest, Washington, DC with the proposal and of the OMB Desk Procedures for Appealing Section 8 20410; e-mail [email protected]; Officer for the Department. Rent Adjustments telephone (202) 708–2374. This is not a This Notice also lists the following AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information toll-free number. Copies of the proposed information: Officer, HUD. forms and other available documents submitted to OMB may be obtained Title of Proposal: Procedures for ACTION: Notice. from Mr. Eddins. Appealing Section 8 Rent Adjustments. OMB Approval Number: 2502–0446. SUMMARY: The proposed information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The collection requirement described below Department has submitted the proposal Form Numbers: None. has been submitted to the Office of for the collection of information, as Description of the Need for the Management and Budget (OMB) for described below, to OMB for review, as Information and its Proposed Use: review, as required by the Paperwork required by the Paperwork Reduction Multifamily project owners may appeal Reduction Act. The Department is Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). The Notice Section 8 rent adjustments determined

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61917

by HUD as required under Title II of the Respondents: Business or other for- Frequency of Submission: On National Housing Act. profit, Not-for profit institutions, occasion. Federal Government.

Number of Annual re- × Hours per Burden respondents sponses response = hours

Reporting burden ...... 1,250 1 2 2,500

Total Estimated Burden Hours: 2,500. Dated: September 26, 2002. comments. If you do not receive Status: Reinstatement, without John D. Garrity, confirmation from the system that your change. Director, Office of Special Needs Assistance e-mail message was received, contact Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Programs. Ms. Kate Williams directly at (907) 424– Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as [FR Doc. 02–24960 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 7738. Four additional means to submit amended. BILLING CODE 4210–29–M comments are by telefax to the BIA, at (907) 586–7142, by voice mail to the Dated: September 24, 2002. BIA, at (907) 586–7301, through the Wayne Eddins, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR public scoping meeting or through a Departmental Reports Management Officer, ‘‘Public Comment’’ feature on the Office of the Chief Information Officer. Bureau of Indian Affairs Shepard Point Project Web site at http:/ [FR Doc. 02–24959 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] /www.nativevillageofeyak.gov. BILLING CODE 4210–72–M Notice of Intent To Prepare an The public scoping meeting will be Environmental Impact Statement for held at the Masonic Temple, 400 1st Construction of the Shepard Point Oil Street, Cordova, Alaska. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Spill Response Facility and Access FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. URBAN DEVELOPMENT Road in Cordova, AK Mark A. Boatwright, (907) 586–7301, or Ms. Kate Williams, (907) 424–7738. [Docket No. Fr–4730–N–40] AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Interior. On behalf of the Native Village of Eyak, in Federal Property Suitable as Facilities ACTION: Notice. To Assist the Homeless accordance with the Agreement and SUMMARY: This notice advises the public Consent Decree in the Exxon Valdez AGENCY: Office of the Assistant that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Case (Case No. A89–095 CI Secretary for Community Planning and in cooperation with the Federal [consolidated] and Case No. A92–175 CI Development, HUD. Highway Administration and the Eyak [Ex. A]) and as mandated by the State ACTION: Notice Native Corporation, intends to prepare of Alaska in the 1993, Alyeska an Environmental Impact Statement settlement (HB 165), the BIA proposes SUMMARY: This Notice identifies (EIS) for the proposed Shepard Point Oil to design and build a deep-water port unutilized, underutilized, excess, and Spill Response Facility (Shepard Point and oil spill response facility at Shepard surplus Federal property reviewed by Project) in Cordova, Alaska. The Point. The purpose of the facility is to HUD for suitability for possible use to purpose of the project is to meet the provide, in the event of an emergency, assist the homeless. need for a deep-port, emergency the capability for rapid deployment of EFFECTIVE DATE: October 2, 2002. response docking and staging facility in oil spill recovery equipment that could FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Prince William Sound region. be flown into Cordova and subsequently Mark Johnston, Department of Housing Descriptions of the project area and of transported by ocean-going, deep draft and Urban Development, Room 7262, the proposed action are provided in the vessels (defined as having a draft of 25 451 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. feet) to an oil spill site in Prince 20410; telephone (202) 708–1234; TTY This notice also announces a public William Sound. To accomplish this, the number for the hearing- and speech- scoping meeting for the content of the proposed construction components impaired (202) 708–2565, (these EIS. must address the following: 1. A heavy-duty freight dock with the telephone numbers are not toll-free), or DATES: Comments on the scope and dock face having a bottom elevation of call the toll-free Title V information line content of the EIS must arrive by minus 35′ Mean Lower Level Water at 1–800–927–7588. November 1, 2002. The public scoping (MLLW); e.g., required elevation at meeting will be held on Thursday, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In periods of low tides. accordance with the December 12, 1988 October 17, 2002, at 7 p.m. 2. A staging area sufficient for storage court order in National Coalition for the ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, of oil spill recovery equipment. This is Homeless v. Veterans Administration, you may submit your comments by any proposed to be contiguous to the dock. No. 88–2503–OG (D.D.C.), HUD one of several methods. You may mail 3. A clear channel to the Prince publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, written comments to the BIA Branch of William Sound with a minimum identifying unutilized, underutilized, Roads, Alaska, Project Code ‘‘SPOSRF,’’ elevation of minus 35′ MLLW. excess and surplus Federal buildings P.O. Box 25520, Juneau, Alaska 99802, 4. Road access between the oil spill and real property that HUD has or hand deliver them to the BIA response dock and the Cordova Airport. reviewed for suitability for use to assist Regional Office, 709 West 9th, 3rd As mandated, a new road segment the homeless. Today’s Notice is for the Floor, Federal Building, Juneau, Alaska. would be constructed between Shepard purpose of announcing that no You may also comment via e-mail to Point and the existing road that serves additional properties have been [email protected]. Please the vicinity of the Orca Cannery. determined suitable or unsuitable this avoid the use of special characters and The BIA will have primary week. any form of encryption in e-mail responsibility for the planning, design,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61918 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

environmental documentation and Dated: September 13, 2002. ACTION: Notice of segregation and sale of permit acquisition for the project. The Neal A. McCaleb, public land. BIA will also be responsible for any Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. SUMMARY: The below described public utility relocation, right-of-way [FR Doc. 02–24982 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] land has been found suitable for direct acquisition, and construction of the BILLING CODE 4310–W7–P deep-water port and the access road. sale under section 203 and 209 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Alternatives to the proposed action DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2750, 43 U.S.C. include variations in project design and 1713), at not less than the estimated fair the no action alternative. Topics so far Bureau of Land Management market value of $31,750. The land will identified to be addressed in the EIS not be offered for sale until at least 45 include air quality, geology, alterations [AK–962–1410–HY–P; AA–6652–A, BBA–5] days after the date of this notice. of shoreline and channel floor, water Alaska Native Claims Selection DATES: Submit comments on or before resources and quality, terrestrial and November 18, 2002. aquatic habitats, flora and fauna AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (including effects on anadromous fish DOI. Michael Truden, Redding Field Office, species), land use, historic properties, ACTION: Notice of decision approving 355 Hemsted Drive, Redding, CA, coastal management, economy, lands for conveyance. 96002; 530–224–2100. transportation, human health and safety SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The (including spill prevention and SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR following public land has been found response), visual environment, 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an suitable for direct sale under section 203 environmental justice and cumulative appealable decision approving lands for and 209 of the Federal Land Policy and effects. These alternatives and topics conveyance pursuant to the Alaska Management Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 2750, may be elaborated, and others may be Native Claims Settlement Act will be 43 U.S.C. 1713), at not less than the added through the scoping process. issued to Far West, Inc., for lands in T. 45 S., R. 58 W., Seward Meridian, estimated fair market value of $31,750. Public Comment Availability Alaska, located in the vicinitiy of The land will not be offered for sale Chignik, Alaska, containing until at least 45 days after the date of Comments, including names and approximately 2 acres. Notice of the this notice. addresses of respondents, will be decision will also be published four Mount Diablo Meridian available for public review at the times in the Anchorage Daily News. mailing address shown in the T. 33 N., R.5 W., Shasta County, California DATES: The time limits for filing an 1 1 ADDRESSES section, during regular Section 33: lot 18, N ⁄2 of lot 19, N ⁄2 of lot appeal are: 20. business hours, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., 1. Any party claiming a property The land described contains 63.50 acres. Monday through Friday, except interest which is adversely affected by holidays. Individual respondents may the decision, shall have until November The land described is hereby request confidentiality. If you wish us to 1, 2002 to file an appeal. segregated from appropriation under the withhold your name and/or address 2. Parties receiving service by public land laws, including the mining from public review or from disclosure certified mail shall have until 30 days laws, pending disposition of this action under the Freedom of Information Act, from the receipt to file an appeal. or 270 days from the date of publication you must state this prominently at the Parties who do not file an appeal in of this notice, whichever occurs first. beginning of your written comment. accordance with the requirements of 43 This land is being offered by direct Such requests will be honored to the CFR part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed sale to the Redding Gun Club, consistent extent allowed by law. We will not, to have waived their rights. with 43 CFR 2711.3–3(a)(1). It has been however, consider anonymous ADDRESSES: Copies of the decision may determined that the parcel contains no comments. All submissions from be obtained from: Bureau of Land mineral values; therefore, mineral organizations or businesses, and from Management, Alaska State Office, 222 interests may be conveyed individuals identifying themselves as West Seventh Avenue, # 13, Anchorage, simultaneously. representatives or officials of Alaska 99513–7599. The lands are not needed for Federal organizations or businesses will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: purposes. Conveyance is consistent with made available for public inspection in Chris Sitbon, (907) 271–3226. current BLM land use planning and their entirety. would be in the public interest. The Chris Sitbon, patent, when issued, will contain Authority Land Law Examiner, Branch of ANCSA Adjudication. certain reservations to the United States This notice is published in and will be subject to all existing rights. [FR Doc. 02–25034 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] accordance with Section 1503.1 of the Detailed information concerning these Council on Environmental Quality BILLING CODE 4310–$$–P reservations as well as specific Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500 through conditions of the sale are available for 1508) implementing the procedural DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR review at the Redding Field Office, requirements of the National Bureau of Land Management, 355 Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as Bureau of Land Management Hemsted Drive, Redding, California amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the 96002. Transportation Equity Act Department [CA–360–1430–EU; CACA–43966] For a period of 45 days from the date for the 21st Century (Pub. L. 105–178), Notice of Realty Action, of publication of this notice in the and the Department of the Interior Noncompetitive Sale of Public Land in Federal Register, interested persons Manual (516 DM 1–6), and is in the Shasta County, CA may submit written comments regarding exercise of authority delegated to the the proposed sale to Charles M. Schultz, Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Field Office Manager, Redding Field 209 DM 8.1. Department of the Interior. Office, Bureau of Land Management,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61919

355 Hemsted Dr., Redding, CA 96002. In who wish to submit comments, State Director, BLM, 1340 Financial the absence of timely objections, this suggestions, or objections in connection Blvd., PO Box 12000, Reno, Nevada proposal shall become the final with the proposed withdrawal may 89520–0006. determination of the Department of the present their views in writing to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interior. Nevada State Director of the Bureau of Dennis J. Samuelson, BLM Nevada State Dated: August 6, 2002. Land Management. Office, 775–861–6532. Notice is hereby given that an Charles M. Schultz, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On opportunity for a public meeting is September 13, 2002, a petition was Field Manager. afforded in connection with the [FR Doc. 02–25035 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] approved allowing the Bureau of Land proposed withdrawal. All interested Management to file an application to BILLING CODE 4310–40–P persons who desire a public meeting for withdraw the following described the purpose of being heard on the public land from settlement, sale, proposed withdrawal must submit a DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR location, or entry under the general land written request to the Nevada State laws, including the mining laws, but not Bureau of Land Management Director within 90 days from the date of the mineral leasing laws, subject to publication of this notice. Upon valid existing rights: [NV–930–1430–ET; N–75850] determination by the authorized officer that a public meeting will be held, a Mount Diablo Meridian Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and notice of the time and place will be T. 14 S., R. 67 E., Opportunity for Public Meeting; published in the Federal Register at Sec. 32, W1⁄2NW1⁄4NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 and 1 1 1 1 Nevada least 30 days before the scheduled date E ⁄2NE ⁄4NW ⁄4SW ⁄4 The area described contains 10 acres in AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, of the meeting. Clark County. Interior. The application will be processed in ACTION: Notice. accordance with the regulations set The purpose of the proposed forth in 43 CFR part 2300. withdrawal is to protect a Bureau of SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land For a period of 2 years from the date Land Management interagency fire Management proposes to withdraw 15 of publication of this notice in the station site near Logandale, Nevada. acres of public land for a period of 20 Federal Register, the land will be For a period of 90 days from the date years to protect an interagency fire segregated as specified above unless the of publication of this notice, all persons station site. This notice closes the land application is denied or canceled or the who wish to submit comments, for up to 2 years from surface entry and withdrawal is approved prior to that suggestions, or objections in connection mining while various studies and date. Other uses which will be with the proposed withdrawal may analyses are made to make a final permitted during this segregative period present their views in writing to the decision on the withdrawal application. are rights-of-way, leases, and permits. Nevada State Director of the Bureau of DATES: Comments and requests for Dated: September 18, 2002. Land Management. Notice is hereby given that an meeting should be received on or before Jim Stobaugh, December 31, 2002. opportunity for a public meeting is Lands Team Lead. afforded in connection with the ADDRESSES: Comments and meeting [FR Doc. 02–25032 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] proposed withdrawal. All interested requests should be sent to the Nevada BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P persons who desire a public meeting for State Director, BLM, 1340 Financial the purpose of being heard on the Blvd., P.O. Box 12000, Reno, Nevada proposed withdrawal must submit a 89520–0006. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR written request to the Nevada State FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director within 90 days from the date of Bureau of Land Management Dennis J. Samuelson, BLM Nevada State publication of this notice. Upon Office, 775–861–6532. [NV–930–1430–ET; N–75849] determination by the authorized officer SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On that a public meeting will be held, a September 13, 2002, a petition was Notice of Proposed Withdrawal and notice of the time and place will be approved allowing the Bureau of Land Opportunity for Public Meeting; published in the Federal Register at Management to file an application to Nevada least 30 days before the scheduled date withdraw the following described AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, of the meeting. public land from settlement, sale, Interior. The application will be processed in location, or entry under the general land accordance with the regulations set ACTION: laws, including the mining laws, but not Notice. forth in 43 CFR part 2300. the mineral leasing laws, subject to SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land For a period of 2 years from the date valid existing rights: Management proposes to withdraw 10 of publication of this notice in the Mount Diablo Meridian acres of public land for a period of 20 Federal Register, the land will be years to protect an interagency fire segregated as specified above unless the T. 21 S., R. 54 E., application is denied or canceled or the Sec. 2, W1⁄2SW1⁄4 of lot 3 and SE1⁄4 of lot station site. This notice closes the land 4. for up to 2 years from surface entry and withdrawal is approved prior to that date. Other uses which will be The area described contains 15 acres in mining while various studies and Clark County. analyses are made to make a final permitted during this segregative period are rights-of-way, leases, and permits. The purpose of the proposed decision on the withdrawal application. withdrawal is to protect a Bureau of DATES: Comments and requests for Dated: September 18, 2002. Land Management interagency fire meeting should be received on or before Jim Stobaugh, station site near Pahrump, Nevada. December 31, 2002. Lands Team Lead. For a period of 90 days from the date ADDRESSES: Comments and meeting [FR Doc. 02–25033 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] of publication of this notice, all persons requests should be sent to the Nevada BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61920 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR above, to the Field Office Manager, announces the availability of NEPA- Richfield Field Office, 150 East 900 related Site-Specific Environmental Bureau of Land Management North, Richfield, Utah 84701. Assessments (SEA) and Findings of No [UT–050–1430–ET; UTU 50514] Notice is hereby given that an Significant Impact (FONSI), prepared by opportunity for a public meeting is MMS for the following oil and gas Notice of Proposed Withdrawal afforded in connection with the activities proposed on the Gulf of Extension and Opportunity for Public proposed withdrawal extension. All Mexico OCS. Meeting; Utah interested persons who desire a public meeting for the purpose of being heard FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, on the proposed withdrawal extension Public Information Unit, Information Interior. must submit a written request, by the Services Section at the number below. ACTION: Notice. date specified above, to the Field Office Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Manager, Richfield Field Office, 150 Mexico OCS Region, Attention: Public SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land East 900 North, Richfield, Utah 84701. Information Office (MS 5034), 1201 Management, has filed an application to Upon determination by the authorized Elmwood Park Boulevard, Room 114, extend Public Land Order No. 6543 for officer that a public meeting will be New Orleans, Louisiana 70123–2394, or a 20-year period. This order withdrew held, a notice of the time and place will by calling 1–800–200–GULF. public land from settlement, sale, be published in the Federal Register location or entry under the general land SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: MMS and a newspaper at least 30 days before laws, including the mining laws, to prepares SEAs and FONSIs for the scheduled date of the meeting. protect the Henry Mountain proposals that relate to exploration for The application will be processed in and the development/production of oil Administrative Site. accordance with the regulations set and gas resources on the Gulf of Mexico DATES: Comments and requests for a forth in 43 CFR 2300. public meeting must be received by OCS. These SEAs examine the potential December 31, 2002. Dated: September 18, 2002. environmental effects of activities Kent Hoffman, ADDRESSES: Comments and meeting described in the proposals and present requests should be sent to the Field Deputy State Director, Division of Lands and MMS conclusions regarding the Office Manager, Richfield Field Office, Minerals. significance of those effects. 150 East 900 North, Richfield, Utah [FR Doc. 02–25048 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Environmental Assessments are used as 84701. BILLING CODE 4310–$$–M a basis for determining whether or not approval of the proposals constitutes FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay major Federal actions that significantly Erickson, Realty Specialist, Richfield DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR affect the quality of the human Field Office, 150 East 900 North, environment in the sense of NEPA Minerals Management Service Richfield, Utah 84701; 435–896–1515. Section 102(2)(C). A FONSI is prepared SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The in those instances where MMS finds Bureau of Land Management proposes Environmental Documents Prepared for Proposed Oil and Gas Operations that approval will not result in to extend Public Land Order No. 6543 significant effects on the quality of the for an additional 20-year period. Public on the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) human environment. The FONSI briefly Land Order No. 6543, which expires on presents the basis for that finding and June 6, 2004, withdrew 41.21 acres from AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, includes a summary or copy of the SEA. settlement, sale, location or entry under Interior. the general land laws, including the This notice constitutes the public ACTION: Notice of the availability of notice of availability of environmental mining laws to protect the Bureau of environmental documents. Prepared for Land Management’s Henry Mountain documents required under the NEPA OCS mineral proposals on the Gulf of Regulations. Administrative Site. Mexico OCS. All persons who wish to submit This listing includes all proposals for comments, suggestions, or objections in SUMMARY: Minerals Management Service which the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region connection with the proposed (MMS), in accordance with Federal prepared a FONSI in the period withdrawal extension may present their Regulations that implement the National subsequent to publication of the views in writing, by the date specified Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), preceding notice dated August 13, 2002.

Activity/operator Location Date

Exxon Mobil Production Company Lease-Term Pipeline Activity, Mobile Area, Blocks 822 and 823, Leases OCS–G 05056 and 07/17/02 SEA No. P–13684. 05057, located 4 miles south of Mobile County, Alabama. LLOG Exploration Offshore, Inc., Initial Exploration Plan Activity, High Island Area, (East Addition, South Extension), A–367, 08/07/02 SEA No. N–7384. Lease OCS–G 23222, located 116 miles from the nearest Texas shoreline, and 126 miles from the onshore support base in Cameron, Louisiana. Grand Isle Pipeline, Right-of-Way Activity, SEA No. P–13518 .... West Delta Area through Blocks 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 and 28, 08/09/02 Right-of Way Grant No. G 23065, originating from onshore pump station Pipeline facility near Venice, Louisiana, and ter- minating at the southwest end of Grand Terre Island, Lou- isiana. Freeport McMoRan Sulfur, LLC, Programmatic EA, Inject OCS- Main Pass Area, Block 299, Lease OCS–G 09372, located 16 09/17/02 Generated Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Exempt miles from shore, east of the Mississippi River Delta and Exploration and Production Waste into Salt Caverns and Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. Caprock.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61921

Activity/operator Location Date

Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Structure Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/ Viosca Knoll Area, Block 252, Lease OCS–G 13982, located 07/17/02 SR 02–060. 30 miles south of Mobile County, Alabama, and 49 miles southeast of Pascagoula, Mississippi. Amerada Hess Corporation, Structure Removal Activity, SEA Vermilion Area, Block 58, Lease OCS–G 03546, located 16 07/16/02 Nos. ES/SR 02–070, 02–071, 02–072, 02–073, 02–074, 02– miles south of Vermilion Parish, Louisiana, and 60 miles 075, 02–076, 02–077, 02–078 and 02–079. east-southeast of Cameron, Louisiana. TotalFinaElf Exploration and Production USA, Inc., Structure Eugene Island Area (South Addition), Block 275, Lease OCS– 07/19/02 Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/SR 02–080. G 00988, located 56 miles south-southwest of Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, and 90 miles southwest of Fourchon, Lou- isiana. Walter Oil and Gas Corporation, Structure Removal Activity, Brazos Area, Block 550, Lease OCS–G 17693 (ROW), located 07/18/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–081. 25 miles south-southeast of Matagorda County, Texas, and 55 miles south-southwest of Freeport, Texas. Fairways Specialty Sales & Service, Inc., Structure Removal Ac- Matagorda Island Area, Block 682, OCS–G 05171, located 24 07/22/02 tivity, SEA No. ES/SR 02–082. miles southeast of Calhoun County, Texas, and 92 miles southwest of Freeport, Texas. Kerr-McGee Oil and Gas Corporation, Structure Removal Activ- High Island Area (South Addition) Block A576, Lease OCS–G 07/31/02 ity, SEA No. ES/SR 02–083. 14194, located 100 miles south-southeast of Brazoria Coun- ty, Texas, and 125 miles south of Sabine Pass, Texas. Energy Resource Technology, Inc., Structure Removal Activity, Eugene Island Area, Block 128A, Lease OCS 00442, located 07/31/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–084. 28 miles southeast of Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, and 58 miles southeast of Morgan City, Louisiana. Pioneer Natural Resources, Structure Removal Activity, SEA West Delta Area, Block 62, Lease OCS–G 03601, located 12 07/31/02 No. ES/SR 02–NG2. miles northwest of Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, and 163 miles southeast of Intracoastal City, Louisiana. Ocean Energy, Inc., Structure Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/SR Vermilion Area, Block 71, Lease OCS–G 14396, located 22 08/05/02 02–085. miles south of Vermilion Parish, Louisiana, and 33 miles south of Intracoastal City, Louisiana. El Paso Production, Structure Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/SR South Timbalier Area, Block 46, Lease OCS–G 16415, located 08/06/02 02–086. 11 miles south-southeast of LaFourche Parish, Louisiana, and 195 miles east-southeast of Cameron, Louisiana. Burlington Resources Offshore, Inc., Structure Removal Activity, Vermilion Area, Block 226, Lease OCS–G 05195, located 60 08/09/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–087. miles south of Vermilion Parish, Louisiana, and 95 miles southeast of Cameron, Louisiana. Freeport McMoRan Sulphur, LLC Structure Removal Activity, Main Pass Area (South and East Addition), Block 299, Lease 08/09/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–088. OCS–G 09372, located 15 miles east-northeast of Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, and 118 miles east of Houma, Louisiana. Freeport-McMoRan Sulphur, LLC, Structure Removal Activity, Main Pass Area, Block 299, Lease OCS–G 09372, located 14 08/19/02 SEA Nos. ES/SR 02–091, 02–092, 02–093, 02–094, 02–095, miles east-northeast of Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, and 02–096 and 02–097. 119 miles east-southeast of Houma, Louisiana. Walter Oil & Gas Structure Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/SR Galveston Area (South Addition), Block Corporation, A218, 08/22/02 02–098. Lease OCS–G 14152, located 78 miles southeast of Brazoria County, Texas, and 92 miles south of Galveston, Texas. Energy Resource Technology, Inc., Structure Removal Activity, West Cameron Area, Block 204, Lease OCS–G 15066, located 08/20/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–099. 33 miles south-southwest of Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and 35 miles south of Cameron, Louisiana. W & T Offshore, Inc., Structure Removal Activity, SEA Nos. ES/ South Timbalier Area, Block 145, Lease OCS–G 14528, lo- 08/28/02 SR 02–100 and 02–101. cated 33 miles south-southwest of Terrebonne Parish, Lou- isiana, and 41 miles southwest of Fourchon, Louisiana. Kerr-McGee Oil & Gas Corporation, Structure Removal Activity, East Cameron Area (South Addition), Block 338, Lease OCS– 08/22/02 SEA No. ES/SR 02–102. G 02063, located 103 miles south of Cameron Parish, Lou- isiana, and 128 miles southeast of Sabine Pass, Texas. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Structure Removal Activity, SEA Nos. ES/ South Marsh Island Area (North Addition), Block 218, Lease 08/28/02 SR 02–103, 02–104 and 02–105. OCS 00310, located 9 miles southwest of Iberia Parish, Lou- isiana, and 24 miles south-southeast of Intracoastal City, Louisiana. Taylor Energy Company, Structure Removal Activity, SEA Nos. Matagorda Island Area, Block 665, Lease OCS–G03464, and 08/29/02 ES/SR 02–106, 02–107 and 02–108. South Marsh Island Area, Block 29, Lease OCS–G 01189, located 13 miles southeast of Calhoun County, Texas, and 32 miles east of Aransas Pass, Texas; located 43 miles southwest of Iberia Parish, Louisiana, and 65 miles south of Intracoastal City, Louisiana. BP America, Structure Removal Activity, SEA Nos. ES/SR 02– Ship Shoal Area, Block 84, Lease OCS–G 03160, Inc., West 08/28/02 109, 02–110, 91–115A and 02–111. Cameron Area, Block 00065, Lease OCS–G 02825, located 13 miles southwest of Terrebone Parish, Louisiana, and 86 miles southeast of Intracoastal City, Louisiana; and 9 miles south of Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and 15 miles southeast of Cameron, Louisiana respectively. The William G. Helis Company, LLC, Structure Removal Activ- Galveston Area, Block 394, Lease OCS–G 13317, located 21 8/30/02 ity, SEA No. ES/SR 02–112. miles southeast of Brazoria County, Texas, and 56 miles southwest of Galveston, Texas.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61922 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Activity/operator Location Date

El Paso Production, Structure Removal Activity, SEA No. ES/SR West Cameron (South Addition) Area, Block 498, Lease OCS– 09/06/02 02–113. G 03520, located 90 miles southwest of Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and 92 miles south of Cameron, Louisiana.

Persons interested in reviewing Agencies’’ on September 28, 2001 (66 Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed environmental documents for the FR 49718), as updated on January 3, information collection is published to proposals listed above or obtaining 2002 (67 FR 369), and corrected on obtain comments from the public and information about SEAs and FONSIs February 22, 2002 (67 FR 8452) (OMB’s affected agencies. prepared for activities on the Gulf of Government-Wide Guidelines). In Comments are encouraged and will be Mexico OCS are encouraged to contact compliance with section 515 and OMB’s accepted for sixty days until December MMS at the address or telephone listed Government-Wide Guidelines, each 2, 2002. This process is conducted in in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION section. Federal agency is required to publish accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Dated: September 19, 2002. guidelines for ensuring and maximizing If you have comments especially on Chris C. Oynes, the quality, objectivity, utility, and the estimated public burden or Regional Director, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region. integrity of the information it associated response time, suggestions, disseminates. The Commission posted or need a copy of the proposed [FR Doc. 02–24981 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] draft Guidelines on the Commission’s information collection instrument with BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P Web site (www.usitc.gov), published instructions or additional information, draft Guidelines on June 3, 2002 (67 FR please contact Gretchen DePasquale, 38293), and sought public comments. Office of Community Oriented Policing INTERNATIONAL TRADE Taking into consideration these Services, 1100 Vermont Avenue, NW., COMMISSION comments, as well as guidance from Washington, DC 20530. Information Quality Guidelines OMB, the Commission revised its Written comments and suggestions Guidelines. The Commission now from the public and affected agencies AGENCY: International Trade announces the publication of its final concerning the proposed collection of Commission. Guidelines on its Web site. The information are encouraged. Your ACTION: Notice. Commission’s Guidelines describe the comments should address one or more agency’s procedures for ensuring the of the following points: SUMMARY: The United States quality (including objectivity, utility, (1) Evaluate whether the proposed International Trade Commission and integrity) of information that it collection of information is necessary (Commission) announces the posting of disseminates, the procedures by which for the proper performance of the its final Information Quality Guidelines an affected person may obtain functions of the agency, including (Guidelines) on the Commission’s correction of information disseminated whether the information will have website. by the Commission that does not practical utility; EFFECTIVE DATE: As indicated in more comply with OMB’s Government-Wide (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the detail in the Guidelines, the Guidelines Guidelines and the Commission’s agency’s estimate of the burden of the are effective as of October 1, 2002. Guidelines, and the procedures for proposed collection of information, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: periodic reporting to OMB. including the validity of the Stephen A. McLaughlin, Acting Chief Issued: September 27, 2002. methodology and assumptions used; Information Officer, telephone 202– By order of the Commission. (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 205–3131. Hearing-impaired individuals Marilyn R. Abbott, clarity of the information to be are advised that information on this collected; and Secretary to the Commission. matter may be obtained by contacting (4) Minimize the burden of the the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– [FR Doc. 02–25114 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] collection of information on those who 205–3105. Persons with mobility BILLING CODE 7020–02–P are to respond, including through the impairments who will need special use of appropriate automated, assistance in gaining access to the electronic, mechanical, or other Commission should contact the Office DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE technological collection techniques or of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. other forms of information technology, Office of Community Oriented Policing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section e.g., permitting electronic submission of Services (COPS); Agency Information 515 of the Treasury and General responses. Collection Activities: Proposed Government Appropriations Act for FY Overview of this information Collection; Comments Requested 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554) directed the collection: Office of Management and Budget ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information (1) Type of Information Collection: (OMB) to issue government-wide Collection Under Review: New New Collection. guidelines providing guidance to Collection: Methamphetamine Project, (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Federal agencies for ensuring and Final Update Report (FUR). Methamphetamine Project, Final Update maximizing the quality, objectivity, Report (FUR). utility, and integrity of information, The Department of Justice (DOJ), (3) Agency form number,if any, and including statistical information, Office of Community Oriented Policing the applicable component of the disseminated by Federal agencies. OMB Services (COPS) has submitted the Department of Justice sponsoring the then published ‘‘Guidelines for following information collection request collection: Form Number: None. U.S. Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, to the Office of Management and Budget Department of Justice, Office of Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of (OMB) for review and approval in Community Oriented Policing Services Information Disseminated by Federal accordance with the Paperwork (COPS).

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61923

(4) Affected public who will be asked Office of Community Oriented Policing United States Department of Justice, 601 or required to respond, as well as a brief Services, 1100 Vermont Avenue, NW., D Street NW., Patrick Henry Building, abstract: Primary: Law Enforcement Washington, DC 20530. Suite 1600, NW., Washington, DC Agency. Other: Universities and Private Written comments and suggestions 20530. Non-Profit Agencies. Abstract: The from the public and affected agencies Dated: September 26, 2002. information collection will be used by concerning the proposed collection of the COPS Office to determine grantee’s information are encouraged. Your Brenda Dyer, progress toward grant implementation comments should address one or more Deputy Clearance Officer, United States and for compliance monitoring efforts. of the following four points: Department of Justice. (5) An estimate of the total number of (1) Evaluate whether the proposed [FR Doc. 02–25001 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] respondents and the amount of time collection of information is necessary BILLING CODE 4410–AT–M estimated for an average respondent to for the proper information of the respond: There will be an estimated 100 functions of the agency, including responses from grantees. The estimated whether the information will have DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE amount of time required for the average practical utility; Immigration and Naturalization Service respondent to respond is 3.0 hours. (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the (6) An estimate of the total public agency’s estimate of the burden of the Agency Information Collection burden (in hours) associated with the proposed collection of information, Activities: Comment Request collection: 325 hours. including the validity of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: methodology and assumptions used; ACTION: 60-day notice of information Brenda Dyer, Deputy Clearance Officer, (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and collection under review; H–1B Data Information Management and Security clarity of the information to be Collection and Filing Fee Exemption; I– Staff, Justice Management Division, collected; and 129W. United States Department of Justice, 601 (4) Minimize the burden of collection D Street NW., Patrick Henry Building, of information on those who are to The Department of Justice, Suite 1600, NW., Washington, DC respond, including through the use of Immigration and Naturalization Service 20530. appropriated automated, electronic, has submitted the following information Dated: September 26, 2002. mechanical, or other technological collection request for review and Brenda Dyer, collection techniques or other forms of clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Deputy Clearance Officer, United States information technology, e.g., permitting Department of Justice. electronic submission of responses. proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the [FR Doc. 02–25000 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Overview of this information collection: public and affected agencies. Comments BILLING CODE 4410–AT–M (1) Type of Information Collection: are encouraged and will be accepted for New Collection. sixty days until December 2, 2002. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Written comments and suggestions Universal Hiring Program Extension from the public and affected agencies Office of Community Oriented Policing Request Worksheet. concerning the proposed collection of Services (COPS); Agency Information (3) Agency form number, if any, and information should address one or more Collection Activities: Proposed the applicable component of the of the following four points: collection; Comments Requested Department of Justice sponsoring the (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection: Form Number: None. U.S. collection of information is necessary ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information Department of Justice Office of for the proper performance of the Collection Under Review: New Community Oriented Policing Services functions of the agency, including Collection: Universal Hiring Program (COPS). whether the information will have Extension Request Worksheet. (4) Affected public who will be asked practical utility; The Department of Justice (DOJ) or required to respond, as well as a brief (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Office of Community Oriented Policing abstract: Primary: Law Enforcement agencies estimate of the burden of the Service (COPS) has submitted the Agencies. Other: none. Abstract: The proposed collection of information, following information collection request information collected will be used by including the validity of the to the Office of Management and Budget the COPS Office to assess grantees’ methodology and assumptions used; (OMB) for review and approval in requests for no-cost extensions to their (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and accordance with the Paperwork Universal Hiring Program grants. clarity of the information to be Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed (5) An estimate of the total number of collected; and information collection is published to respondents and the amount of time (4) Minimize the burden of the obtain comments from the public and estimated for an average respondent to collection of information on those who affected agencies. respond: There will be an estimated are to respond, including through the Comments are encouraged and will be 4,000 responses annually from grantees. use of appropriate automated, accepted for sixty days until December The estimated amount of time required electronic, mechanical, or other 2, 2002. This process is conducted in for the average respondent to respond is technological collection techniques or accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. 30 minutes. other forms of information technology, If you have comments especially on (6) An estimate of the total burden (in e.g., permitting electronic submission of the estimated public burden or hours) associated with the collection: responses. associated response time, suggestions, 2,000 hours. Overview of this information or need a copy of the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: collection: information collection instrument with Brenda Dyer, Deputy Clearance Officer, (1) Type of Information Collection: instructions or additional information, Information Management and Security Extension of currently approved please contact Gretchen DePasquale, Staff, Justice Management Division, collection.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61924 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: H–1B DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE e.g., permitting electronic submission of Data Collection and Filing Fee responses. Exemption. Immigration and Naturalization Service Overview of this information (3) Agency form number, if any, and Agency Information Collection collection: the applicable component of the Activities: Proposed Collection; (1) Type of information Collection: Department of Justice sponsoring the Comment Request Extension of currently approved collection: Form I–129W. Adjudications collection. Division, Immigration and ACTION: 30-day notice of information (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Naturalization Service. collection under review: Employment Employment Eligibility Verification. Eligibility Verification; Form I–9. (4) Affected public who will be asked (3) Agency form number, if any, and or required to respond, as well as a brief The Department of Justice, the applicable component of the abstract: Primary: Business or other for- Immigration and Naturalization Service Department of Justice sponsoring the profit. This addendum to Form I–129 (INS) has submitted the following collection: Form I–9. Program Division, will be used by the INS to determine if information collection request to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. an H–1B petitioner is exempt from the Office of Management and Budget (4) Affected public who will be asked additional filing fee of $500, as provided (OMB) for review and clearance in or required to respond, as well as a brief by the American Competitiveness and accordance with the Paperwork abstract: Primary: Individuals or Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. Reduction Act of 1995. A notice Households. This form was developed (5) An estimate of the total number of containing this information collection to facilitate compliance with Section respondents and the amount of time was previously published in the Federal 274A of the Immigration and estimated for an average respondent to Register on July 23, 2002, at 67 FR Nationality Act (the Act), as amended 48210. The notice allowed for a 60-day respond: 128,092 responses at 30 by the Immigration Reform and Control public review and comment period. No Act of 1986 (IRCA), which prohibits the minutes (.50) per response. comments were received by the INS on knowing employment of unauthorized (6) An estimate of the total public this proposed information collection. aliens. The information collected is burden (in hours) associated with the The purpose of this notice is to allow used by employers or by recruiters for collection: 64,046 annual burden hours. an additional 30 days for public enforcement of provisions of If you have additional comments, comments. Comments are encouraged immigration laws that are designed to suggestions, or need a copy of the and will be accepted until November 1, control the employment of unauthorized proposed information collection 2002. This process is conducted in aliens. instrument with instructions, or accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. (5) An estimate of the total number of additional information, please contact Written comments and/or suggestions respondents and the amount of time Richard A. Sloan 202–514–3291, regarding the items contained in this estimated for an average respondent to notice, especially regarding the Director, Regulations and Forms respond: 78,000,000 respondents at 9 estimated public burden and associated Services Division, Immigration and minutes or (.15) hours per response and response time, should be directed to the Naturalization Service, U.S. Department 20,000,000 record keepers at 4 minutes Office of Management and Budget, or (.066) hours per response. of Justice, Room 4034, 425 I Street, NW., Office of Information and Regulatory (6) An estimate of the total public Washington, DC 20536. Additionally, Affairs, Attention: Department of Justice burden (in hours) associated with the comments and/or suggestions regarding Desk Officer, 725–17th Street, NW., collection: 13,020,000 annual burden the item(s) contained in this notice, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20530. hours. especially regarding the estimated Written comments and suggestions public burden and associated response from the public and affected agencies If you have additional comments, time may also be directed to Mr. concerning the proposed collection of suggestions, or need a copy of the Richard A. Sloan. information should address one or more proposed information collection If additional information is required of the following four points: instrument with instructions, or additional information, please contact contact: Mr. Robert B. Briggs, Clearance (1) Evaluate whether the proposed Richard A. Sloan 202–514–3291, Officer, United States Department of collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Director, Regulations and Forms Justice, Information Management and Services Division, Immigration and Security Staff, Justice Management functions of the agency, including whether the information will have Naturalization Service, U.S. Department Division, 601 D Street, NW., Suite 1600, of Justice, Room 4034, 425 I Street, NW., Patrick Henry Building, Washington, DC practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Washington, DC 20536. Additionally, 20004. agency’s estimate of the burden of the comments and/or suggestions regarding Dated: September 27, 2002. proposed collection of information, the item(s) contained in this notice, Richard A. Sloan, including the validity of the especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated response Department Clearance Officer, Department of methodology and assumptions used; Justice, Immigration and Naturalization (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and time may also be directed to Mr. Service. clarity of the information to be Richard A. Sloan. [FR Doc. 02–25029 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] collected; and If additional information is required BILLING CODE 4410–10–M (4) Minimize the burden of the contact: Mr. Robert B. Briggs, Clearance collection of information on those who Officer, United States Department of are to respond, including through the Justice, Information Management and use of appropriate automated, Security Staff, Justice Management electronic, mechanical, or other Division, Patrick Henry Building, 601 D technological collection techniques or Street, NW., Suite 1600, Washington, other forms of information technology, DC 20530.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61925

Dated: September 27, 2002. Organizations or individuals may also ADDRESSES: To request a copy of any Richard A. Sloan, submit statements for the record records schedule identified in this Department Clearance Officer, Department of without testifying. Twenty (20) copies of notice, write to the Life Cycle Justice, Immigration and Naturalization such statements should be sent to the Management Division (NWML), Service. Executive Secretary of the Advisory National Archives and Records [FR Doc. 02–25030 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Council at the above address. Papers Administration (NARA), 8601 Adelphi BILLING CODE 4410–10–M will be accepted and included in the Road, College Park, MD 20740–6001. record of the meeting if received on or Requests also may be transmitted by before October 10, 2002. FAX to 301–837–3698 or by e-mail to DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Signed at Washington, DC, this 26th day of [email protected]. Requesters must September 2002. cite the control number, which appears Pension and Welfare Benefits Ann L. Combs, in parentheses after the name of the Administration agency which submitted the schedule, Assistant Secretary, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration. and must provide a mailing address. Teleconferences; Working Groups on Those who desire appraisal reports [FR Doc. 02–24996 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Fiduciary Education and Training, should so indicate in their request. BILLING CODE 4510–29–M Orphan Plans, and Electronic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reporting Advisory Council on Larry Baume, Acting Director, Life Cycle Employee Welfare and Pension Management Division (NWML), Benefits Plans: Notice of Meeting NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS National Archives and Records Pursuant to the authority contained in ADMINISTRATION Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, Section 512 of the Employee Retirement College Park, MD 20740–6001. Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 Records Schedules; Availability and Telephone: 301–837–1505. E-mail: U.S.C. 1142, the Working Groups Request for Comments [email protected]. assigned by the Advisory Council on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year AGENCY: National Archives and Records Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Federal agencies create billions of Administration (NARA). Plans to study fiduciary education and records on paper, film, magnetic tape, training, orphan plans, and electronic ACTION: Notice of availability of and other media. To control this reporting will hold open public proposed records schedules; request for accumulation, agency records managers meetings consecutively, via comments. prepare schedules proposing retention teleconference, on Thursday, October periods for records and submit these SUMMARY: 17, 2002, in the conference room in The National Archives and schedules for NARA’s approval, using Suite N–5677, U.S. Department of Labor Records Administration (NARA) the Standard Form (SF) 115, Request for Building, Second and Constitution publishes notice at least once monthly Records Disposition Authority. These Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. of certain Federal agency requests for schedules provide for the timely transfer The purpose of the open meetings is records disposition authority (records into the National Archives of for Working Group members to discuss schedules). Once approved by NARA, historically valuable records and their initial findings concerning the records schedules provide mandatory authorize the disposal of all other issues studied in preparation for instructions on what happens to records records after the agency no longer needs drafting recommendations for the when no longer needed for current them to conduct its business. Some Secretary of Labor. Government business. They authorize schedules are comprehensive and cover The teleconference meetings will the preservation of records of all the records of an agency or one of its begin with the Working Group on continuing value in the National major subdivisions. Most schedules, Fiduciary Education and Training at 10 Archives of the United States and the however, cover records of only one a.m., followed by the Working Group on destruction, after a specified period, of office or program or a few series of Orphan Plans at 1:30 p.m., and will records lacking administrative, legal, records. Many of these update conclude with the Working Group on research, or other value. Notice is previously approved schedules, and Electronic Reporting at 3:30 p.m. published for records schedules in some include records proposed as Members of the public are encouraged which agencies propose to destroy permanent. to file a written statement pertaining to records not previously authorized for No Federal records are authorized for the topics by sending 20 copies on or disposal or reduce the retention period destruction without the approval of the before October 10, 2002, to Sharon of records already authorized for Archivist of the United States. This Morrissey, Executive Secretary, ERISA disposal. NARA invites public approval is granted only after a Advisory Council, U.S. Department of comments on such records schedules, as thorough consideration of their Labor, Room N–5677, 200 Constitution required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a). administrative use by the agency of Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. DATES: Requests for copies must be origin, the rights of the Government and Individuals or representatives of received in writing on or before of private persons directly affected by organizations wishing to address the November 18, 2002. Once the appraisal the Government’s activities, and Working Group should forward requests of the records is completed, NARA will whether or not they have historical or to the Executive Secretary or telephone send a copy of the schedule. NARA staff other value. (202) 693–8668. Oral presentations will usually prepare appraisal Besides identifying the Federal be limited to 20 minutes, but an memorandums that contain additional agencies and any subdivisions extended statement may be submitted information concerning the records requesting disposition authority, this for the record. Individuals with covered by a proposed schedule. These, public notice lists the organizational disabilities who need special too, may be requested and will be unit(s) accumulating the records or accommodations should contact Sharon provided once the appraisal is indicates agency-wide applicability in Morrissey by October 10, 2002, at the completed. Requesters will be given 30 the case of schedules that cover records address indicated in this notice. days to submit comments. that may be accumulated throughout an

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61926 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

agency. This notice provides the control envelopes, paid checks, daily summary transplantation. Also included are number assigned to each schedule, the reports, and address list updates. electronic copies of records created total number of schedule items, and the 7. Department of the Treasury, Bureau using electronic mail and word number of temporary items (the records of the Public Debt (N1–53–02–15, 5 processing systems. Reports that relate proposed for destruction). It also items, 5 temporary items). Office of to individual patient care are filed in the includes a brief description of the Chief Counsel litigation case files, patient’s medical folder, which was temporary records. The records weekly reports concerning legal previously approved for disposal 75 schedule itself contains a full activities, and reports to Congress and years after last episode of care. description of the records at the file unit GAO concerning regulations to be 12. Administrative Office of the U.S. level as well as their disposition. If published in the Federal Register. Also Courts, Office of Legislative Affairs (N1– NARA staff has prepared an appraisal included are electronic copies of 116–02–4, 7 items, 5 temporary items). memorandum for the schedule, it too documents created using electronic mail Inputs to and outputs of the Judicial includes information about the records. and word processing. Vacancies Listings Database and reports Further information about the 8. Department of the Treasury, Bureau summarizing items in the Congressional disposition process is available on of the Public Debt (N1–53–02–16, 6 Record that are relevant to the judiciary. request. items, 6 temporary items). Reports used Also included are electronic copies of by the Treasury Securities Accounting Schedules Pending documents created using electronic mail Branch to identify errors and ensure and word processing. The master file of 1. Department of Agriculture, Foreign accurate reporting of the public debt. the Judicial Vacancies Listings Database Agricultural Service (N1–166–02–2, 4 Also included are electronic copies of is proposed for permanent retention items, 4 temporary items). Federal documents created using electronic mail along with the related system Register Docket files. Included are and word processing. documentation. copies of documents submitted for 9. Department of the Treasury, Office 13. Environmental Protection Agency, publication, background materials, of Foreign Assets Control (N1–56–02–4, Agency-wide (N1–412–99–17, 3 items, 2 public correspondence, and electronic 64 items, 55 temporary items). temporary items). Records relating to copies of records created using Records relating to foreign assets international activities and agreements, electronic mail and word processing. control, including such records as an 2. Department of Justice, Drug electronic tracking system for including bilateral and cooperative Enforcement Administration (N1–170– correspondence, working files, briefing research agreements, correspondence, 02–4, 4 items, 2 temporary items). papers, guidelines, case files on civil and related documentation. Also Inputs and outputs for an electronic penalties, financial management files, included are electronic copies of system relating to clandestine laboratory enforcement case files, legislative documents created using electronic mail seizures. The electronic data is materials, and licensing applications. and word processing. Proposed for proposed for permanent retention along Also included are electronic copies of permanent retention are recordkeeping with the system documentation. records created using electronic mail copies of files relating to those 3. Department of Labor, Bureau of and word processing. Proposed for international activities and agreements Labor Statistics (N1–257–01–1, 8 items, permanent retention are such files as that result in significant changes in 5 temporary items). Inputs, extra copies recordkeeping copies of blocked assets agency policies and practices or of system outputs, and extra copies of reports and the blocked assets master generate great media attention documentation for the Occupational data file along with the related system 14. Federal Retirement Thrift Outlook Technical Memoranda Record documentation, case files relating to Investment Board, Office of Benefits and Files electronic system. Also included blocked persons and specially Investments (N1–474–02–1, 3 items, 3 are electronic records created using designated nationals, and significant temporary items). Paper and electronic electronic mail and word processing. subject files. copies of records relating to loan and Proposed for permanent retention are 10. Department of the Treasury, withdrawal policies and procedures for paper records that pre-date the United States Mint (N1–104–00–1, 27 Federal employees covered under the automated system, electronic data, and items, 21 temporary items). Facilitative Thrift Savings Plan. Also included are system documentation. records relating to the design, electronic copies of records created 4. Department of the Treasury, Bureau production, marketing, and sales of using electronic mail and word of Public Debt (N1–53–02–12, 3 items, 3 coins, medals, and other Mint products, processing. temporary items). Records pertaining to including electronic copies of records 15. National Archives and Records such matters as interest payments on created using electronic mail and word Administration, Office of Records savings bonds, bank error adjustments, processing. Proposed for permanent Services ‘‘ Washington, DC (N1–64–02– and miscellaneous accounting work. retention are recordkeeping copies of 11, 6 items, 5 temporary items). Records 5. Department of the Treasury, Bureau mint product case files, numismatic relating to the Modern Archives of the Public Debt (N1–53–02–7), 10 advertising and promotional materials, Institute. Included are such files as items, 10 temporary items). Records of coin and medal designs selected for course evaluation forms completed by the Division of Accounting Services final review, product summary reports, participants, records relating to relating to financial and securities and Congressional inquiries. administrative and logistics matters, accounting, including transaction 11. Department of Veterans Affairs, background papers accumulated by reconciliation. Veterans Health Administration (N1– instructors, and electronic copies of 6. Department of the Treasury, Bureau 15–02–4, 12 items, 12 temporary items). records created using electronic mail of Public Debt (N1–53–02–11, 2 items, 2 Records of the Pathology and Laboratory and word processing. Proposed for temporary items). Records transferred Medicine Service relating to such permanent retention are recordkeeping from the Federal Reserve Bank of matters as general laboratory quality copies of files accumulated by the Philadelphia relating to the Federal control, proficiency test surveys, Institute Director, which include such Housing Administration Debenture instrument maintenance, test records as curriculum plans, lists of Program. Included are such records as procedures, blood bank operations, and class participants, class profiles, system conversion reports, daily work the donation and receipt of organs for aggregated evaluation data, and other

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61927

records which document major changes contacting the Office of the General Dated: September 26, 2002. in course content and structure. Counsel. For the National Endowment for the Dated: September 24, 2002. Dated: September 26, 2002. Humanities. Michael J. Kurtz, For the National Endowment for the Arts. Daniel C. Schneider, Assistant Archivist for Record Services, Hope O’Keeffe, General Counsel. Washington, DC. Acting General Counsel. [FR Doc. 02–25068 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 02–24955 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 02–24980 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7536–01–P BILLING CODE 7515–01–P BILLING CODE 7537–01–P NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE BOARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE HUMANITIES ARTS AND HUMANITIES Information Quality Guidelines Notice of Guidelines for Ensuring and Notice of Guidelines for Ensuring and AGENCY: National Labor Relations Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Board. Utility, and Integrity of Information Utility, and Integrity of Information ACTION: Final Guidelines. Disseminated by the National Disseminated by the National Endowment for the Humanities Endowment for the Arts SUMMARY: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) announces September 26, 2002. September 26, 2002. that its final Information Quality AGENCY: National Endowment for the AGENCY: Guidelines have been posted on the National Endowment for the Humanities. Arts, National Foundation on the Arts NLRB Web site. Information Quality ACTION: and Humanities. Notice of availability of final Guidelines for the Agency’s Office of guidelines. ACTION: Notice. Inspector General are included as SUMMARY: The National Endowment for Appendix A to those Guidelines. SUMMARY: The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) announces that DATES: These Guidelines are effective the Arts (Endowment) announces that its Guidelines for Ensuring and October 1, 2002. its Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, ADDRESSES: Submit any comments Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information related to the NLRB’s Information Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the National Quality Guidelines to the Executive Disseminated by the National Endowment for the Humanities have Secretary, National Labor Relations Endowment for the Arts have been been posted on the NEH Web site, Board, 1099 14th Street, NW., posted on the Endowment Web site, http://www.neh.gov. Washington, DC 20570. Comments may www.arts.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be submitted by e-mail to: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel C. Schneider, General Counsel, [email protected] or by facsimile Hope O’Keeffe, Acting General Counsel, telephone 202–606–8322, to (202) 273–4270. telephone 202–682–5418, [email protected]. Hearing-impaired FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [email protected]. Hearing-impaired individuals may contact the NEH by Lester A. Heltzer, Acting Executive individuals may contact the Endowment TDD/TTY at 202–606–8338. Secretary, National Labor Relations by TDD/TTY at 202–682–5496. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Board, 1099 14th Street, NW., SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 515 of the Treasury and General Washington, DC 20570; telephone (202) 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for FY 273–1936; facsimile (202) 273–4270; e- Government Appropriations Act for FY 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554) requires each mail to [email protected]. 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554) requires each Federal agency to publish guidelines for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Federal agency to publish guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, 515 of the Treasury and General ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the Government Appropriations Act for FY objectivity, utility, and integrity of the information it disseminates. Agency 2001 (Public Law No. 106–554) requires information it disseminates. Agency guidelines must be based on each Federal agency to publish guidelines must be based on government-wide guidelines issued by Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing government-wide guidelines issued by the Office of Management and Budget the quality, objectivity, utility, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In compliance with this integrity of the information it (OMB). In compliance with this statutory requirement and OMB disseminates to the public. Agency statutory requirement and OMB instructions, the NEH has posted its Guidelines must conform to instructions, the Endowment has posted Information Quality Guidelines on the government-wide guidelines issued by its Information Quality Guidelines on NEH’s Web site (http://www.neh.gov). the Office of Management and Budget the Endowment’s Web site The Guidelines describe the agency’s (OMB). In compliance with this (www.arts.gov). procedures for ensuring the quality of statutory requirement and OMB The Guidelines describe the agency’s information that it disseminates and the instructions, the NLRB has posted its procedures for ensuring the quality of procedures by which an affected person Information Quality Guidelines on the information that it disseminates and the may obtain correction of information NLRB Web site (www.NLRB.gov) in the procedures by which an affected person disseminated by the NEH that does not ‘‘Public Notices’’ area. The Guidelines may obtain correction of information comply with the Guidelines. Persons describe the Agency’s procedures for disseminated by the Endowment that who cannot access the Guidelines ensuring the quality of information that does not comply with the Guidelines. through the Internet may request a it disseminates to the public and the Persons who cannot access the paper or electronic copy by contacting procedures by which an affected person Guidelines through the Internet may the Office of the General Counsel. may obtain correction of information request a paper or electronic copy by Effective Date: October 1, 2002. disseminated by the NLRB that does not

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61928 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

comply with the Guidelines. Persons (10,839 Reporting + 16,905 NUCLEAR REGULATORY who cannot access the Guidelines recordkeepers)). COMMISSION through the Internet may request a 7. The estimated number of annual paper or electronic copy by contacting [Docket Nos. STN 50–528, 529, 530 and 72– respondents: 21,583 (4,678 NRC 44] the Division of Information at (202) licensees and 16,905 Agreement State 273–1991. licensees). Arizona Public Service Company, Palo Dated: September 27, 2002. 8. An estimate of the total number of Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Lester A. Heltzer, hours needed annually to complete the Units 1, 2 and 3; Environmental Acting Executive Secretary. requirement or request: 247,239 (NRC Assessment and Finding of No [FR Doc. 02–25050 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] licensees 55,488 hours (26,875 reporting Significant Impact BILLING CODE 7545–01–M + 28,613 recordkeeping) and Agreement The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory State licensees 191,751 hours (90,967 Commission (NRC or Commission) is reporting + 100,784 recordkeeping). considering issuance of an exemption NUCLEAR REGULATORY 9. An indication of whether Section from Title 10 of the Code of Federal COMMISSION 3507(d), Pub. L. 104–13 applies: Not Regulations (10 CFR) Part 72 for the applicable. general license utilized by the Arizona Agency Information Collection 10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 30 Public Service Company (APS or Activities: Submission for the Office of establishes requirements that are licensee). The exemption is pursuant to Management and Budget (OMB) applicable to all persons in the United 10 CFR 72.7 for the storage of spent fuel Review; Comment Request States governing domestic licensing of in an independent spent fuel storage AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory radioactive byproduct material. The installation (ISFSI) associated with the Commission (NRC). application, reporting and operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear recordkeeping requirements are Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of necessary to permit the NRC to make a (PVNGS), located in Maricopa County, information collection and solicitation determination whether the possession, Arizona. Therefore, as required by 10 of public comment. use, and transfer of byproduct material CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this SUMMARY: The NRC has recently is in conformance with the environmental assessment and finding submitted to OMB for review the Commission’s regulations for protection of no significant impact. following proposal for the collection of of the public health and safety. Environmental Assessment information under the provisions of the A copy of the final supporting Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 statement may be viewed free of charge Identification of the Proposed Action U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby at the NRC Public Document Room, One The proposed action would exempt informs potential respondents that an White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Arizona Public Service Company from agency may not conduct or sponsor, and Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville, MD the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2), that a person is not required to respond 20852. OMB clearance requests are 72.212(b)(2)(i)(A), 72.212(b)(7), and 10 to, a collection of information unless it available at the NRC worldwide Web CFR 72.214 for PVNGS Units 1, 2, and displays a current valid OMB control site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ 3. These regulations specifically require number. doc-comment/omb/index.html. The compliance with the conditions set forth 1. Type of submission, new, revision, document will be available on the NRC in the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) or extension: Revision. home page site for 60 days after the for each dry spent fuel storage cask used 2. The title of the information signature date of this notice. by an ISFSI general licensee. The dry collection: 10 CFR part 30—Rules of Comments and questions should be cask storage system used by APS is the General Applicability to Domestic directed to the OMB reviewer listed NAC–UMS Universal Storage System, Licensing of Byproduct Material. below by November 1, 2002. Comments Certificate of Compliance Number 1015. 3. The form number if applicable: Not received after this date will be The NAC–UMS CoC provides applicable. considered if it is practical to do so, but conditions for requirements of 4. How often the collection is assurance of consideration cannot be Appendix A, Technical Specifications, required: Required reports are collected given to comments received after this and Appendix B, Approved Content and and evaluated on a continuing basis as date. Design Features. The proposed action events occur. There is a one-time would allow APS to deviate from (1) the submittal of information to receive a Bryon Allen, Office of Information and removable surface contamination limits license. Renewal applications are Regulatory Affairs (3150–0017), in LCO 3.2.1 of Appendix A, and (2) the submitted every 10 years. Information NEOB–10202, Office of Management vertical seismic limits in paragraph B submitted in previous applications may and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. 3.4.1.3 of Appendix B. The proposed be referenced without being Comments can also be submitted by action would implement the limits resubmitted. In addition, recordkeeping telephone at (202) 395–3087. requested by NAC International in the must be performed on an on-going basis. The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda NAC–UMS CoC amendment request 5. Who will be required or asked to Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233. currently under staff review. report: All persons applying for or The proposed action is in accordance holding a license to manufacture, Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day with the licensee’s application dated of September, 2002. produce, transfer, receive, acquire, own, May 1, 2002, as supplemented by letter possess, or use radioactive byproduct For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. dated June 19, 2002. material. Brenda Jo. Shelton, 6. An estimate of the number of NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief The Need for the Proposed Action responses: 35,709 (7,965 NRC licensees Information Officer. The proposed action is needed (3,287 Reporting + 4,678 Recordkeepers) [FR Doc. 02–25080 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] because APS plans to begin its initial and 27,744 Agreement State licensees BILLING CODE 7590–01–P dry cask spent fuel loading campaign

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61929

with PVNGS Unit 2 in November 2002. With regard to potential adams.html. If you do not have access APS plans to continue loading spent nonradiological impacts, the proposed to ADAMS or if there are problems in fuel in dry cask storage with PVNGS action does not have a potential to affect accessing the documents located in Unit 1 in May 2003 and PVNGS Unit 3 any historic sites. It does not affect ADAMS, contact the NRC Public in January 2004. The licensee has stated nonradiological plant effluents and has Document Room (PDR) Reference staff that Unit 2 will lose its full-core offload no other environmental impact. at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737, capability following the fall 2003 Therefore, there are no significant or by e-mail at [email protected]. refueling outage. Units 1 and 3 will lose nonradiological environmental impacts Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day their full-core offload capability upon associated with the proposed action. of September, 2002. startup from the following outages, Accordingly, the NRC concludes that For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. consecutively. The initial loading of there are no significant environmental E. William Brach, spent fuel into dry casks needs to be impacts associated with the proposed accomplished during winter 2002 to action. Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of support subsequent refueling outage Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Alternatives to the Proposed Action schedules and dry cask load schedules [FR Doc. 02–25082 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] for all the units. Deferral of the cask Since there is no significant BILLING CODE 7590–01–P loading campaign is not desired because environmental impact associated with the preparation, time and resources the proposed action, alternatives with required are extensive and would equal or greater environmental impact NUCLEAR REGULATORY significantly impact the associated unit were not evaluated. As an alternative to COMMISSION refueling outage. Additionally, dry cask the proposed action, the staff considered [Docket No. 70–27] loading operations cannot be conducted denial of the proposed action. Denial of for a unit during the same time as the exemption would result in no Environmental Assessment and refueling activities because of new fuel change in current environmental Finding of No Significant Impact of receipt and use of the same APS staff. impact, but would result in a potential License Amendment for BWX If the first cask loading campaign is dose increase to workers involved in Technologies, Inc. deferred the delay would cascade to cask decontamination activities. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory subsequent units, remove any margin Agencies and Persons Consulted Commission. from subsequent cask load schedules, increase scheduling pressures, and On September 3, 2002, the staff ACTION: Amendment of BWX potentially impact plant safety. The consulted with Mr. William Wright of Technologies, Inc., Materials License proposed action is necessary because the Arizona Radiation Regulatory SNM–42 To authorize elimination of the 10 CFR 72.214 rulemaking to Agency, regarding the environmental LTC stack continuous monitoring. implement the NAC–UMS CoC impact of the proposed action. He had no comments. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory amendment is not projected for Commission is considering the completion until December 2002, which Finding of No Significant Impact amendment of Special Nuclear Material will not support the APS dry cask License SNM–42 to authorize storage loading schedule. The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed in elimination of Lynchburg Technology Environmental Impacts of the Proposed accordance with the requirements set Center (LTC) stack continuous Action forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based on the monitoring and revise other air The NRC has completed its evaluation foregoing Environmental Assessment, monitoring stack action levels at the of the proposed action and concludes the Commission finds that the proposed BWX Technologies, Inc., facility located that there is no significant action of granting an exemption from 10 in Lynchburg, VA, and has prepared an environmental impact if the exemption CFR 72.212(a)(2), 72.212(b)(2)(i)(A), Environmental Assessment in support is granted. The potential environmental 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214 allowing of this action. impact of using the NAC–UMS Arizona Public Service Company to Environmental Assessment Universal Storage System was initially deviate from the removable surface presented in the Environmental contamination limits and the vertical Docket: 70–27. Licensee: BWX Technologies (BWXT), Assessment (EA) for the Final Rule to seismic limits, will not significantly Inc., Navy Nuclear Fuel Division, add the NAC–UMS Universal Storage impact the quality of the human System to the list of approved spent fuel environment. Accordingly, the Lynchburg, Virginia. Subject: Environmental Assessment storage casks in 10 CFR 72.214 (65 FR Commission has determined not to for license amendment request dated 62581, dated November 20, 2000), as prepare an environmental impact July 16, 2002. revised in Amendment No. 1 (65 FR statement for the proposed action. 76896, dated February 20, 2001) and in For further details with respect to this 1.0 Introduction Amendment No. 2 (66 FR 52486, dated exemption request, see the APS letter October 16, 2001). The revised surface dated May 1, 2002, as supplemented by 1.1 Background contamination and vertical seismic letter dated June 19, 2002. The request The Nuclear Regulatory Commission limits do not increase the probability or for exemption was docketed under 10 (NRC) staff has received a license consequences of accidents, no changes CFR part 72, Docket 72–44. The NRC request, dated July 16, 2002, to amend are being made in the types of any maintains an Agencywide Documents Special Nuclear Material License SNM– effluents that may be released offsite, Access and Management System 42 to eliminate the need for continuous and there is no significant increase in (ADAMS), which provides text and air monitoring at the LTC on the BWX occupational or public radiation image files of NRC’s public documents. Technologies, Inc. (BWXT) site in exposure. Therefore, there are no These documents may be accessed Lynchburg, Virginia. The purpose of significant radiological environmental through the NRC’s Public Electronic this document is to assess the impacts associated with the proposed Reading Room on the Internet at environmental consequences of the action. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ proposed license amendment.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61930 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

The BWXT facility in Lynchburg, VA other radioactive gases and particulates, acre (2 km2) site in the northeastern is authorized under SNM–42 to possess the stack monitoring system for the hot corner of Campbell County, nuclear materials for the fabrication and cells needs to be capable of detecting approximately 5 miles (8km) east of assembly of nuclear fuel components. noble gases and alpha and beta Lynchburg, Virginia. This site is located The facility supports the U.S. naval radiation. The hot cells are the only in a generally rural area, consisting reactor program, fabricates research and areas vented through the 50 meter stack primarily of rolling hills with gentle university reactor components, and which can release noble gases and other slopes, farm land, and woodlands. manufactures compact reactor fuel radioactive gases and particulates. elements. The facility also performs The current license requires BWXT to 3.0 Effluent Releases and Monitoring recovery of scrap uranium. The LTC continuously monitor the 50-meter stack A full description of the effluent specifically conducts research and by a system capable of measuring alpha monitoring program at the site is development activities related to the and beta particulates and noble gases. provided in the 1991 Environmental fabrication of nuclear fuel components. The licensee is proposing to perform Assessment for the Renewal of the NRC license for BWXT. Monitoring programs 1.2 Review Scope continuous monitoring only when working with Post Accident Samples at the BWXT facility comprise effluent This environmental assessment (EA) (PAS) or uncut or unpunctured monitoring of air and water and serves to present information and irradiated fuel with significant volatile environmental monitoring of various analysis for determining whether to radioisotope inventories. During periods media (air, soil, vegetation, and issue a Finding of No Significant Impact when this type of work is not being groundwater). This program provides a (FONSI) or to prepare an Environmental performed, and significant volatile basis for evaluation of public health and Impact Statement (EIS). Should the NRC radioisotope sources are absent, the safety impacts, for establishing issue a FONSI, no EIS would be licensee will monitor the stack daily for compliance with environmental prepared and the license amendment alpha and beta particulates. Daily regulations, and for development of would be granted. monitoring of the LTC stack will not mitigation measures if necessary. The This document serves to evaluate and include any change in the type or form monitoring program is not expected to document the impacts of the proposed of special nuclear material (SNM) or any change as a result of the proposed action. Other activities on the site have new or different operations from those action. The NRC has reviewed the previously been evaluated and currently authorized under BWXT’s location of the environmental documented in the 1991 Environmental license. monitoring program sampling points, Assessment (EA) for the renewal of the This daily sampling of the 50-meter the frequency of sample collection, and NRC license for BWXT. The 1991 stack will be similar to the sampling the trends of the sampling program document is referenced when no protocol for other existing stacks at the results in conjunction with the significant changes have occurred. site. The sampler will include a environmental pathway and exposure Besides the proposed licensing action, calibrated flow meter and a collection analysis and concluded that the operations will continue to remain filter. The filter will be collected and monitoring program provides adequate limited to those authorized by the analyzed on a daily basis for alpha and protection of public health and safety. license. beta particulates. The proposed activity will change the sampling of the 50-meter stack, which 1.3 Proposed Action 1.4 Purpose and Need for Proposed exhausts effluents from the hot cells, The proposed action is to amend NRC Action from continuous to daily, except when Materials License SNM–42 to eliminate BWXT indicates that maintaining the the need for continuous air monitoring work with PAS or uncut or unpunctured continuous alpha and beta particulate irradiated fuel is being performed. at the LTC. The duration of the and noble gas monitoring is costly and proposed activity is for as long as the During those times, the licensee will not justified when work with PAS or monitor the stack continuously. The hot facility holds a license with the NRC, or unpunctured irradiated fuel is until BWXT requests and the NRC cells are provided with two stages of performed only sporadically. BWXT HEPA filtration, before the effluents are approves a license amendment. stated that the current inventory of Activities, utilizing licensed material, released through the stack. irradiated fuel at the LTC has been cut are conducted at the LTC in support of Continuous air samples are collected and placed in storage and that limited operating divisions of Babcock and at the site boundaries by samplers future work with unpunctured Wilcox and for other companies and which are nominally located at the four irradiated fuel is anticipated. government organizations. Some of compass points. Other samples may be these activities include: failure analysis, 1.5 Alternatives collected to ensure the plant operations are not adversely affecting the fatigue and fracture analysis, hot cell The alternatives available to the NRC work, hot machine shop work, environment. The boundary air samples are: are compared to actions levels and if environmental chemistry analysis, and 1. Approve the license amendment radiochemistry analysis. The hot cell is exceeded, appropriate investigative and request as submitted; corrective actions are taken. vented through the 50-meter stack, 2. Approve the license amendment located on the roof of the facility. The with restrictions; or 4.0 Environmental Impacts of hot cell facility consists of four 3. Deny the amendment request. Proposed Action and Alternatives independent beta-gamma type hot cells. Work in the hot cells consists of 2.0 Affected Environment 4.1 Radiological Health Impacts examinations to investigate extended The affected environment for Daily monitoring of the LTC stack will burn-up commercial light water reactor Alternatives 1 and 2 is the BWXT site. not include any change in the type or fuel rods, examination of advanced A full description of the site and its form of special nuclear material (SNM) spacer grid designs, failed in-core characteristics is given in the 1991 or any new or different operations from instrument detectors, and failed fuel Environmental Assessment (EA) for the those currently authorized under rods. Because cutting and puncturing of Renewal of the NRC license for BWXT. BWXT’s license. The impacts of normal irradiated fuel releases noble gases and The BWXT facility is located on a 525 operation of the site were evaluated in

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61931

the 1991 Environmental Assessment described in Chapter 5 of the BWXT amendment request, the NRC has (EA) for the Renewal of the NRC license Emergency Plan. The scenario involves determined that the proper action is to for BWXT, and accident scenarios were the ignition of zircaloy grindings, issue a FONSI in the Federal Register. evaluated in the BWXT Emergency Plan. resulting in a release of plutonium The NRC staff considered the The total effective dose equivalent through the stack. This accident would environmental consequences of (TEDE) for members of the public from result in a possible exposure to the amending NRC Special Nuclear the normal operations at the BWXT site public of less than one millionth of a Materials License SNM–42 to change was calculated to be 0.024 mrem per maximum allowable lung burden for the frequency of monitoring the stack year. plutonium. Thus, off-site exposure due from continuously to daily and have Since the proposed amendment will to the worst-case accident in the hot determined that the approval of the not result in changes in the types or cells is negligible. request will have no significant effect on increases in the amounts of any public health and safety or the 4.8 Cumulative Impacts effluents released, the dose to the environment. worker and the public will remain the The NRC has found no other activities 8.0 Finding of No Significant Impact same if the amendment is approved. in the areas that could result in cumulative impacts. On the basis of this EA, the NRC has 4.2 Water Resources and Biota concluded that the environmental 4.9 Alternatives Monitoring the LTC air effluents impacts associated with the proposed daily, as opposed to continuously, will The action that the NRC is action would not be significant and do have no impact on water resources or considering is approval of an not warrant the preparation of an biota. Effluent amounts will not be amendment request to Materials License Environmental Impact Statement. increased and there will be no change SNM–42 issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part Accordingly, the NRC is making a in the composition of material released. 70. The alternatives available to the Finding of No Significant Impact. NRC are: In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of 4.3 Geology and Seismology 1. Approve the license amendment the NRC’s ‘‘Rules of Practice,’’ the Monitoring the LTC air effluents daily request as submitted; Environmental Assessment and the will have no impact on geology or 2. Approve the license amendment documents related to this proposed seismology. request with restrictions; or action will be available electronically 3. Deny the amendment request. 4.4 Soils for public inspection from the Publicly Based on its review, the NRC staff has Available Records (PARS) component of Soils will not be impacted as a result concluded that the environmental NRC’s document system (ADAMS). of monitoring the LTC air effluents impacts associated with the proposed ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web daily. There will be no new action are insignificant. Thus, the staff site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ construction, no physical disturbance of considers that Alternative 1 is the adams.html (the Public Electronic soils, and there will not be any releases appropriate alternative for selection. Reading Room). of process materials to soils as a result 5.0 Agencies and Persons Contacted The NRC contact for this licensing of this amendment application. action is Edwin Flack, who may be The NRC contacted the Director of 4.5 Air Quality contacted at (301) 415–8115 or by e-mail Radiological Health at the Virginia at [email protected] for more information The NRC staff has determined that the Department of Health (VDH) August, about the licensing action. proposed amendment will have 2002 concerning this request. There minimal impact on air quality. As Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day were no comments, concerns or of September, 2002. discussed above, daily monitoring will objections from the state. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. be used to maintain radiological Because the proposed action is airborne releases within NRC limits. entirely within existing facilities, and Daniel M. Gillen, Chief, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division 4.6 Demography, Cultural and Historic does not involve new or increased effluents or accident scenarios, the NRC of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office Resources of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. has concluded that there is no potential The NRC staff has determined that the to affect endangered species or historic [FR Doc. 02–25084 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] proposed amendment will not impact resources, and therefore consultation BILLING CODE 7590–01–P demography, or cultural or historic with the State Historic Preservation resources. A full description of these Society and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife NUCLEAR REGULATORY parameters is given in the 1991 Service was not performed. Environmental Assessment for Renewal. COMMISSION 6.0 References 4.7 Impacts Due to Accident Announcement of Public Workshop on Conditions U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), License Renewal Continuing Guidance August 1991, ‘‘Environmental Assessment Development In accordance with 10 CFR 70.61, for Renewal of Special Nuclear Material BWXT is required to limit the risk of License SNM–42.’’ AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory each credible high or intermediate BWX Technologies, July 16, 2002, Letter from Commission. consequence event through the Carl Yates to Director of Office of Nuclear ACTION: Notice of public workshop. application of engineered and/or Materials Safety and Safeguards, administrative controls. Also nuclear Amendment of License SNM–42. SUMMARY: The United States Nuclear criticality events must be limited BWX Technologies, November 28, 2001, ‘‘Mt. Regulatory Commission (NRC) will hold through assurance that all processes are Athos Site Emergency Plan’. a public workshop on implementation maintained at subcritical levels. of Title 10 of the Code of Federal The impacts due to the worst-case 7.0 Conclusions Regulations, (10 CFR) part 54, accident conditions were evaluated for Based on an evaluation of the ‘‘Requirements for Renewal of Operating the hot cells. The worst-case scenario is environmental impacts of the Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants’’ (the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61932 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

license renewal rule) and Part 51 applications NUCLEAR REGULATORY (environmental issues). The purpose of Tables consistent with generic aging COMMISSION the workshop is to exchange lessons learned (GALL) report, not [Docket No. 70–3103 information between applicant, the NRC consistent with GALL, links, staff reviewers, and other stakeholders columns, number of subgroups, Louisiana Energy Services Gas that will lead to enhancing the license order of table data, table headings Centrifuge Enrichment Facility renewal application (LRA) in a manner Lessons learned from LRA submittals, AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory that provides the most efficient review request for additional information Commission. by the NRC staff and enhances public (RAI), acceptable GALL deviations confidence. The workshop is intended ACTION: Opportunity to provide public Staff-applicant interface to allow for an open exchange between comments. the stakeholders. It will provide an Document revisions GALL, Standard opportunity to discuss lessons learned Review Plan (SRP), NEI 95–10 SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory in the license renewal process. On day —Short term Commission (NRC) is requesting one, part 54 is discussed, and on the —Long term comments from members of the public concerning a series of ‘‘white papers’’ second day, part 51 is discussed. Round table discussion The NRC staff will consider the presented to the NRC by the Louisiana Path going forward Energy Services addressing licensing comments received from the workshop • participants to improve the license Interim staff guidance issues for a gas centrifuge uranium renewal guidance documents NUREG– —Current status enrichment facility to be located in the 1800, ‘‘Standard Review Plan for —Interim guidance use during area of Hartsville, Tennessee. The Review of License Renewal application review Commission will consider comments Applications for Nuclear Power Plants’’, —Looking ahead received in response to this notice in NUREG 1801, ‘‘Generic Aging Lessons developing its position on the issues Learned (GALL) report,’’ and Regulatory Lunch raised in these ‘‘white papers.’’ Guide (RG) 1.188 ‘‘Standard Format and • Format and content of time-limited DATES: Comments are due by (30 days). Content for Applications to Renew aging analyses (TLAA) Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, Nuclear Power Plant Operating • Generic guidance Licenses.’’ NEI will consider the but the NRC is able to ensure —Electrical cable programs comments to improve NEI 95–10, consideration only for comments ‘‘Industry Guideline for Implementing —Environmentally assisted fatigue received on or before this date. the Requirements of 10 CFR part 54— —Criterion 54.4(a)(2) for scoping FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. The License Renewal Rule,’’ as —System realignment Timothy C. Johnson, Project Manager, appropriate. • On-site inspections lessons learned, Special Projects and Inspection Branch, The workshop will be conducted in a scoping, regional inspections, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and roundtable format to allow for project manager-applicant interface Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material interaction between presenters and • Summary and follow-up actions Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear attendees. This is a Category 3 Meeting. Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T– The public is invited to participate in Wednesday, October 23, 2002 8A33, Washington, DC 20555. this meeting by providing comments 9 a.m. to Noon Telephone (301) 415–7299, e-mail and asking questions throughout the [email protected]. meeting. • Opening remarks by NRC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On • DATES: October 22, 2002, 9 a.m. to 4 Opening remarks by NEI December 17, 2001, Louisiana Energy p.m.; October 23, 2002, 9 a.m. to 12 • Purpose and format of the workshop Services (LES) notified the NRC of its noon. • Environmental reviews intention to apply for a license to ADDRESSES: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory • Format and content of public construct and operate a gas centrifuge Commission, Two White Flint North, meetings enrichment facility in the United States. 11545 Rockville Pike, Auditorium, • Generic issues of public interest Subsequently, LES and the NRC staff have met in several public meetings to Rockville, Maryland. —Radiological For further information contact: Raj discuss pre-application issues. LES Anand, Mail Stop O–12D3, Office of —Endangered species currently intends to submit its Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. —Alternatives application in December 2002. By letter Nuclear Regulatory Commission, —Severe accident mitigation dated April 24, 2002, LES presented six Washington, DC, 20555–0001, alternative (SAMA) evaluation pre-application policy issues ‘‘white Telephone: 301–415–1146; Fax: 301– —Lessons learned papers’’ to the NRC. LES submitted 415–2279, e-mail: [email protected]. —Poster session, lessons learned these white papers to the Commission as LES believes that Commission • Summary and follow-up actions Agenda direction on these issues will be Tuesday, October 22, 2002 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day essential to the conduct of an efficient of September 2002. regulatory review process. The white 8:30 a.m: Registration—TWFN For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. papers addressed the following subjects: Auditorium Pao-Tsin Kuo, 1. Analysis of need for the facility and 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Program Director, License Renewal and the no-action alternative under the • Opening remarks by NRC Environmental Impacts Division of Regulatory National Environmental Policy Act • Opening remarks by NEI Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear 2. Environmental justice • Purpose and format of the workshop Reactor Regulation. 3. Financial qualifications • License renewal application format [FR Doc. 02–25085 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] 4. Antitrust review Industry proposal Class of 2003 BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 5. Foreign ownership

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61933

6. Disposition of depleted uranium tails RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of September, A public meeting was held on April Agency Forms Submitted for OMB 2002. A copy of each application may be 30, 2002, to discuss these papers. Review obtained for a fee at the SEC’s Public Comments on the papers were Reference Branch, 450 Fifth St., NW., SUMMARY: In accordance with the submitted by two attendees at the Washington, DC 20549–0102 (tel. 202– Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 meeting: the Department of Energy and 942–8090). An order granting each U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad the United States Enrichment application will be issued unless the Retirement Board (RRB) has submitted Corporation. The NRC prepared a SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons the following proposal(s) for the meeting summary, dated May 28, 2002, may request a hearing on any collection of information to the Office of which is publicly available. At the time application by writing to the SEC’s Management and Budget for review and of the April meeting, LES had not Secretary at the address below and approval. chosen a site for the facility. serving the relevant applicant with a On September 9, 2002, LES notified Summary of Proposal(s) copy of the request, personally or by the NRC that it had selected a site in (1) Collection title: Request for review mail. Hearing requests should be Hartsville, Tennessee, where the of Part B Medicare Claim. received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on Tennessee Valley Authority had (2) Form(s) submitted: G–790, G–791. October 21, 2002, and should be planned at one time to build a nuclear (3) OMB Number: 3220–0100. accompanied by proof of service on the power plant. By letter dated, September (4) Expiration date of current OMB applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, 11, 2002, the Nuclear Information and clearance: 11/30/2002. for lawyers, a certificate of service. Resource Service requested an (5) Type of request: Extension of a Hearing requests should state the nature opportunity to submit comments. Now, currently approved collection. of the writer’s interest, the reason for the that a site has been chosen, the NRC is (6) Respondents: Individuals or request, and the issues contested. providing a 30 day public comment Households. Persons who wish to be notified of a period on the issues proposed by LES. (7) Estimated annual number of hearing may request notification by respondents: 4,000. writing to the Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth The April 24, 2002, LES ‘‘white Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549– papers;’’ the May 28, 2002, NRC (8) Total annual responses: 4,100. (9) Total annual reporting hours: 0609. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Meeting Summary; DOE’s July 25, 2002, CONTACT: Diane L. Titus at (202) 942– comments; and USEC’s June 19, 2002, 1,025. (10) Collection description: The 0564, SEC, Division of Investment comments are accessible electronically Railroad Retirement Board administers Management, Office of Investment from the NRC Agency wide Documents the Medicare program for persons Company Regulation, 450 Fifth Street, Access and Management System covered by the railroad retirement NW., Washington, DC 20549–0506. (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading system. The request provides the means Room on the internet at the NRC Web ABN AMRO Funds [File No. 811–7244] for obtaining review by Palmetto GBA site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ on claims for Part B Medicare benefits. Summary: Applicant seeks an order adams.html. The ADAMS Accession declaring that it has ceased to be an Numbers for these documents are: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS: Copies of the forms and supporting investment company. On September 21, ML022350051, ML021480298, 2001 and September 26, 2001, applicant ML022350130, and ML021770197 documents can be obtained from Chuck Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer transferred its assets to ABN AMRO respectively. These documents may also (312–751–3363). Funds (formerly known as Alleghany be examined and/or copied for a fee at Comments regarding the information Funds), based on net asset value. NRC’s Public Document Room located collection should be addressed to Expenses of $140,000 incurred in at One White Flint North, 11555 Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement connection with the reorganization were Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, paid by ABN AMRO Asset Management Maryland. Illinois, 60611–2092 and to the OMB (USA) LLC, applicant’s investment Members of the public may provide Desk Officer for the RRB, at the Office adviser, and/or its affiliates. comments on the subject application of Management and Budget, Room Filing Date: The application was filed within 30 days of the publication of this 10230, New Executive Office Building, on September 17, 2002. notice in the Federal Register. The Washington, DC 20503. Applicant’s Address: c/o PFPC Inc., comments may be provided to Micheal 101 Federal St., Boston, MA 02110. Lesar, Chief, Rules Review and Chuck Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. Principal High Yield Fund, Inc. [File Directives Branch, Division of No. 811–5174] Administration Services, Office of [FR Doc. 02–24976 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory BILLING CODE 7905–01–M Summary: Applicant seeks an order Commission, Washington DC 20555. declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On July 31, 2002, Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE applicant transferred its assets to September, 2002. COMMISSION Principal Bond Fund, Inc., based on net For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory asset value. Expenses of $67,399 Commission. [Release No. IC–25758] incurred in connection with the Melvyn N. Leach, Notice of Applications for reorganization were paid by applicant’s Chief, Special Projects and Inspection Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the investment adviser, Principal Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Investment Company Act of 1940 Management Corporation. Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety Filing Date: The application was filed and Safeguards. September 26, 2002. on September 19, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–25081 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] The following is a notice of Applicant’s Address: 711 High St., BILLING CODE 7590–01–P applications for deregistration under Des Moines, IA 50392–0200.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61934 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Current Income Shares, Inc. [File No. Applicant’s Address: One South ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule 811–2357] Street, Baltimore, MD 21202. change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been Summary: Applicant, a closed-end Alliance Money Market Fund [File No. prepared by the CBOE. The Commission investment company, seeks an order 811–8838] declaring that it has ceased to be an is publishing this notice to solicit Summary: Applicant seeks an order investment company. On April 22, comments on the proposed rule change declaring that it has ceased to be an 2002, applicant transferred its assets to from interested persons. investment company. By July 29, 2002, HighMark Bond Fund, a series of all shareholders of applicant had I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s HighMark Funds, based on net asset voluntarily redeemed their shares at net Statement of the Terms of Substance of value. Expenses of $291,400 incurred in asset value. Applicant incurred no the Proposed Rule Change connection with the reorganization were expenses in connection with the The CBOE proposes to amend paid by applicant, HighMark Capital liquidation. provisions of its Constitution and Rules Management, Inc., applicant’s Filing Dates: The application was pertaining to the governance of the investment adviser, and SEI filed on August 7, 2002, and amended Exchange. Below is the text of the Investments, HighMark Funds’ on September 13, 2002. proposed rule change. Proposed new administrator. Applicant’s Address: 1345 Avenue of language is italicized, proposed Filing Date: The application was filed the Americas, New York, NY 10105. on September 17, 2002. deletions are bracketed. Applicant’s Address: 445 South Variable Investors Series Trust [File * * * * * Figueroa St., Suite 306, Los Angeles, CA No. 811–4969] Chicago Board Options Exchange, 90071. Summary: Applicant seeks an order Incorporated Putnam Asia Pacific Growth Fund [File declaring that it has ceased to be an Proposed Governance Amendments to No. 811–6202] investment company. On December 28, CBOE Constitution and Rules 2001, applicant made a liquidating Summary: Applicant seeks an order distribution to its shareholders based on Constitution declaring that it has ceased to be an net asset value. Expenses of $55,675 investment company. On August 19, Article I incurred in connection with the 2002, applicant transferred its assets to liquidation were paid by First Variable Definitions Putnam International Growth Fund, Life Insurance Company, the parent of No change. based on net asset value. Expenses of applicant’s investment advisor. Article II $565,744 incurred in connection with Filing Date: The application was filed the reorganization were paid by on August 30, 2002. Membership applicant, the acquiring fund and Applicant’s Address: 2801 Highway No change. Putnam Investment Management, LLC, 280 South, Birmingham, AL 35223. applicant’s investment adviser. Article III Filing Date: The application was filed For the Commission, by the Division of on September 13, 2002. Investment Management, pursuant to Meetings of Members Applicant’s Address: One Post Office delegated authority. Sections 3.1–3.3 No change. Square, Boston, MA 02109. Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. Section 3.4 Special Meetings Putnam Strategic Income Fund [File [FR Doc. 02–25005 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Special meetings of members, for any No. 811–7221] BILLING CODE 8010–01–Py purpose or purposes, unless otherwise Summary: Applicant seeks an order prescribed by statute or by the declaring that it has ceased to be an Certificate of Incorporation, may be investment company. On June 24, 2002, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE called by the Chairman of the Board, the applicant transferred its assets to COMMISSION Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive Putnam Diversified Income Trust, based [Release No. 34–46546; File No. SR–CBOE– Committee] or the Board of Directors, on net asset value. Expenses of $77,800 2002–48] and shall be called by the Secretary at incurred in connection with the the request in writing of 150 voting reorganization were paid by applicant Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice members, provided that such request and the acquiring fund. of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by shall state the purpose or purposes of Filing Date: The application was filed the Chicago Board Options Exchange, the proposed meeting and the day and on August 28, 2002. Incorporated Relating to Amendments hour at which such meeting shall be Applicant’s Address: One Post Office to Its Constitution and Rules held. Square, Boston, MA 02109. Pertaining to the Governance of the Sections 3.5–3.7 No change. Intermediate Tax Free Portfolio [File Exchange Article IV No. 811–6700] September 24, 2002. Nominations Summary: Applicant seeks an order Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Section 4.1 Nominating Committee declaring that it has ceased to be an Securities Exchange Act of 1934 investment company. On August 25, (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 (a) There shall be a Nominating 2000, applicant transferred its assets to notice is hereby given that on August Committee composed of four members Municipal Bond Fund, based on net 26, 2002, the Chicago Board Options who are primarily engaged in business asset value. Expenses of $105,875 Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’ or on the floor of the Exchange in the incurred in connection with the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities capacity of a member (floor members) reorganization were paid by applicant and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or [(except that, as provided in paragraph and the acquiring fund. (b) of this Section 4.1, the Nominating Filing Date: The application was filed 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Committee shall have six floor members on September 3, 2002. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. until the 1999 annual election meeting

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61935

and shall have five floor members until approval of the Board to hold office primarily conduct a non-member public the 2000 annual election meeting)]; two until the next annual election meeting, customer business and are not members who are officers of member at which time a qualified successor shall individually engaged in business on the organizations that primarily conduct a be elected to serve the unexpired term, Exchange floor (off-floor directors),] and non-member public customer business if any, of his predecessor in office. [two] three non-members who are not (firm members); two members each of Sections 4.3–4.7 No change. broker-dealers or persons affiliated with whom directly or indirectly owns and Article V broker-dealers (public directors). controls (as defined in Section 6.1(a)) one or more memberships in respect of Conduct of Annual Election Class II shall consist of one floor director, one member who functions as which he acts solely as lessor (lessor Section 5.1 Election Committee members), at least one of whom is not a member in any recognized capacity actively engaged in business as a The Vice Chairman of the Board either individually or on behalf of a ‘‘broker-dealer’’ or as a ‘‘person [Executive Committee], with the member organization (at-large director), associated with a broker-dealer’’ as approval of the Board, shall appoint not two members who are executive officers those terms are defined in the Securities less than three tellers, none of whom of member organizations that primarily Exchange Act of 1934; and two may be a member of the Exchange or a conduct a non-member public customer representatives of the public (public partner or officer of a member business and are not individually members). organization, who shall constitute a engaged in business on the Exchange Committee to conduct the annual (b) All of the members of the floor (off-floor directors) and [three] four election. The Committee shall have Nominating Committee shall be elected public directors. by the voting members of the Exchange. authority to decide all questions [Members of the Nominating Committee pertaining to the conduct of the annual Class III shall consist of two floor elected prior to the 1999 annual election election, and its decision shall be final. directors, one at-large director, two off- meeting shall continue to serve until the Sections 5.2–5.3 No change. floor directors and [three]four public expiration of the terms for which they Article VI directors. were elected. The Nominating Board of Directors The ordinary place of business of at Committee to serve in respect of the least one of the two off-floor directors in 1999 annual election meeting shall also Section 6.1 Number, Election and each Class shall be a location more than include two firm members, two lessor Term of Office of Directors 80 miles from the Exchange’s trading members and two public members, all (a) The Board of Directors shall floor. For purposes of this Section 6.1, of whom shall be appointed by the consist of 22 directors as described a member shall be considered to directly Chairman of the Executive Committee below and the Chairman of the Board, own and control a membership only if with the approval of the Board of who by virtue of his office shall be a the member individually and directly Directors.] In the 1999 annual election member of the Board. [Commencing owns of record and beneficially all right, meeting, one floor member shall be with the 1999 annual election meeting, title and interest in the membership, elected for a three year term, and two t]The Directors elected by the firm members, two lessor members and and a member shall be considered to membership shall be divided into three indirectly own and control a two public members shall be elected, classes which, commencing with the one firm member, one lessor member membership only if the member (A) has 2002 annual election meeting, shall be the sole and exclusive right to vote the and one public member for terms 3 composed as follows: membership and control its sale, and (B) expiring at the second annual election Class I shall consist of one member is in possession of and subject to all of meeting following the 1999 annual who directly or indirectly owns and election meeting, and one firm member, controls a membership and is primarily the risks and rewards of a direct owner one lessor member and one public engaged in business on the floor of the of at least a fifty percent (50%) interest member for terms expiring at the third Exchange in the capacity of a member in a membership, either through annual election meeting following the (floor director), [one member who ownership of an equity interest in a 1999 annual election meeting. In the functions as a member in any member organization or of a beneficial 2000 annual election meeting, one floor recognized capacity either individually interest in a trust, which in either case member shall be elected for a three year or on behalf of a member organization is the owner of one or more term. At each subsequent annual (at-large director),] one member who memberships as permitted under the election meeting, members of the directly or indirectly owns and controls Rules. Nominating Committee shall be elected a membership with respect to which he (b) The [initial] terms of Class I, Class to succeed those whose terms expire, acts solely as lessor and who is not each to serve for a term expiring at the II and Class III directors shall terminate actively engaged in business as a following the annual election meetings third succeeding annual election ‘‘broker-dealer’’ or as a ‘‘person meeting and until their successors are to be held in [1999] 2002, [2000] 2003 associated with a broker-dealer’’ as and [2001] 2004, respectively[, and duly elected and qualified. Elected those terms are defined in the Securities members of the Nominating Committee members of the Board prior to the Exchange Act of 1934, (lessor director), annual election meeting to be held in shall be ineligible for reelection for a [two members who are executive 1999 shall be assigned to one of these period of three years after their terms officers of member organizations that expire. three Classes on the basis of the year in which their current term of office Section 4.2 Nominating Committee 3 Prior to the 2002 annual election meeting, the Vacancies three classes of Directors elected by the membership expires]. are composed as follows: Class I: one floor director, Any vacancy occurring among the one-at-large director, one lessor director, two off- members of the Nominating Committee floor directors, and two public directors; Class II: [4 Any member serving as a floor director prior to one floor director, one at-large director, two off-floor the 1999 annual election meeting shall be permitted may be filled by a qualified person directors, and three public directors; Class III: two to serve out the remainder of his current term of appointed by the Vice Chairman of the floor directors, one at-large director, two off-floor office without regard to whether his business on the Board [Executive Committee] with the directors, and three public directors. floor is conducted ‘‘in the capacity of a member.’’]

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61936 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

the directors of each class shall be of the members of the Executive appointed by the Chairman of the elected for three year terms to succeed Committee (excluding the Chairman) Board. The Compensation Committee those whose terms are then about to shall be public directors. Members of the shall have such duties and may exercise expire, and they shall hold office for the Executive Committee shall not be such authority as may be prescribed in terms for which elected and until their subject to removal except by the Board. the Constitution or Rules or by successors shall have been duly elected The Chairman of the Board shall be the resolution of the Board. and qualified, or until their earlier Chairman of the Executive Committee. Section 7.5 The Floor Directors death, resignation or removal. Terms of Each member of this Committee shall be Committee office of directors shall expire at the first a voting member. The members of the regular meeting of the Board of Directors Executive Committee shall serve for a The Floor Directors Committee shall held on or after January 1 following the term of one year expiring at the first consist of those Directors who are annual election meetings at which their regular meeting of Directors following primarily engaged in business on the successors are elected. the annual election meeting in each floor of the Exchange (whether serving Sections 6.2–6.6 No change. year. The Executive Committee shall as floor directors or at-large directors), have and may exercise all the powers Section 6.7 Special Meetings the lessor director as a non-voting and authority of the Board in the member of the Committee, and such Special meetings of the Board may be management of the business and affairs other persons as may be appointed as called by the Chairman of the Board or of the Exchange, except it shall not have voting or nonvoting members of the the Vice Chairman of the Board the power or authority of the Board in Committee by the Vice Chairman of the [Executive Committee] and shall be reference to amending the Certificate of Board with the approval of the Board. called by the Secretary upon the written Incorporation, adopting an agreement of The Vice Chairman of the Board shall request of any 4 Directors. The Secretary merger or consolidation, recommending be the Chairman of the Floor Directors shall give at least one hour’s notice of to the members the sale, lease or Committee. The Floor Directors such meeting to each Director, either by exchange of all or substantially all of the Committee shall have such duties and announcement on the Exchange floor Exchange’s property and assets, may exercise such authority as may be during trading hours on business days, recommending to the members the prescribed in the Constitution or Rules or personally, or by mail, telegram or dissolution of the Exchange or a or by resolution of the Board. cablegram. Every such notice shall state revocation of a dissolution, or amending the time and place of the meeting which the Constitution or Rules of the Section 7.[3]6 Other shall be fixed by the person calling the Exchange. All other committees shall have such meeting, but need not state the purpose Section 7.3 The Audit Committee duties and may exercise such authority thereof except as otherwise required by The Audit Committee shall consist of as may be prescribed for them in the statute, the Constitution or the Rules. Constitution or Rules or by resolution of Sections 6.8–6.11 No change. at least three Directors appointed by the Chairman of the Board with the the Board. Article VII approval of the Board, the exact number Section 7.[4]7 Conduct of Proceedings Committees to be determined from time to time by the Board. Not less than 50% of the Except as otherwise provided in the Section 7.1 Designation of Committees members of the Audit Committee shall Certificate of Incorporation, The committees of the Exchange shall be public directors. Members of the Constitution or Rules, or by resolution consist of an Executive Committee, an Audit Committee shall not be subject to of the Board, each committee may Audit Committee, a Compensation removal except by the Board. The determine the manner in which its Committee, a Floor Directors Chairman of the Audit Committee shall proceedings shall be conducted. Committee, and such other standing and be a public director appointed by the Committees shall keep minutes of their special committees as may be provided Chairman of the Board. The Audit meetings and periodically report their in the Constitution or Rules or as may Committee shall have such duties and proceedings to the Board of Directors. be from time to time appointed by the may exercise such authority as may be Article VIII Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive prescribed in the Constitution or Rules Committee] with the approval of the or by resolution of the Board. Officers Board. Except as may be otherwise Section 7.4 The Compensation Section 8.1 Designation; Number; provided in the Constitution or the Committee Election Rules, the Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive Committee] with the The Compensation Committee shall (a) The officers of the Exchange shall approval of the Board shall appoint the consist of the Vice Chairman of the be a Chairman of the Board, a Vice members of all committees and may Board, the lessor director, the Chairman Chairman of the Board[Executive designate a Chairman and a Vice- of the Financial Planning Committee, Committee], a President, one or more Chairman thereof [other than the one or more off-floor directors, and such Vice-Presidents (the number thereof to Chairman of the Executive Committee, number of public directors that will be determined by the Board of who shall be selected as provided in constitute at least 50% of the members Directors), a Secretary, a Treasurer, and Section 8.1(a) of the Constitution]. of the Committee. The off-floor such other officers as the Board may director(s) and the public directors shall determine. The Chairman of the Board Section 7.2 The Executive Committee be appointed to the Compensation shall be elected by the affirmative vote The Executive Committee shall Committee by the Chairman of the of at least two-thirds of the Directors consist of the Chairman of the Board, Board with the approval of the Board. then in office exclusive of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman of the Members of the Compensation who shall not vote. Such affirmative Board[Executive Committee], and at Committee shall not be subject to vote may also prescribe his duties not least 4 other persons appointed as removal except by the Board. The inconsistent with the Constitution or provided in Section 7.1, each of whom Chairman of the Compensation Rules and may prescribe a tenure of must be a Director. Not less than 50% Committee shall be a public director office.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 02:17 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61937

The Vice Chairman of the Chairman of the Board[Executive of the Board[Executive Committee] to Board[Executive Committee] shall be a Committee] may appoint standing and discharge his duties, or for any cause director who owns or directly controls special committees unless the method of affecting the best interests of the his own membership and is primarily appointment is otherwise provided for Exchange, the sufficiency of which the engaged in business on the floor of the in the Constitution or Rules or in the Board of Directors shall be the sole Exchange in the capacity of a member. resolution of the Board establishing the judge, the Board shall have the power, He shall be elected by a plurality of committee. The Vice Chairman of the by the affirmative vote of at least two- members voting at a meeting of the Board[Executive Committee] shall be thirds of the Directors then in office membership held on the 3rd Friday in responsible for the coordination of the exclusive of the Vice Chairman of the December of each year (or if that day is activities of all committees, with the Board[Executive Committee], to remove not a business day, on the next exception of committees of the Board, the Vice Chairman of the succeeding business day) and shall including the Executive Committee, the Board[Executive Committee] and serve until his successor is duly chosen Audit Committee and the Compensation declare such office vacant. and qualified or until his earlier death Committee. The Vice Chairman of the (b) Any officer, other than the Vice or his resignation or removal. Once a Board[He] shall be an ex-officio Chairman of the Board[Executive director has held the office of the Vice member, without a right to vote, of all Committee], chosen by the Board may Chairman of the Board[Executive committees, without prejudice to being be removed at any time by the Board Committee] for six months or more of a specifically appointed as a voting whenever in its judgment the best one-year term and for the next two member of any committee. In the case interests of the Exchange would be succeeding one-year terms, the director of the absence or inability to act of the served thereby; provided, that the shall thereafter be ineligible to again Chairman of the Board, or in case of a Chairman of the Board or the President hold the office until a period of not less vacancy in the office of the Chairman of may be removed only by the affirmative than six months has elapsed during the Board, the Vice Chairman of the vote of at least two-thirds of the which the director has not held that Board[Executive Committee] shall Directors then in office exclusive of the office. Candidates for the office of Vice exercise the powers and discharge the Chairman of the Board, who shall not Chairman of the Board[Executive duties of the Chairman of the Board. vote. Any such removal shall be without Committee] must notify the Secretary of prejudice to the contract rights, if any, Section 8.4 Acting Chairman the Exchange in writing no later than of the person so removed. the close of business on November 23rd In the absence or inability to act of (c) Any vacancies occurring in any (or if that day is not a business day, on both the Chairman of the Board and the office of the Exchange at any time may the next succeeding business day). In Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive be filled by the Board for the unexpired the event there is only one candidate, no Committee], the Board may designate an term. election need be held, and the Board of Acting Chairman of the Board. In the Sections 8.8–8.10 No change. Directors shall declare the office filled absence of such a designation by the Article IX by the sole announced candidate. Board, the President, or in his absence The remaining officers of the or inability to act, the senior available Indemnification Exchange shall be appointed by the Vice-President, shall assume all the No change. Chairman of the Board, subject to the functions and discharge all the duties of approval of the Board, at the first regular the Chairman of the Board. Article X meeting of the Board of Directors held Notices on or after January 1 following each Section 8.5 Vacancy in Office of Vice annual election meeting, each to serve Chairman of the Board [Executive No change. Committee] until a successor has been duly chosen Article XI and qualified or until the officer’s (a) If the Vice Chairman of the General Provisions earlier death or resignation or removal. Board[Executive Committee] shall cease (b) No officer, other than the Vice to satisfy the requirements for election Sections 11.1–11.3 No change. Chairman of the Board[Executive to that office, he shall thereupon cease Section 11.4 Officers and Employees Committee], shall be a member or to hold his office and such office shall Restricted affiliated with a member or a broker or become vacant, provided that if his a dealer in securities or commodities. membership is suspended he may (a) Every salaried officer or employee Two or more offices may be held by the continue to hold office unless he is of the Exchange, except the Vice same person, except the offices of removed pursuant to paragraph (a) of Chairman of the Board[Executive Chairman of the Board and President, Section 8.7. Committee], and every salaried officer Chairman of the Board and Secretary, or (b) If a vacancy occurs in the office of or employee of any corporation in President and Secretary may not be held Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive which the Exchange owns the majority by the same person. The compensation Committee] pursuant to paragraph (a) of of the stock, shall report promptly to the of all officers of the Exchange chosen by this Section or if for any other reason Exchange every purchase or sale for his the Board shall be fixed by the Board. the office becomes vacant, the Board, by or her own account or the account of Section 8.2 No change. the affirmative vote of a majority of the others of any security which is the underlying security of any option Section 8.3 [Chairman of the Directors then in office, shall fill such vacancy by the election to such office of contract admitted to dealings on the Executive Committee/]Vice Chairman of Exchange. the Board a Director then in office who satisfies the requirements for election to such (b) With the exception of the Vice The Vice Chairman [of the Executive office. Chairman of the Board[Executive Committee (who is also Vice-Chairman] Section 8.6 No change. Committee], no salaried officer or of the Board[)] shall preside at meetings employee of the Exchange or salaried of the [Executive Committee and at Section 8.7 Removals officer or employee of any corporation meetings of the] members. Subject to the (a) In the event of the refusal, failure, in which the Exchange owns the approval of the Board, the Vice neglect or inability of the Vice Chairman majority of the corporate stock may

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61938 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

purchase or sell for his or her own Directors to serve on the Audit and Chapter XVI account or for the account of others any Compensation Committees, whose Summary Suspension by Chairman of option contract which entitles the members shall not be subject to removal the Board or purchaser to purchase or sell any except by the Board. Whenever the Vice security described in paragraph (a) of Chairman of the Board[Executive Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive this Section. Committee] is, or has reason to believe Committee] (c) Paragraphs (a) and (b) above of this he may become, a party to any Imposition of Suspension Section shall not be construed to proceeding of an Exchange committee, Rule 16.1. A member or person preclude any salaried officer or he shall not exercise his power to associated with a member who has been employee of the Exchange or of any appoint or remove members of that and is expelled or suspended from any corporation in which the Exchange committee, and the Chairman of the self-regulatory organization or barred or owns a majority of the stock from Board shall have such power. suspended from being associated with a performing his duties and (b)–(d) No change. member of any self-regulatory responsibilities as assigned to him by * * * * * organization, or a member which is in such organization. such financial or operating difficulty Chapter II—Organization and Article XII that the Chairman of the Board or Vice Administration Chairman of the Board[Executive Amendments Part C—Dues, Fees and Other Charges Committee] determines that the member No change. Liability for Payment cannot be permitted to continue to do * * * * * business as a member with safety to Rule 2.23. A member or associated investors, creditors, other members, or Rules person that does not pay any dues, fees, the Exchange, may be summarily * * * * * assessments, charges, fines or other suspended by the Chairman of the Chapter II—Organization and amounts due to the Exchange within 30 Board or Vice Chairman of the Administration days after the same has become payable Board[Executive Committee]. In shall be reported to the Vice Chairman addition, the Chairman of the Board or Part A—Committees of the Board[Executive Committee], who Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive Committees of the Exchange may, after giving reasonable notice to Committee] may limit or prohibit any the member or associated person of such person with respect to access to services Rule 2.1. Committees of the Exchange arrearages, suspend the member or offered by the Exchange if any of the (a) Establishment of Committees. In associated person from membership and criteria or the foregoing sentence is addition to committees specifically association with any member until applicable to such person or, in the case provided for in the Constitution, there payment is made. Should payment not of a person who is not a member, if the shall be the following committees: be made by a member within 6 months Chairman of the Board or Vice Appeals, Arbitration, Business Conduct, after payment is due, any memberships Chairman of the Board[Executive appropriate Floor Procedure owned by that member may be disposed Committee] determines that such person Committees, Floor Officials, appropriate of by the Exchange in accordance with does not meet the qualification Market Performance Committees, Rule 3.14(b). A former member or requirements or other prerequisites for Membership, Product Development and associated person that does not pay any such access with safety to investors, such other committees as may be dues, fees, assessments, charges, fines or creditors, members, or the Exchange. In established in accordance with the other amounts due to the Exchange the event a determination is made to Constitution. Except as may be within 30 days after the same has take summary action, as described otherwise provided in the Constitution become payable shall be reported to the above, notice thereof will be sent to the or the Rules, [T]the Vice Chairman of Vice Chairman of the Board[Executive Securities and Exchange Commission. the Board[Executive Committee], with Committee], who may, after giving Any person aggrieved by any summary the approval of the Board, shall appoint reasonable notice to the former member action taken under this Rule shall be the chairmen and members of such or associated person of such arrearages, promptly afforded an opportunity for a committees to serve for terms expiring bar the former member or associated hearing by the Exchange in accordance at the regular meeting of the Board person from becoming a member and with the provisions of Chapter XIX. In following the next succeeding Annual associated person until payment is addition, the Securities and Exchange Election Meeting or until successors are made. Commission may on its own motion appointed. Consideration shall be given * * * Interpretations and Policies: order or such a person may apply to the to continuity and to having, where Securities and Exchange Commission 01. Reasonable notice under Rule 2.23 appropriate, a cross section of the for a stay of such summary action shall include, but is not limited to, membership represented on each pending the results of a hearing service on a member or associated committee. Except as may be otherwise pursuant to Chapter XIX. person’s address as it appears on the provided in the Constitution or the * * * * * Rules, [T]the Vice Chairman of the books and records of the Exchange Board[Executive Committee] may, at either by (1) hand delivery or (2) deposit Chapter XXX any time, with or without cause, remove in the United States post office, postage prepaid via registered or certified mail. Part A—Trading in Stocks, Warrants any member of such committees. Any and Other Securities vacancy occurring in one of these 02. The Exchange shall report to the committees shall be filled by the Vice Central Registration Depository operated Appendix A—Applicability of Rules of Chairman of the Board[Executive by the National Association of the Exchange Committee] for the remainder of the Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘CRD’’) any This Appendix lists the rules in term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the suspension or bar imposed pursuant to Chapters I through XIX of the rules of Chairman of the Board, with the this Rule. the Exchange that apply to the trading approval of the Board, shall appoint * * * * * of stock, warrants, and such other

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61939

securities instruments and contracts as equally balanced between 11 member Committee, one or more off-floor may be traded subject to the rules in directors and 11 public directors plus directors, and a number of public Chapter XXX. Where a rule in Chapter the Chairman. Directors will continue to directors that will constitute at least I through XIX is supplemented by a rule be elected for three-year terms, with all 50% of the members of the Committee. in Chapter XXX, that fact is so categories of directors to be elected by The Chairman of the Compensation indicated. the membership. As a matter of Committee will be a public director transition, the Exchange proposes to appointed by the Chairman of the Board Existing rule by Supplemented effect the changes with the 2002 annual with the approval of the Board, and the election of directors.5 off-floor directors and the public Chapter I–Chapter 15 No Change. In addition to changing the directors on the Compensation Chapter XVI ...... Summary Suspension composition of the Board, the Exchange by Chairman of the Committee will also be appointed by the Board or Vice Cha. proposes to modify the composition of Chairman of the Board consistent with Rule 16.1–Rule No Change. the Executive Committee to make it the Chairman’s current authority under 16.5. reflect the same balance and Rule 2.1. Members of the Compensation Chapter XVII–Chapter No Change. composition as the Board as a whole. To Committee may be removed only by the XIX. accomplish this, the Exchange proposes Board. to amend Section 7.2 of its Constitution The Floor Directors Committee will II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to provide that not less than 50% of the consist of those directors who are Statement of the Purpose of, and members of the Executive Committee, primarily engaged in business on the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule excluding the Chairman of the Board, floor of the Exchange, whether serving Change will be public directors. Members of the as floor directors or at-large directors, In its filing with the Commission, the Executive Committee may be removed and will also include the lessor director CBOE included statements concerning only by the Board. The Chairman of the as a non-voting member of the the purpose of and basis for the Board and the Vice Chairman of the Committee. This represents no change proposed rule change and discussed any Board will continue to be ex officio from current practice. The Vice comments it received on the proposed members of the Executive Committee, Chairman of the Board will be rule change. The text of these statements with the Chairman of the Board serving designated in the Constitution as the may be examined at the places specified as the Chairman of the Executive Chairman of this Committee. The Floor in Item IV below. The CBOE has Committee in place of the Vice Directors Committee will continue to prepared summaries, set forth in Chairman, who currently holds that function as an advisory committee to Sections A, B, and C below, of the most position. the Board of Directors and to the Office significant aspects of such statements. The Exchange also proposes to codify of the Chairman. in the Constitution the establishment of It is also proposed to amend Section A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Audit Committee (Section 7.3), the 8.3 of the Constitution, which describes Statement of the Purpose of, and Compensation Committee (Section 7.4) the authority of the Vice Chairman of Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule and the Floor Directors Committee the Board, to make it clear that the Change (Section 7.5) as committees of the authority of that officer to coordinate 1. Purpose Board. the activities of the committees of the The Audit Committee will consist of Exchange does not extend to the The purpose of the proposed at least 3 directors of which not less Executive, Audit or Compensation amendment is to make certain revisions than 50% will be public directors. The Committees of the Board. to provisions of the Exchange’s members of the Audit Committee will In addition to the foregoing proposed Constitution and Rules pertaining to the be appointed by the Chairman of the changes to the governance provisions of governance of the Exchange. The Board, subject to Board approval, as is the Constitution, a few ‘‘housekeeping’’ principal governance change proposed currently provided in Exchange Rule amendments to the Constitution and to be made is to increase the public 2.1, and the Chairman of the Audit rules are also proposed. Among these is representation on the Exchange’s Board Committee will be a public director also the proposed deletion of outdated of Directors (‘‘Board’’) and three appointed by the Chairman of the references to members of the committees of the Board so that the Board. Members of the Audit Committee Nominating Committee and floor Board and these three committees will may be removed only by the Board. directors who were elected prior to the be balanced between industry (member) The Compensation Committee will 1999 annual election in Section 4.1 and and public directors. With respect to the consist of the Vice Chairman of the in the note to Section 6.1(b) of the Board, the Exchange proposes to amend Board, the lessor director, the Chairman Constitution. In addition, because the Section 6.1 of the Constitution to of the Exchange’s Financial Planning offices of Chairman of the Executive maintain the current 23-person size of Committee and Vice Chairman of the the Board, while increasing the number 5 In 1999, the Exchange amended its Constitution Board will no longer be held by the of public directors from 8 to 11. In order to increase the public representation on its Board same person, it is proposed to amend a to accommodate the greater number of of Directors from 4 to 8 public directors, and also number of provisions in the public directors, the Exchange proposes to create a lessor director category on the Board. To accommodate the greater number of public directors Constitution and rules that refer to the to reduce the number of off-floor and the lessor director, the Exchange increased the Chairman of the Executive Committee to member firm directors from 6 to 4, and total size of its Board from 21 to 23 directors, make them refer instead to the Vice to reduce the number of at-large member reduced the number of floor directors from 6 to 4, Chairman of the Board so as not to directors from 3 to 2. The number of and provided that the President of the Exchange would no longer be an ex-officio director. To change their intended meaning. floor member directors will remain effectuate these governance changes, the number of unchanged at 4 directors, and the Board off-floor member directors and at-large directors 2. Statutory Basis will continue to have one lessor member remained unchanged at 6 directors and 3 directors, The CBOE believes that, by increasing director. The Chairman of the Board respectively, and the Chairman continued to serve as an ex-officio director. See Securities Exchange the public representation on the will continue to serve as an ex-officio Act Release No. 4206 (October 18, 1999), 64 FR Exchange’s Board and three committees director. As a result, the Board will be 57499 (October 25, 1999). of the Board (the Executive, Audit and

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61940 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Compensation Committees) such that Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of things, execution of limit orders in a the Board and these three committees the submission, all subsequent CHX specialist’s book following a trade- are balanced between industry and amendments, all written statements through in the primary market. public directors, and by requiring that with respect to the proposed rule Specifically, the CHX seeks to render the Chairman of the Audit Committee change that are filed with the voluntary a CHX specialist’s obligation and the Compensation Committee be Commission, and all written to fill limit orders in the specialist’s public directors, the proposed communications relating to the book following a primary market trade- amendment to the Constitution furthers proposed rule change between the through, if such trade-through the objectives of Section 6(b)(3) of the Commission and any person, other than constitutes an Exempted Trade-Through Act 6 to assure fair representation of the those that may be withheld from the (as defined below). The text of the members of the Exchange in the public in accordance with the proposed rule change is available at the selection of its directors and in the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Commission and at the CHX.3 administration of its affairs, and to available for inspection and copying in provide that one or more members of the Commission’s Public Reference II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Board of Directors must be Room. Copies of such filing will also be Statement of the Purpose of, and representatives of investors (i.e., public available for inspection and copying at Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule directors). The CBOE also believes that the principal office of the CBOE. Change the proposed amendment furthers the All submissions should refer to File objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 7 No. SR–CBOE–2002–48 and should be In its filing with the Commission, the to protect investors and the public submitted by October 23, 2002. CHX included statements concerning interest. For the Commission, by the Division of the purpose of and basis for the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated proposed rule change and discussed any B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s authority.8 comments it received regarding the Statement on Burden on Competition Margaret H. McFarland, proposal. The text of these statements The CBOE does not believe that the Deputy Secretary. may be examined at the places specified proposed rule change will impose any [FR Doc. 02–25008 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] in Item IV below. The CHX has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B burden on competition not necessary or BILLING CODE 8010–01–P appropriate in furtherance of the and C below, of the most significant purposes of the Act. aspects of such statements. C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and Proposed Rule Change Received from [Release No. 34–46556; File No. SR–CHX– Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Members, Participants or Others 2002–31] Change No written comments were solicited Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice 1. Purpose or received with respect to the proposed of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by rule change. the Chicago Stock Exchange, On August 28, 2002, the Commission Incorporated Relating To Execution of issued an order granting a de minimis III. Date of Effectiveness of the exemption (the ‘‘Exemption’’) for Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Limit Orders Following Exempted ITS Trade-Through transactions in certain exchange-traded Commission Action funds (‘‘ETFs’’) from the trade-through Within 35 days of the date of September 26, 2002. provisions of the Intermarket Trading publication of this notice in the Federal Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the System (‘‘ITS’’) Plan.4 The Exemption Register or within such longer period (i) Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the was proposed by Commission staff to as the Commission may designate up to ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 permit rapid execution of orders in 90 days of such date if it finds such notice is hereby given that on ETFs at prices that may trade through longer period to be appropriate and September 20, 2002, the Chicago Stock the quotations of other markets, publishes its reasons for so finding or Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CHX’’ or including the NBBO price. Because (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities Exempted Trade-Throughs will, by the Commission will: and Exchange Commission (the definition, be exempt from ITS (A) By order approve such proposed ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule restrictions, a market participant that rule change, or change as described in Items I, II and III reports execution of an Exempted (B) Institute proceedings to determine below, which Items have been Trade-Through will not be required to whether the proposed rule change substantively prepared by the Exchange. satisfy an administrative request from should be disapproved. The Commission is publishing this any ITS participant for satisfaction IV. Solicitation of Comments notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested 3 In this submission, the CHX seeks permanent Interested persons are invited to persons. approval of a rule currently in effect on a 30-day submit written data, views, and pilot basis. See SR–CHX–2002–29. arguments concerning the foregoing, I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46428, including whether the proposed rule Statement of the Terms of Substance of 67 FR 56607 (September 4, 2002). At present, the change is consistent with the Act. the Proposed Rule Change exemption extends to transactions in three designated ETFs—the Nasdaq-100 Index (‘‘QQQ’’), Persons making written submissions The Exchange proposes to amend the Dow Jones Industrial Average (‘‘DIAMONDs’’) should file six copies thereof with the certain provisions of CHX Article XX, and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (‘‘SPDRs’’)— Secretary, Securities and Exchange Rule 37, which governs, among other when the transactions are ‘‘executed at a price that Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., is no more than three cents lower than the highest bid displayed in CQS and no more than three cents 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). higher than the lowest offer displayed in CQS’’ 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(3). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). (each, an ‘‘Exempted Trade-Through’’). The 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. exemption was effective as of September 4, 2002.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61941

following the Exempted Trade- perfect the mechanism of, a free and For the Commission, by the Division of Through.5 open market and a national market Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 8 Article XX, Rules 37(a)(3) and 37(b)(6) system, and, in general, to protect authority. of the CHX Rules, which govern investors and the public interest. Margaret H. McFarland, execution of limit orders in a CHX Deputy Secretary. specialist’s book, provides for execution B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s [FR Doc. 02–25007 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Statement of Burden on Competition of such orders at the limit price when BILLING CODE 8010–01–P certain conditions occur in the primary The Exchange does not believe that market. Specifically, these provisions the proposed rule change will impose obligate a CHX specialist to fill limit any inappropriate burden on SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE orders in his book if there is a trade- competition. COMMISSION through of the limit price in the primary C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s [Release No. 34–46557; File No. SR–CHX– market. These rule provisions were 2002–29] enacted as a means of attracting order Statement on Comments Regarding the flow to the CHX, by guaranteeing that a Proposed Rule Change Received From Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice limit order resident in a CHX Members, Participants or Others of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness specialist’s book would receive a fill if No written comments were either of proposed Rule Change by The the primary market traded through the Chicago Stock Exchange, Incorporated solicited or received. limit price. The CHX specialist is Relating to Execution of Limit Orders willing to provide this ‘‘trade-through III. Date of Effectiveness of the Following Exempted ITS Trade- protection’’ to its customer limit orders Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Through because the CHX specialist can seek Commission Action relief via ITS in the event of a trade- September 26, 2002. through. Within 35 days of the date of Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Now that the Exemption has become publication of this notice in the Federal Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the effective, however, certain primary Register or within such other period (i) ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 market trade-throughs in ETFs that will as the Commission may designate up to notice is hereby given that on trigger a CHX specialist’s obligation to 90 days of such date if it finds such September 4, 2002, the Chicago Stock provide trade-through protection will longer period to be appropriate and Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CHX’’ or now constitute Exempted Trade- publishes its reasons for so finding or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities Throughs, and will leave the CHX (ii) as to which the self-regulatory and Exchange Commission (the specialist without recourse to seek organization consents, the Commission ‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed satisfaction from the primary market. will: rule change as described in Items I, II While the CHX believes that certain (A) by order approve the proposed and III below, which Items have been CHX specialists may still wish to rule change, or substantively prepared by the Exchange. On September 25, 2002, the Exchange provide trade-through protection to (B) institute proceedings to determine submitted Amendment No. 1 to the their limit orders for business and whether the proposed rule change proposed rule change.3 The Commission marketing reasons, the CHX believes should be disapproved. that trade-through protection should no is publishing this notice to solicit longer be mandated in the case of IV. Solicitation of Comments comments on the proposed rule change Exempted Trade-Throughs. The from interested persons. Interested persons are invited to attached rule would permit, but would I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s not require, a CHX specialist firm to fill submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, Statement of the Terms of Substance of limit orders in his book when an the Proposed Rule Change. Exempted Trade-Through occurs in the including whether the proposal is primary market. consistent with the Act. Persons making The Exchange proposes to amend written submissions should file six certain provisions of CHX Article XX, 2. Statutory Basis copies thereof with the Secretary, Rule 37, which governs, among other The CHX believes the proposal is Securities and Exchange Commission, things, execution of limit orders in a consistent with the requirements of the 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC CHX specialist’s book following a trade- Act and the rules and regulations 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, through in the primary market. thereunder that are applicable to a all subsequent amendments, all written Specifically, the CHX seeks to render national securities exchange, and, in statements with respect to the proposed voluntary a CHX specialist’s obligation particular, with the requirements of rule change that are filed with the to fill limit orders in the specialist’s Section 6(b).6 The CHX believes the Commission, and all written book following a primary market trade- proposal is consistent with Section communications relating to the through, if such trade-through 6(b)(5) of the Act 7 in that it is designed proposed rule change between the constitutes an Exempted Trade- to promote just and equitable principles Commission and any person, other than Through. of trade, to remove impediments, and to those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 5 Under current ITS rules and practice, if an ITS provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). participant trades through the quotation of another available for inspection and copying in 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. ITS participant, thereby violating the ITS trade- the Commission’s Public Reference 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange consented through prohibition, the non-violating participant is to the Commission’s treatment of the proposed rule entitled to send an administrative message noting Room. Copies of such filing will also be change as being filed as a stated policy, practice or the trade-through and the violating participant is available for inspection and copying at interpretation with respect to the meaning, required to respond with a commitment to trade at the principal office of the CHX. All administration or enforcement of an existing rule the price and size quoted by the non-violating submissions should refer to File No. pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act. participant. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). In addition, the Exchange 6 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b). SR–CHX–2002–31 and should be clarified that the proposed rule change was being 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). submitted by October 23, 2002. submitted as a 30-day pilot.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61942 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

The text of the proposed rule change, execution of limit orders in a CHX any inappropriate burden on which would be in effect for a pilot specialist’s book, provide for execution competition. period of 30 days, is available at the of such orders at the limit price when Commission and at the CHX. certain conditions occur in the primary C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s market. Specifically, these provisions Statement on Comments Regarding the II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s obligate a CHX specialist to fill limit Proposed Rule Change Received From Statement of the Purpose of, and orders in his book if there is a trade- Members, Participants or Others Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule through of the limit price in the primary Change No written comments were either market. These rule provisions were solicited or received. In its filing with the Commission, the enacted as a means of attracting order CHX included statements concerning flow to the CHX by guaranteeing that a III. Date of Effectiveness of the the purpose of and basis for the limit order resident in a CHX Proposed Rule Change and Timing for proposed rule change and discussed any specialist’s book would receive a fill if Commission Action comments it received regarding the the primary market traded through the proposal. The text of these statements limit price. The CHX specialist is The foregoing rule change constitutes may be examined at the places specified willing to provide this ‘‘trade-through a stated policy, practice or in Item IV below. The CHX has prepared protection’’ to its customer limit orders interpretation with respect to the summaries, set forth in Sections A, B because the CHX specialist can seek meaning, administration, or and C below, of the most significant relief via ITS in the event of a trade- enforcement of an existing rule of the aspects of such statements. through. Exchange and therefore, has become A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Now that the Exemption has become effective pursuant to section 8 Statement of the Purpose of, and effective, however, certain primary 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule market trade-throughs in ETFs that will subparagraph (f)(1) of Rule 19b–4 Change trigger a CHX specialist’s obligation to thereunder.9 provide trade-through protection will 1. Purpose At any time within 60 days of the now constitute Exempt Trade-Throughs, filing of the proposed rule change, the On August 28, 2002, the Commission and will leave the CHX specialist Commission may summarily abrogate issued an order granting a de minimis without recourse to seek satisfaction such rule change if it appears to the exemption (the ‘‘Exemption’’) for from the primary market. While the Commission that such action is transactions in certain exchange-traded CHX believes that certain CHX necessary or appropriate in the public funds (‘‘ETFs’’) from the trade-through specialists may still wish to provide interest, for the protection of investors, provisions of the Intermarket Trading trade-through protection to their limit or otherwise in furtherance of the 4 System (‘‘ITS’’) Plan. The Exemption orders for business and marketing purposes of the Act. was proposed by Commission staff to reasons, the CHX believes that trade- permit rapid execution of orders in through protection should no longer be IV. Solicitation of Comments certain ETFs at prices that may trade mandated in the case of Exempted through the quotations of other markets, Trade-Throughs. The proposed rule, in Interested persons are invited to including the NBBO price. Because effect for a pilot period of 30 days, submit written data, views and Exempted Trade-Throughs will, by would permit, but would not require, a arguments concerning the foregoing, definition, be exempt from ITS CHX specialist firm to fill limit orders including whether the proposal is restrictions, a market participant that in his book when an Exempted Trade- consistent with the Act. Persons making reports execution of an Exempted Through occurs in the primary market. written submissions should file six Trade-Through will not be required to copies thereof with the Secretary, 2. Statutory Basis satisfy an administrative request from Securities and Exchange Commission, any ITS participant for satisfaction The CHX believes the proposal is 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC following the Exempted Trade- consistent with the requirements of the 20549–0609. Copies of the submissions, Through.5 Act and the rules and regulations all subsequent amendments, all written Article XX, Rules 37(a)(3) and 37(b)(6) thereunder that are applicable to a statements with respect to the proposed of the CHX Rules, which govern national exchange, and, in particular, rule change that are filed with the with the requirements of section 6(b).6 Commission, and all written 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46428, The CHX believes the proposal is communications relating to the 67 FR 56607 (September 4, 2002). At present, the consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the proposed rule change between the Exemption extends to transactions in three 7 designated ETFs—the Nasdaq-100 Index (‘‘QQQ’’), Act in that it is designed to promote Commission and any person, other than the Dow Jones Industrial Average (‘‘DIAMONDs’’) just and equitable principles of trade, to those that may be withheld from the and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (‘‘SPDRs’’)— remove impediments, and to perfect the public in accordance with the when the transactions are ‘‘executed at a price that mechanism of, a free and open market provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be is no more than three cents lower than the highest bid displayed in CQS and no more than three cents and a national market system, and, in available for inspection and copying in higher than the lowest offer displayed in CQS’’ general, to protect investors and the the Commission’s Public Reference (each, an ‘‘Exempted Trade-Through’’). The public interest. Room. Copies of such filing will also be Exemption is effective as of September 4, 2002. available for inspection and copying at 5 B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Under current ITS rules and practice, if an ITS the principal office of the CHX. All participant trades through the quotation of another Statement of Burden on Competition ITS participant, thereby violating the ITS trade- submissions should refer to File No. through prohibition, the non-violating participant is The Exchange does not believe that SR–CHX–2002–29 and should be entitled to send an administrative message noting the proposed rule change will impose submitted by October 23, 2002. the trade-through and the violating participant is required to respond with a commitment to trade at the price and size quoted by the non-violating 6 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b). 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i). participant. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(1).

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61943

For the Commission, by the Division of In the event of an interruption in the securities in an index (as opposed to Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated markets for an underlying security or ‘‘securities representing a substantial authority.10 one or more component securities in an portion of the value of an index’’) and Margaret H. McFarland, underlying index, OCC needs to have added a paragraph relating solely to Deputy Secretary. discretion to act to set final settlement expiring options specifically permitting [FR Doc. 02–25009 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] values in a manner that avoids OCC to fix settlement prices based on BILLING CODE 8010–01–M inconsistencies between the futures and the next opening prices for one or more options markets and among futures component stocks.7 markets.5 At times, investors employ Effective December 1, 2001, CME SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE hedging and other trading strategies that changed its rules governing its method COMMISSION involve holding positions in different of fixing final settlement prices for each contracts on the same underlying of its index futures products under [Release No. 34–46561; File No. SR–OCC– security or index. These strategies are certain circumstances. CME’s newly 2002–09] based on the expectation that the values amended rules provide that if the primary market for a component stock Self-Regulatory Organizations; The of different derivative contracts with the opens for trading on the day scheduled Options Clearing Corporation; Order same underlying interest will have a for determination of a final settlement Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule predictable relationship to one another. price but the component stock does not Change Relating to Fixing Settlement This expectation may not be met when trade while the market is open, the price Prices in the Event of Market trading halts or other disruptions in of the component stock for purposes of Disruptions markets for the underlying interests require the derivatives markets to fix calculating the final settlement price September 26, 2002. settlement prices using prices or values will be based on the last sale price of the stock unless CME’s president or his I. Introduction other than those that would normally be used. In such cases, discrepancies in delegate determines that there is a On May 17, 2002, The Options settlement prices can occur unless reasonable likelihood that trading in the Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed with prices for derivative products traded in component stock will occur shortly. In the Securities and Exchange different markets are fixed using a that case, for purposes of determining Commission (‘‘Commission’’) proposed common method. Unless such the final settlement price, the price of rule change SR–OCC–2002–09 pursuant coordination occurs, investors with the component stock may be based on to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities positions in options and futures that the opening price of the component Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’).1 Notice were intended to hedge one another stock on the next day the component 8 of the proposal was published in the may find that the positions do not stock is traded on its primary market. 2 OCC’s existing rules do not authorize Federal Register on August 1, 2002. No produce the anticipated offset. OCC to fix a settlement price based on comment letters were received. For the In the spring of 2000, OCC attempted a stock’s next opening price in reasons discussed below, the to solve the problem of a potential situations where the stock’s primary Commission is approving the proposed disconnect between the options and market is open but the stock does not rule change. futures markets in setting final index trade. SR–OCC–00–01 authorized the contract settlement prices by II. Description use of opening values only in cases conforming its rules more closely to the where a stock’s primary market did not The primary purpose of the proposed rules of the Chicago Mercantile open or remain open for trading at or rule change is to ensure that OCC will Exchange (‘‘CME’’) as then in effect.6 before the time when the exercise have the ability, in case of market OCC’s rule change broadened the settlement amount would ordinarily be disruptions, to conform settlement circumstances under which OCC could determined. As a result, OCC is again prices for OCC-cleared security futures fix a settlement price for expiring index faced with a potential disconnect and index options, where appropriate, options to include situations where between its rules and CME’s rules. to settlement prices that are used for market disruptions affected one or more related products (such as other futures The most fundamental aspect of SR– OCC–00–01 was that for the first time on the same security or index) traded in 5 This rule change will affect the fixing of final other markets and not cleared by OCC. settlement prices for futures contracts and exercise OCC was allowed to fix a settlement The proposed rule change will primarily settlement amounts for options. However, in the affect the fixing of exercise settlement case of options exercised other than at expiration, 7 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42769 (May coordination with other markets is ordinarily not a 9, 2000), 65 FR 31036 (May 15, 2000) [SR–OCC– amounts for expiring options as well as significant factor because either there is no 2000–01]. final settlement prices for maturing concurrent final settlement in related futures 8 For example, CME added the following futures contracts.3 OCC does not markets or an investor need not exercise the option. underlined language to CME Rule 2003.A: anticipate any substantive change in its 6 For example, CME Rule 2003.A., which governs If a component stock in the index does not trade the method for determining the final settlement present policy with respect to fixing on the day scheduled for determination of the Final price for Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index Settlement Price while the primary market for that settlement prices for options that are Futures, provided (at that time) as follows: stock is open for trading, the price of that stock exercised prior to expiration.4 If the primary market for a component stock in shall be determined, for the purposes of calculating the index does not open on the day scheduled for the Final Settlement Price, based on the last sale determination of the Final Settlement Price, then price of that stock. However, if the President of the 10 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). the price of that stock shall be determined, for the Exchange or his delegate determines that there is 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). purposes of calculating the Final Settlement Price, a reasonable likelihood that trading in the stock 2 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46265 (July based on the opening price of that stock on the next shall occur shortly, the President or his delegate 25, 2002), 67 FR 49973. day that its primary market is open for trading. may instruct that the price of stock shall be based, 3 These will include single stock futures and If a component stock in the index does not trade for the purposes of calculating the Final Settlement narrow-based index futures as well as broad-based on the day scheduled for determination of the Final Price, on the opening price of the stock on the next index futures subject to the exclusive jurisdiction Settlement Price while the primary market for that day that it is traded on its primary market. Factors of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. stock is open for trading, the price of that stock to be considered in determining whether trading in 4 That general policy will be restated in new shall be determined, for the purposes of calculating the stock is likely to occur shortly shall include the Interpretation .02 to Section 4 of Article XVII of the Final Settlement Price, based on the last sale nature of the event and recent liquidity levels in the OCC’s by-laws. price of that stock. affected stock.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61944 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

value based on prices that occurred after expiration, maturity, or delivery dates of For the Commission by the Division of an expiration and to treat options that Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated related contracts traded in other 11 were in the money based upon that markets. Accordingly, exercises of index authority. subsequently determined price as options prior to the expiration date Margaret H. McFarland, having been exercised on the expiration would not necessarily be adjusted to Deputy Secretary. date. This rule change makes more conform to activity in other markets. [FR Doc. 02–25010 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] explicit the broad scope of OCC’s Finally, even in the case of final BILLING CODE 8010–01–P discretion to invoke that authority and settlement values that would ordinarily the broad discretion that OCC or an correspond with final settlement values adjustment panel (in the case of options) in other markets, the coordination of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE has in fixing final settlement prices and COMMISSION such settlement values is not the only exercise settlement amounts.9 The rule factor that OCC (or an adjustment panel) [Release No. 34–46545; File No. SR–Phlx– change also will make clear that OCC 2002–49] may follow the procedures in CME’s will consider in deciding whether and current rule and may use either the how to fix settlement values. Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice latest closing prices for individual Accordingly, there could be of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by stocks that fail to trade or use opening circumstances where settlement values the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. prices for the next day on which the for OCC-cleared products would not be Relating to Extension of PACE stock trades. conformed to prices used in other Guarantee Exemption The authority to fix final settlement markets even though the authority prices for futures and exercise would exist to do so. September 24, 2002. settlement amounts for options in Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the unusual market conditions should be III. Discussion Securities Exchange Act of 1934 sufficiently broad to ensure that the (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act directs notice is hereby given that on authority will exist to conform such the Commission to approve a proposed settlement values to the settlement September 12, 2002, the Philadelphia rule change of a self-regulatory values established for related products Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’ or traded in other markets whenever that organization if it finds that such ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities result is deemed, on balance, to be in proposed rule change is consistent with and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or the best interest of investors. Experience the requirements of the Act and the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule has shown that this authority must be rules and regulations thereunder change as described in Items I, II, and stated broadly so that if CME or other applicable to such organization. Section III below, which Items have been related markets in the future amend the 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the prepared by the self-regulatory circumstances in which they can fix rules of a clearing agency be designed to organization. settlement values or the means that they protect investors and the public The Commission is publishing this use to fix those values, OCC will not interest.10 By being able in times of notice to solicit comments on the need to amend its rules further to market disruptions to conform proposed rule change from interested conform. Because CME and other settlement prices for security futures persons. markets often do not coordinate with and index options to settlement prices I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s OCC when they change their rules that are used for related products traded Statement of the Terms of Substance of governing the fixing of settlement in other markets, OCC will be able to fix the Proposed Rule Change values, OCC may not be able to conform exercise prices to better meet investors’ The Phlx proposes to amend the first its rules to amendments made by other expectations in establishing hedged markets quickly enough to avoid a paragraph of Supplementary Material positions that the values of different Section .10(a)(iii) of Exchange Rule 229, disconnect between the futures and derivatives contracts with the same options markets. The rule change Philadelphia Stock Exchange underlying interest will have a provides broad discretion both as to the Automated Communication and predictable relationship to one another. 3 circumstances in which authority would Execution System (PACE’’), to extend a exist to fix a settlement value and the As a result, investors will be better current exemption from that provision method by which the settlement value protected from losses resulting from so that it will be effective for as long as would be fixed. market disruptions. Therefore, OCC’s the Commission’s exemption from The primary purpose of the rule proposed rule change meets the section 8(d) of the ITS Plan issued by change is to give OCC broad requirements of section 17A(b)(3)(F). Commission Order dated August 28, discretionary authority to adjust 2002 (the ‘‘ITS Exemption’’) remains in IV. Conclusion 4 settlement values for OCC-cleared index effect. options and futures whenever, and in On the basis of the foregoing, the whatever manner, OCC deems 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Commission finds that the proposed 1 appropriate to avoid a disconnect 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). rule change is consistent with the 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. between the futures and options markets requirements of the Act and in 3 PACE is the Exchange’s Automated or among the futures markets. It is particular with the requirements of Communication and Execution System. PACE equally important to note, however, that section 17A of the Act and the rules and provides a system for the automatic execution of such coordination is primarily of orders on the Exchange equity floor under regulations thereunder applicable. predetermined conditions. importance only when OCC-cleared It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46428, options are exercised on expiration 67 FR 56607 (September 4, 2002) (Order Pursuant dates or when OCC-cleared futures have section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of maturity dates that coincide with the proposed rule change (File No. SR– 1934 and Rule 11Aa3–2(f) thereunder Granting A OCC–2002–09) be, and hereby is, De Minimis Exemption for Transactions in Certain Exchange-Traded Funds from the Trade-Through 9 A supplement to the Options Disclosure approved. Provisions of the Intermarket Trading System.). The Document that describes the substance of the by- ITS Plan is a national market system plan approved law changes proposed herein has been filed with by the Commission pursuant to Section 11A of the the Commission. 10 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). Act and Rule 11Aa3–2 thereunder.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61945

The text of the proposed rule change (‘‘SPDRs’’).7 On September 4, 2002 (the is designed to promote just and is available at the Phlx and the effective date of the ITS Exemption) the equitable principles of trade; to foster Commission. Exchange filed a proposed rule change cooperation and coordination with for immediate effectiveness to adopt an persons engaged in regulating, clearing, II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s exemption from the first paragraph of settling, processing information with Statement of the Purpose of, and Phlx Rule 229.10(a)(iii) beginning respect to, and facilitating transactions Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule September 4, 2002 for a period of 30 in securities; to remove impediments to Change days ending on October 4, 2002.8 This and perfect the mechanism of a free and In its filing with the Commission, the exemption was intended correlate with open market and a national market Exchange included statements the ITS Exemption. system; and, in general, to protect concerning the purpose of and basis for Phlx Rule 229.10(a)(iii) requires a investors and the public interest; and is the proposed rule change and discussed Phlx specialist to execute certain orders not designed to permit unfair any comments it received on the that are traded-through by another discrimination between customers, proposed rule change. The text of these market center. Previously, although the issuers, brokers or dealers. By adopting statements may be examined at the specialist had this obligation the the proposed exemption, the Exchange places specified in Item IV below. The specialist was, in turn, entitled to avoids burdening specialists beginning Exchange has prepared summaries, set ‘‘satisfaction’’ of those orders pursuant October 4, 2002, with the obligation to forth in sections A, B and C below, of to section 8(d) of the ITS Plan. Now, fill an order in circumstances where an the most significant aspects of such where trading through is no longer external event triggered the execution statements. prohibited by the ITS Plan, as obligation and the specialist could not enumerated in the ITS Exemption, the access trading at that price. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s specialist does not have recourse to seek Statement of the Purpose of, and ‘‘satisfaction’’ for these orders and is B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule alone responsible for those executions. Statement on Burden on Competition Change Thus, the Phlx believes that its The Phlx does not believe that the provision guaranteeing an execution no proposed rule change will impose any 1. Purpose longer makes sense. Moreover, the inappropriate burden on competition. Exchange Rule 229, Supplementary provision now unduly burdens the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Material Section .10(a)(iii) provides that specialist by requiring the specialist to Statement on Comments on the if 100 or more shares print through the execute orders in situations where the Proposed Rule Change Received From limit price on any exchange(s) eligible specialist does not have access to Members, Participants, or Others to compose the PACE Quote 5 after the trading at that price. Thus, the Exchange time of entry of any such order into is proposing that the existing exemption No written comments were either PACE, the specialist shall execute all from the requirements of the first solicited or received. such orders at the limit price without paragraph of Rule 229 Supplementary III. Date of Effectiveness of the waiting for an accumulation of 1000 Material Section 10(a)(iii), which Proposed Rule Change and Timing for shares to print at the limit price on the expires on October 4, 2002, remain in Commission Action New York market.6 On August 28, 2002, effect so long as the ITS Exemption remains in effect, including by any Within 35 days of the date of the Commission issued the ITS publication of this notice in the Federal Exemption which applies to the extensions the Commission may determine to provide. Register or within such other period (i) exchange-traded funds (‘‘ETFs’’) as the Commission may designate up to tracking the Nasdaq-100 Index 2. Statutory Basis 90 days of such date if it finds such (‘‘QQQs’’), the Dow Jones Industrial longer period to be appropriate and Average (‘‘DIAMONDs’’), and the The proposed rule change is 9 publishes its reasons for so finding or Standard & Poor’s 500 Index consistent with section 6(b) of the Act in general and furthers the objectives of (ii) as to which the self-regulatory section 6(b)(5) 10 in particular in that it organization consents, the Commission 5 PACE Quote is defined in Rule 229 as the best will: bid/ask quote among the American, Boston, Cincinnati, Chicago, New York, Pacific or 7 The Exchange does not currently trade (A) By order approve such proposed Philadelphia Stock Exchange, or the Intermarket DIAMONDs or SPDRs but may determine to do so rule change, or Trading System/Computer Assisted Execution in the future. The Exchange does trade QQQs. The (B) Institute proceedings to determine System (‘‘ITS/CAES’’) quote, as appropriate. Nasdaq-100, Nasdaq-100 Index, Nasdaq, The whether the proposed rule change  SM 6 To be understood, Section .10(a)(iii) must be Nasdaq Stock Market Nasdaq-100 Shares, , should be disapproved. read in conjunction with the preceding Section of Nasdaq-100 TrustSM, Nasdaq-100 Index Tracking the PACE Rule. Supplementary Material Section StockSM, and QQQSM are trademarks or service IV. Solicitation of Comments .10(a)(ii) provides as follows: marks of The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (Nasdaq) Non-Marketable Limit Orders—Unless the and have been licensed for use for certain purposes Interested persons are invited to member organization entering orders otherwise by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange pursuant to a submit written data, views and License Agreement with Nasdaq. The Nasdaq-100 elects, round-lot limit orders up to 500 shares and  arguments concerning the foregoing, the round-lot portion of PRL limit orders up to 599 Index (the Index) is determined, composed, and shares which are entered at a price different than calculated by Nasdaq without regard to the including whether the proposed rule SM the PACE Quote will be executed in sequence at the Licensee, the Nasdaq-100 Trust , or the beneficial change is consistent with the Act. SM limit price when an accumulative volume of 1000 owners of Nasdaq-100 Shares . Nasdaq has Persons making written submissions complete control and sole discretion in shares of the security named in the order prints at should file six copies thereof with the the limit price or better on the New York market determining, comprising, or calculating the Index or after the time of entry of any such order into PACE. in modifying in any way its method for Secretary, Securities and Exchange For each accumulation of 1000 shares which have determining, comprising, or calculating the Index in Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., been executed at the limit price on the New York the future. Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of 8 market, the specialist shall execute a single limit See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46481 the submission, all subsequent order of a participant up to a maximum of 500 (September 10, 2002), 67 FR 58669 (September 17, shares for each round-lot limit order up to 500 2002) (SR–Phlx–2002–48). amendments, all written statements shares or the round-lot portion of a PRL limit order 9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). with respect to the proposed rule up to 599 shares. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) change that are filed with the

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61946 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Commission, and all written counties in the State of Illinois; DATES: Final OSC information quality communications relating to the Henderson and Union counties in the guidelines become effective on October proposed rule change between the State of Kentucky; and Butler, Darke, 2, 2002 Commission and any person, other than Hamilton and Mercer counties in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: those that may be withheld from the State of Ohio. Sharyn Danch, by mail (Planning and public in accordance with the The interest rates are: Advice Division, Office of Special provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Counsel, 1730 M Street, NW., (Suite available for inspection and copying in Percent 201), Washington, DC 20036–4505), or the Commission’s Public Reference l Room. Copies of such filing will also be For Physical Damage: electronic mail (info [email protected]). available for inspection and copying at Homeowners with credit OSC’s final information quality the principal office of the Phlx. All available elsewhere ...... 6.625 guidelines are available on the agency Homeowners without credit submissions should refer to File No. Web site (http://www.osc.gov, at the available elsewhere ...... 3.312 ‘‘Reading Room’’ link). SR–Phlx–2002–49 and should be Businesses with credit avail- submitted by October 23, 2002. able elsewhere ...... 7.000 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB For the Commission, by the Division of Businesses and non-profit or- guidelines, issued to Federal agencies Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated ganizations without credit under section 515 of the Treasury and authority.11 available elsewhere ...... 3.500 General Government Appropriations Margaret H. McFarland, Others (including non-profit Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law organizations) with credit Deputy Secretary. 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763), provide that available elsewhere ...... 6.375 [FR Doc. 02–25006 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] For Economic Injury: each agency should: (1) develop BILLING CODE 8010–01–P Businesses and small agricul- information resources management tural cooperatives without procedures and issue agency guidelines credit available elsewhere 3.500 to ensure the quality, objectivity, utility SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION and integrity of information The number assigned to this disaster disseminated by the agency to the [Declaration of Disaster #3447] for physical damage is 344711. For public; (2) establish administrative mechanisms for affected persons to seek State of Indiana economic injury the number is 9R7600 for Indiana; 9R7700 for Illinois; 9R7800 and obtain the correction of As a result of the President’s major for Kentucky; and 9R7900 for Ohio. disseminated information that does not comply with the OMB or agency disaster declaration on September 25, (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 2002, I find that Bartholomew, Program Nos. 59002 and 59008) guidelines; and (3) report annually to OMB on requests for correction received Blackford, Brown, Daviess, Decatur, Dated: September 26, 2002. Delaware, Fayette, Franklin, Gibson, by the agency and the resolution of S. George Camp, Grant, Greene, Hamilton, Hancock, those requests. OMB advises agencies to Hendricks, Henry, Jay, Johnson, Knox, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster use common sense in adapting its Assistance. Lawrence, Madison, Marion, Monroe, guidelines to information disseminated Morgan, Owen, Pike, Posey, Randolph, [FR Doc. 02–24995 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] to the public, taking into account the Rush, Shelby, Sullivan, Tipton and BILLING CODE 8025–01–P nature and importance of the Vanderburgh in the State of Indiana information involved. Finally, OMB constitute a disaster area due to encourages agencies to incorporate damages caused by severe storms and standards and procedures required by tornadoes occurring on September 20, OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL its guidelines into existing agency 2002. Applications for loans for Guidelines for Ensuring and information management and physical damage as a result of this Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, administrative practices, under disaster may be filed until the close of Utility, and Integrity of Information applicable laws and OMB circulars. business on November 25, 2002 and for Disseminated by the Office of Special On April 30, 2002, pursuant to the economic injury until the close of Counsel (OSC) OMB guidelines, OSC published its business on June 25, 2003 at the address draft report to OMB with proposed OSC listed below or other locally announced AGENCY: Office of Special Counsel information quality guidelines, and locations: ACTION: Final Agency Guidelines invited public comment on or before U.S. Small Business Administration, June 1, 2002. OSC received one Disaster Area 2 Office, One Baltimore SUMMARY: Pursuant to guidance issued response, from the Center for Regulatory Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30308. by the Office of Management and Effectiveness (CRE), on May 30th, 2002. In addition, applications for economic Budget (OMB), the U.S. Office of Special On June 6, 2002, OMB gave agencies an injury loans from small businesses Counsel (OSC) published a Federal extension of time (to August 1, 2002) in located in the following contiguous Register (FR) notice on April 30, 2002, which to submit their reports with counties may be filed until the specified inviting public comment on its draft proposed guidelines to OMB, and date at the above location: Adams, report to OMB with proposed OSC suggested that agencies consider Boone, Clay, Clinton, Dearborn, Dubois, guidelines for ensuring and maximizing extending the public comment period Howard, Huntington, Jackson, Jennings, the quality, objectivity, utility, and on their guidelines. 67 FR 40755. On Martin, Miami, Montgomery, Orange, integrity of certain information July 8, 2002, OSC published a notice Putnam, Ripley, Union, Vigo, Wabash, disseminated to the public extending the public comment period to Warrick, Washington, Wayne and Wells (‘‘information quality guidelines’’). 67 July 10, 2002. 67 FR 45168. A second in the State of Indiana; Clark, Crawford, FR 21316. This notice describes response, received from Citizens for Gallatin, Lawrence, Wabash and White comments received, and announces the Sensible Safeguards (CSS) on June 14, availability of OSC’s final information 2002, was deemed to have been received 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). quality guidelines. during the comment period, as

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61947

extended. OSC carefully considered of ‘‘affected persons,’’ noting with favor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION both responses received. the definition OMB used in its CRE advised OSC that its response guidelines to agencies.4 While the draft Federal Aviation Administration (entitled ‘‘Proposed CRE Generic report to OMB described specific target Comments to all Federal Agencies audiences for information disseminated Proposed Advisory Circular; Related to Data Quality Guidelines’’) by OSC,5 a description of ‘‘affected Continued Airworthiness Assessments consisted of generic comments, persons’’ was not included in the of Powerplant and Auxiliary Power Unit provided to all Federal agencies on agency’s proposed guidelines. OSC Installations on Transport Category cross-cutting issues that might apply to agrees that such a description should Airplanes draft guidelines of only some agencies. appear in the guidelines. Part IV.C. of AGENCY: Federal Aviation OSC reviewed the CRE comments, and OSC’s guidelines, therefore, now Administration, DOT. identified two that might apply to its describes, by reference to the target ACTION: Notice of availability of proposed guidelines.1 audiences described in its initial report Under comment (1), CRE asserted that proposed advisory circular and request to OMB and in OMB’s guidelines for for comments. neither OMB nor Federal agencies have Federal agencies, affected persons who the authority to exempt types and can file an administrative request for SUMMARY: This notice announces the categories of information from their correction. availability of proposed Advisory guidelines. CRE maintained that the The comment received from CSS also Circular (AC) No. 39.XX, Continued OMB guidelines improperly limited the consisted of generic, non-agency Airworthiness Assessments of Power relevant statutory language requiring specific comments. OSC reviewed all plant and Auxiliary Power Unit that guidelines apply to the comments and determined that no Installations on Transport Category ‘‘information...disseminated by Federal changes to its proposed guidelines were Airplanes. agencies,’’ by including certain needed. One or more of the following DATES: Comments must be received on exemptions in the definition of factors applied to each comment: (1) or before November 1, 2002. ‘‘dissemination.’’2 CRE stated that ‘‘any OSC guidelines met or exceeded the information that an agency has in fact standards suggested by CSS; (2) the ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the made public’’ must be covered. OSC’s comment concerned a type of proposed AC to the Federal Aviation proposed guidelines incorporated the information not disseminated by OSC; Administration, Attn: Engine and OMB definition of ‘‘dissemination’’ with or (3) the proposed OSC guidelines Propeller Standards Staff, ANE–110, the included exemptions. OSC believes adopted or mirrored provisions in Engine and Propeller Directorate, that no change should be made in its OMB’s guidance to Federal agencies. Aircraft Certification Service, 12 New guidelines until such time as OMB may After review of the public responses England Executive Park, Burlington, revise its guidelines to amend the received, OSC sent its report and MA, 01803–5299. definition and exemptions in question.3 proposed information quality guidelines FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Under comment (6), CRE stated that for OMB review and comment on Azevedo, Engine and Propeller in determining who may file an August 1, 2002, and for final review on Standards Staff, ANE–110, at the above administrative complaint requesting September 17, 2002. Pursuant to OMB’s address, telephone (781) 238–7117, fax correction of disseminated information, review and further guidance to Federal (781) 238–7199. A copy of the subject agencies should use a broad definition agencies, OSC revised its proposed AC may also be obtained electronically guidelines to: (1) clarify that OSC press by writing to the following Internet 1 Six of CRE’s 16 numbered comments (nos. 5, 11, releases typically contain information address: [email protected]. 12, 14, 15, 16) addressed matters not applicable to information disseminated by OSC and, therefore, about matters not covered under OMB’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: guidelines, and (2) conform times for not addressed by its guidelines. Other comments Comments Invited (nos. 7, 8, and 9), critical of guidelines issued by responses to requestors seeking some agencies, did not apply to OSC because its corrections of information, and A copy of the subject AC may be guidelines met or exceeded the standard(s) obtained by contacting the person suggested by CRE. Several comments (nos. 2, 10, appealing OSC decisions on those and 13, and discussion referring to no. 1) indicated requests, from 30 to 60 days. named under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION dissatisfaction with definitions used in the OMB OSC’s final information quality CONTACT or by downloading the guidelines issued to agencies. OSC has decided to guidelines and September 17, 2002, proposed AC from the following keep any definitions taken from the OMB Internet website: http:// guidelines, until such time as OMB may revise its report to OMB are available, upon guidelines to amend the definitions in question. As publication of this notice, on the www.airweb.faa.gov/rgl. The FAA noted by CRE in its comments, ‘‘[a]ll agency agency’s Web site, (http://www.osc.gov invites interested parties to comment on guidelines are required to comply with the at the ‘‘Reading Room’’ link). the proposed AC. Comments should requirements set forth by OMB in their interagency identify the subject of the AC and be February 22nd Final Guidelines. (statutory citations Dated: September 26, 2002. submitted to the individual identified omitted).’’ Elaine D. Kaplan, 2 ‘‘Dissemination does not include distribution under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Special Counsel. limited to government employees or agency CONTACT. The FAA will consider all contractors or grantees; intra- or inter-agency use or [FR Doc. 02–25041 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] communications received by the closing sharing of government information; and responses BILLING CODE 7405–01–M to requests for agency records under the Freedom date before issuing the final AC. of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act or other similar law. This 4 OMB defined affected persons as ‘‘people who Background definition also does not include distribution limited may benefit or be harmed by the disseminated The proposed Advisory Circular (AC) to correspondence with individuals or persons, information ... includ[ing] persons who are seeking press releases, archival records, public filings, to address information about themselves as well as describes the Continued Airworthiness subpoenas or adjudicative processes.’’ 67 FR 8452, persons who use information. (citation omitted).’’ Assessment Methodologies (CAAM). 8460 (Feb. 22, 2002). 5 ‘‘Primary target audiences ... are current and The Federal Aviation Administration 3 See last sentence of fn. 1, above. OSC’s proposed former federal government employees, applicants (FAA) Engine and Propeller Directorate guidelines did not add exemptions to those defined for federal employment, employee representatives, (EPD) and the Transport Airplane by OMB. Those parts of CRE comments (1), (3), and and state and local government employees (i.e., (4) that addressed agency guidelines defining other persons affected by or interested in the laws and Directorate (TAD) may use CAAM to exemptions did not apply to OSC. regulations enforced by OSC).’’ 67 FR 21317. identify unsafe conditions and

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61948 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

determine when an ‘‘unsafe condition is unsafe condition exists, and the 1–800–647–5527) is on the plaza level likely to exist or develop in other appropriate responses to that unsafe of the NASSIF Building at the products of the same type design’’ condition, are exclusively the Department of Transportation at the before prescribing corrective action in responsibility of the Administrator. above address. Also, you may review accordance with Title 14 of the Code of This proposed advisory circular, public dockets on the Internet at Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 39. published under the authority granted http://dms.dot.gov. CAAM is used for products associated to the Administrator by 49 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with the Powerplant or Auxiliary Power 106(g), 40113, 44701–44702, 44704, Denise Emrick (202) 267–5174, Office of Unit (APU) Installations on Transport provides guidance for the use of CAAM. Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Aviation Category Airplanes. Dated: Issued in Burlington, Administration, 800 Independence Continued airworthiness requires that Massachusetts, on September 24, 2002. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. safety concerns within the existing fleet Francis Favara, be addressed, and the knowledge gained Extension of Comment Period applied for the benefit of future fleets as Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking well. This proposed AC also provides [FR Doc. 02–25053 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] provisions governing the application, CAAM guidance for estimating the risks processing, and disposition of petitions BILLING CODE 4910–13–M s associated with identified unsafe for exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code conditions; defining prioritizing, and of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this selecting suitable corrective actions for DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION notice contains a summary of certain all identified unsafe conditions; and petitions seeking relief from specified verifying that the corrective actions Federal Aviation Administration requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of were effective. This proposed AC is this notice is to improve the public’s [Summary Notice No. PE–2002–57] intended to present a tangible means of awareness of, and participation in, this logically assessing and responding to aspect of FAA’s regulatory activities. the safety risks posed by unsafe Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Petitions Received Neither publication of this notice nor conditions. the inclusion or omission of information This proposed AC does not establish AGENCY: Federal Aviation in the summary is intended to affect the any requirement that the FAA must Administration (FAA), DOT. legal status of any petition or its final perform a risk assessment before issuing ACTION: Notice of petitions for disposition. an AD, or that the FAA must wait to exemption received, extension of The original summary of the petition issue an AD until the design approval was published in the Federal Register holder performs a risk assessment, or comment period. on September 10, 2002 (67 FR 57478). that the FAA must accept the findings SUMMARY: This action extends the The FAA has determined that the of a risk assessment performed by the comment period for a petition for summary was general in nature; design approval holder. CAAM, as exemption that was published in the therefore, the FAA is offering the public described in this proposed AC, assists Federal Register on September 10, 2002. more information on this petition to the FAA in making decisions The FAA has determined that the allow the public a chance to offer concerning the priority in which unsafe summary was general in nature. To offer comments more specific to the situation. conditions should be addressed. The the public more information on the The FAA has determined that an FAA may issue an AD for a particular petition, the FAA has revised the extension of the comment period is unsafe condition before a risk summary. In addition, the FAA is assessment is performed, or without consistent with the public interest, and extending the comment period to allow that good cause exists for taking this having an assessment performed at all. interested parties sufficient time to In this regard, CAAM does not define action. Accordingly, the comment submit comments. ‘‘unsafe condition’’ in a powerplant or period for Docket No. FAA–2002–12501 APU installation. Rather, CAAM is a DATES: Comments about petitions is extended until October 14, 2002. tool that the FAA usually will sue to received must identify the petition Issued in Washington, DC, on September make the kinds of decisions described docket number involved and must be 25, 2002. above. received on or before October 14, 2002. Donald P. Byrne, Note that the descriptive level of the ADDRESSES: Send comments on any Chief Counsel for Regulations. CAAM process contained in this AC is petition to the Docket Management aimed at the individual, whether from System, U.S. Department of Petitions for Exemption the FAA or the manufacturer, who is Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Docket No.: FAA–2002–12501. without extensive risk analysis Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC Petitioner: Mr. Anthony P.X. experience. Some of the material within 20590–0001. You must identify the Bothwell, Attorney for ten petitioners. this AC will therefore seem very basic docket number FAA–2002–12501 at the Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR to the experienced analyst. beginning of your comment. If you wish 121.383(c). Additionally, this proposed AC to receive confirmation that FAA Description of Relief Sought: To recognizes that an analysis must received your comments, include a self- permit the petitioners to act as pilots in sometimes be performed without the addressed, stamped postcard. operations conducted under part 121 benefit of readily-available information You may also submit comments after reaching their 60th birthdays. The from the manufacturer. Typically, it is through the Internet to http:// petitioners submit no medical expected that more specific information dms.dot.gov. You may review the public information to support this petition, will be available to the analyst, thus docket containing the petition, any instead, the petitioners allege that the eliminating the need for some of the comments received, and any final Age 60 rule has no safety basis and was process steps that are described. disposition in person in the Dockets originally adopted as an act of While information may be provided Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., favoritism and continues to be by and the assessment performed by the Monday through Friday, except Federal supported by the FAA as an economic applicant, decisions as to whether an holidays. The Dockets Office (telephone favor to the airline industry. The

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61949

petitioners allege that the FAA Springs Resort, 400 East Tahquitz representatives of the FAA intentionally misrepresented the Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California Headquarters. justification for the Age 60 rule to the 92262 in conjunction with the Aircraft (b) The meeting will be open to all public, Congress, Federal courts, and Owners and Pilots (AOPA) Expo ’02. persons on a space-available basis. the International Civil Aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Debi Every effort was made to provide a Organization. The petitioners allege that Bacon, Aerospace Weather Policy meeting site with sufficient seating the U.S. Senate Committee on Division, ARS–100, Federal Aviation capacity for the expected participation. Appropriations ordered the FAA to Administration, 800 Independence There will be neither admission fee nor conduct a study in a 2000 Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; other charge to attend and participate. appropriations bill. The petitioner allege telephone number (202) 385–7705; Fax: This meeting is being held in that the study was flawed. Further, the (202) 385–7701; email: conjunction with the AOPA Expo ’02. petitioners allege that there is ‘‘evidence [email protected]. Internet address: There is a charge to attend the AOPA of the FAA’s intent—perhaps even its http:\\[email protected]. Expo ’02; however, any person complicity with the [Senate attending this informal meeting only SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appropriations] Committee—to will be admitted by AOPA conference mislead.’’ The petitioners assert that the History officials, to this meeting only, at no FAA has refused to collect data, make In 1999, the FAA established an charge. data available that has been collected, or (c) FAA personnel present will analyze data that has been collected that Aviation Weather Technology Transfer (AWTT) Board to manage the orderly conduct a briefing on how the AWTT would undermine the Age 60 rule. The system works and changes to the petitioners claim pilot incapacitation transfer of weather capabilities and products from research and process made in the last year. Any poses no threat to safety in air person will be allowed to ask questions operations; therefore, there is no development into operations. The Director of the Aerospace Weather during the presentation and FAA justification for the FAA ‘‘no personnel will clarify any part of the exemptions’’ policy towards Age 60. Policy and Standards Staff, ARS–20, chairs the AWTT Board. The board is process that is not clear. The petitioners allege that when FAA (d) FAA personnel will present a considers granting exemptions to Age 60 composed of stakeholders in Air Traffic Services, ATS; Regulation and briefing on the specific product to be rule, it does not take into consideration reviewed at the November 2002 AWTT that performance and medical checks Certification, AVR; and Research and Acquisitions, ARA in the Federal Board Meeting. Any person will be would eliminate at-risk pilots. The allowed to ask questions during the petitioners claim that they are entitled Aviation Administration and the Office of Climate, Water and Weather Services, presentation and FAA personnel will to be exempt from the Age 60 rule clarify any part of the presentation that because the rule has no medical or OS and the Office of Science and Technology, OST in the National is not clear. safety basis; therefore, granting them an (e) Any person present may give exemption to the rule will not adversely Weather Service. The AWTT Board meets semi- feedback on the product to be presented. affect safety. annually or as needed, to determine the Feedback on the proposed product will [FR Doc. 02–25056 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] readiness of weather research and be captured through discussion between BILLING CODE 4910–13–P development (R&D) products for FAA personnel and any persons experimental use, full operational use attending the meeting. The meeting will for meteorologists or full operational use not be formally recorded. However, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION for end users. The board’s informal tape recordings may be made determinations will be based upon of the presentations to ensure that each Federal Aviation Administration criteria in the following areas: users respondent’s comments are noted accurately. User Input to the Aviation Weather needs; benefits; costs; risks; technical (f) An official verbatim transcript or Technology Transfer Board readiness; operational readiness and budget requirements. minutes of the informal meeting will not AGENCY: Federal Aviation The user interface process is designed be made. However, a list of the Administration (FAA), Department of to allow FAA to both report progress attendees, a digest of discussions during Transportation (DOT). and receive feedback from industry the meeting and an action item list will ACTION: Notice of public meeting. users. Each AWTT board meeting will be produced. Any person attending may be preceded by a half-day industry receive a copy of the written SUMMARY: The FAA will hold an review session approximately one information upon request to the informal public meeting to seek aviation month prior to each board meeting. information contact, above. weather user input to the Aviation These industry review sessions will be (g) Every reasonable effort will be Weather Technology Transfer (AWTT) announced in the Federal Register and made to hear each person’s feedback Board. Details: October 22, 2002; Hilton open to all interested parties. consistent with a reasonable closing Palm Springs Resort, 400 East Tahquitz This meeting is the industry review time for the meeting. Written feedback Canyon Way, Palm Springs, California; session intended to receive feedback on may also be submitted to FAA 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. in the Horizon Room. a weather R&D product that will be personnel for up to seven (7) days after The objective of this meeting is to presented for consideration at the the close of the meeting. provide an opportunity for interested November 2002 AWTT Board meeting. Agenda aviation weather users to provide input The product to be considered is the on FAA’s plans for implementing new Integrated Turbulence Forecast (a) Opening Remarks and Discussion weather products. Algorithm (ITFA). of Meeting Procedures. DATES: The meeting will be held at 1 (b) Briefing on AWTT Process. p.m. to 5 p.m. on October 22, 2002. Meeting Procedures (c) Briefing on Weather Products. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in (a) The meeting will be informal in (d) Request for User Input. the Horizon Room at the Hilton Palm nature and will be conducted by (e) Closing Comments.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61950 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Issued in Washington, DC, on September Comments received on the proposed 20036. Copies can also be obtained 20, 2002. technical standard order may be through the RTCA Internet web site at Anthony W. Johnson, examined, before and after the comment http://www.rtca.org/ Acting Deputy Director, Aerospace Weather closing date, in Room 815, FAA Issued in Washington, DC, on September Policy and Standards Staff. Headquarters Building (FOB–10A), 800 19, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–24670 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Independence Avenue, SW., Stephen P. Van Trees, Washington, DC 20591, weekdays BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Acting Manager, Aircraft Engineering except Federal holidays, between 8:30 Division, Aircraft Certification Service. a.m. and 4:30 p.m. All communications [FR Doc. 02–25052 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION received on or before the closing date for comments specified above will be BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Federal Aviation Administration considered by the Director of the Aircraft Certification Service before DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Proposed Technical Standard Order issuing the final TSO. (TSO) C–154, Universal Access Transceiver Equipment Background Federal Transit Administration AGENCY: Federal Aviation This proposed TSO prescribes the Transfer of Federally Assisted Land or Administration (DOT) minimum standards for airborne Facility equipment to support Automatic ACTION: Notice of availability and Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, requests for public comment. (ADS–B) using Universal Access DOT SUMMARY: This notice announces the Transceiver (UAT) equipment operating ACTION: Notice of intent to transfer availability of and requests comments on the frequency of 978 MHz. ADS–B is federally assisted land or facility. on a proposed Technical Standard a system by which aircraft and certain Order (TSO) C–154, Universal Access equipped surface vehicles can share SUMMARY: Section 5334(g) of the Federal Transceiver (UAT) Automatic position, velocity, and other information Transit Laws, as codified, 49 U.S.C. Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast with one another (and also with ground- 5301, et seq., permits the Administrator (ADS–B) Equipment Operating on the based facilities such as air traffic of the Federal Transit Administration Frequency of 978 MHz. This draft TSO services) via radio broadcast techniques. (FTA) to authorize a recipient of FTA tells persons seeking a TSO UTA is a multi-purpose aeronautical funds to transfer land or a facility to a authorization or letter of design datalink system intended to support not public body for any public purpose with approval what minimum performance only ADS–B, but also Flight Information no further obligation to the Federal standards (MPS) their UAT equipment Service—Broadcast (FIS–B), Traffic Government if, among other things, no must meet to be identified with the Information Service—Broadcast (TIS–B), Federal agency is interested in acquiring applicable TSO marking. and supplementary ranging and the asset for Federal use. Accordingly, positioning capabilities. Two major DATES: Comments must identify the FTA is issuing this Notice to advise classes of UAT equipment are supported TSO file number and be received on or Federal agencies that the City and by this TSO; Class A( ) equipment before October 22, 2002. County of Honolulu Department of which incorporates both a broadcast and Transportation Services intends to ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the receive subsystem, and Class B( ) proposed technical standard order to: transfer a vacant parcel of land without equipment which supports broadcast structures to Honolulu’s Department of Technical Programs and Continued only. Airworthiness Branch, AIR–120, Facility Maintenance to use as a Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft How To Obtain Copies refueling station for city vehicles. The parcel was formerly used as a bus Certification Service—File No. TSO– A copy of the proposed TSO–C154 terminus facility and consists of C154, Federal Aviation Administration, may be obtained via the information approximately 12,800 square feet of 800 Independence Avenue, SW., contained in section titled ‘‘For Further land fronting Umi Street in Honolulu, Washington, DC 20591. Or deliver Information Contact’’, or from the FAA Hawaii across the street from the Kalihi comments to: Federal Aviation Internet web site at http:// Shopping Center situated within an area Administration, Room 815, 800 www.faa.govcertification/aircraft/ zoned IMX–1 for industrial-commercial Independence Avenue, SW., tsoa.htm. Copies of RTCA Document mixed use. Washington, DC 20591. No’s. RTCA/DO–160D, ‘‘Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Conditions and Test Procedures for EFFECTIVE DATE: Any Federal agency Bobbie J. Smith, Technical Programs Airborne Equipment,’’ dated July 29, interested in acquiring the land or and Continued Airworthiness Branch, 1997; RTCA/DO–178B, ‘‘Software facility must notify the FTA Region IX AIR–120, Aircraft Engineering Division, Considerations in Airborne Systems and Office of its interest by November 1, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Equipment Certification,’’ dated 2002. Aviation Administration, 800 December 1, 1992; RTCA Document No. ADDRESSES: Interested parties should Independence Avenue, SW., DO–242A, ‘‘Minimum Aviation System notify the Regional Office by writing to Washington, DC 20591, Telephone (202) Performance Standards for Automatic Leslie T. Rogers, Regional 267–9546. Dependant Surveillance-Broadcast Administrator, Federal Transit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (ADS–B)’’ dated June 25, 2002; and Administration, 201 Mission Street, RTCA/DO–282, ‘‘Minimum Operational Suite 2210, San Francisco, CA 94105. Comments Invited Performance Standards for Universal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interested persons are invited to Access Trnasceiver (UAT) Automatic Edward Carranza, Director of Office of comment on the proposed TSO listed in Dependant Surveillance—Broadcast Program Management at (415) 744– this notice by submitting such written (ADS–B)’’ dated August 27, 2002, may 3118. data, views, or arguments as they desire be purchased from RTCA, Inc., 1828 L to the above specified address. Street, NW., Suite 815, Washington, DC SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61951

Background to the north and Verizon Hawaii’s Research and Special Programs 49 U.S.C. section 5334(g) provides property to the east and south border it. Administration, Department of guidance on the transfer of capital Office buildings are on Verizon Hawaii’s Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, assets. Specifically, if a recipient of FTA site. SW., Washington, DC 20950, (202) 366– assistance decides an asset acquired The Umi Street property was 6205 or by electronic mail at under this chapter at least in part with previously used as a municipal transit [email protected]. that assistance is not longer needed for bus terminus. It is presently vacant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the purpose for which it was acquired, without any building structures. An the Secretary of Transportation may existing concrete pavement bus Title: Response Plans for Onshore Oil authorize the recipient to transfer the turnaround driveway is situated on the Pipelines. front half of the property. The concrete asset to a local government authority to OMB Number: 2137–0589. be used for a public purpose with no pavement is in good condition. The rear Type of Request: Extension of an further obligation to the Government. 49 portion of the parcel does not have any U.S.C. section 5334(g)(1). improvements and is overgrown with existing information collection. vegetation. The property frontage along Abstract: The Oil Pollution Act of Determinations Umi Street is open. A concrete block 1990 (OPA 90) requires that operators of The Secretary may authorize a wall and chain link fence separates the onshore oil pipelines develop response transfer for a public purpose other than property’s perimeter adjoining the plans to minimize the impact of an oil mass transportation only if the Secretary residential and Verizon Hawaii discharge in the case of an accident. decides: properties. These response plans enhance the spill (A) The asset will remain in public Issued on: September 16, 2002. response capability of pipeline use for at least 5 years after the date the Leslie T. Rogers, operators. Operators may submit their asset is transferred; Regional Administrator. plan electronically or in hard copy. (B) There is no purpose eligible for assistance under this chapter for which [FR Doc. 02–25046 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Respondents: Oil Pipeline operators. the asset should be used; BILLING CODE 4910–57–M Estimated Number of Respondents: (C) The overall benefit of allowing the 233. transfer is greater than the interest of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Hours per Operator or Respondent: Government in liquidation and return of 127.8. the financial interest of the Government [Docket: RSPA–98–4957] in the asset, after considering fair Estimated Total Annual Burden on market value and other factors; and Request for Extension of Existing Respondents: 29,780 hours annually. (D) Through an appropriate screening Information Collection Frequency: Every five years. or survey process, that there is no AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Use: To enhance response capability interest in acquiring the asset for Administration, DOT. in the event of an oil spill. Government use if the asset is a facility ACTION: Notice and request for public or land. Regulation or Subpart: 49 CFR part comments. 194. Federal Interest in Acquiring Land or Facility SUMMARY: In accordance with the Comments are invited on: (a) The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this need for the proposed collection of This document implements the notice announces the Research and information for the proper performance requirements of 49 U.S.C. section Special Programs Administration’s of the functions of the agency, including 5334(G)(1)(D) of the Federal Transit (RSPA) intention to request extension of whether the information will have Laws. Accordingly, FTA hereby an information collection in support of practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the provides notice of the availability of the the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) for agency’s estimate of the burden of the land or facility further described below. Response Plans for Onshore Oil proposed collection of information Any Federal agency interested in Pipelines. (approval number 2137– including the validity of the acquiring the affected land or facility 0589.) Operators are invited to submit methodology and assumptions used; (c) should promptly notify the FTA. comments on whether collecting ways to enhance the quality, utility and If no Federal agency is interested in information on response plans for clarity of the information to be acquiring the existing land or facility, onshore oil pipelines is burdensome, collected; and (d) ways to minimize the FTA will make certain that the other and other factors explained in the body burden of the collection of information requirements specified in 49 U.S.C. of this notice. on those who are to respond, including section 5334(g)(1)(A) through (C) are DATES: the use of appropriate automated, met before permitting the asset to be Comments on this notice must be electronic, mechanical, or other transferred. received by December 2, 2002 to be assured of consideration. technological collection techniques. Additional Description of Land or ADDRESSES: Copies of this information Send written comments in duplicate to Facility collection can be reviewed at the Dockets Facility, Plaza 401, U.S. The property is an unused, vacant but Dockets Facility, Plaza 401, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 terminus, consisting of an Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC approximately 12,800 square foot parcel Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590. Please include the docket of land fronting Umi Street in Honolulu, 20590, Monday to Friday from 10 a.m. number in your comments. Comments Hawaii. The property is situated within to 4 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. can also be sent electronically to an area zoned IMX–1 for industrial- Comments can be reviewed dms.dot.gov. commercial mixed use. The parcel is electronically on the worldwide web at All responses to this notice will be located across the street from the Kalihi dms.dot.gov. summarized and included in the request Shopping Center and a one-family FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: for OMB approval. All comments will housing unit. A one-family housing unit Marvin Fell, Office of Pipeline Safety, also be a matter of public record.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61952 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

Issued in Washington, DC, on September at any time. The filing of a petition to Respondents: Business or other for- 26, 2002. revoke will not automatically stay the profit, State, Local or Tribal Jeffrey D. Wiese, transaction. Government. Manager, Program Development, Office of An original and 10 copies of all Estimated Number of Respondents: Pipeline Safety. pleadings, referring to STB Finance 630. [FR Doc. 02–25045 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Docket No. 34250, must be filed with Estimated Burden Hours Per BILLING CODE 4910–60–P the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 Respondent: K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423– 0001. In addition, a copy of each Hours DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION pleading must be served on Linda B. McClintock, Two Gateway Center, ATF F 2093 (5200.3) ...... 2 Surface Transportation Board Pittsburgh, PA 15222, Robert D. ATF F 2098 (5200.16) ...... 1 ATF F 5230.4 ...... 2 [STB Finance Docket No. 34250] Rosenberg, 1224 17th Street, NW., ATF F 5230.5 ...... 1 Washington, DC 20036, and Frank Almono LP—Acquisition and Brooks Robinson, 425 Sixth Avenue, Frequency of Response: On occassion. Operation Exemption—Line of Suite 500, Pittsburgh, PA 15219. Estimated Total Reporting Burden: Monongahela Connecting Railroad Board decisions and notices are 1,130 hours. Company available on our Web site at www.stb.dot.gov. Clearance Officer: Jacqueline White Almono LP (Almono), a noncarrier, (202) 927–8930, Bureau of Alcohol, has filed a verified notice of exemption Decided: September 25, 2002. Tobacco and Firearms, Room 3200, under 49 CFR 1150.31 to acquire and By the Board, David M. Konschnik, 650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., operate approximately 2 miles of rail Director, Office of Proceedings. Washington, DC 20226. line of the Monongahela Connecting Vernon A. Williams, OMB Reviewer: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr. Railroad Company (Mon Con) in Secretary. (202) 395–7316, Office of Allegheny County, PA.1 The line [FR Doc. 02–24865 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Management and Budget, Room extends between the plant of the sole BILLING CODE 4915–00–P 10235, New Executive Office shipper on the line (MetalTech) on the Building, Washington, DC 20503. north side of the Monongahela River Lois K. Holland, and an interchange point with CSX DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) north of Departmental Reports, Management Officer. CSXT’s Glenwood Yard in Hazelwood, Submission for OMB Review; [FR Doc. 02–24974 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] PA. Almono states that the line does not Comment Request BILLING CODE 4810–31–M have milepost designations.2 The transaction was expected to be September 16, 2002. consummated on or shortly after The Department of Treasury has DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY September 12, 2002. Almond certifies submitted the following public Submission for OMB Review; that its projected annual revenues do information collection requirement(s) to Comment Request not exceed those that would qualify it OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwor Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. as a Class III carrier. September 20, 2002. If the verified notice contains false or L. 104–13. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury The Department of Treasury has misleading information, the exemption submitted the following public is void ab initio. Petitions to reopen the Bureau Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information information collection requirement(s) to proceeding to revoke the exemption OMB for review and clearance under the under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. Copies of the 1 Almono states that Mon Con is a wholly owned Treasury Department Clearance Officer, subsidiary of LTV Steel Corporation (LTV), which Department of the Treasury, Room 2110, submission(s) may be obtained by is in bankruptcy and is liquidating its assets. 1425 New York Avenue, NW., calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Almono indicates that it is acquiring Mon Con’s Washington DC 20220. Officer listed. Comments regarding this assets as well as adjoining LTV property with court information collection should be DATES: Written comments should be approval. addressed to the OMB reviewer listed 2 Almono states that it intends to seek received on or before November 1, 2002 abandonment of the acquired line shortly after to be assured of consideration. and to the Treasury Department consummation of the transaction. It adds that, Clearance Officer, Department of the although its primary interest is in the underlying Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York real estate and not the railroad operation, it has Firearms (BATF) reached an agreement with MetalTech under which Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20220. the shipper would continue to receive rail service OMB Number: 1512–0398. DATES: Written comments should be following abandonment. Acquisitions of active rail Form Number: ATF Forms 2093 received on or before November 1, 2002 lines under 49 U.S.C. 10901 are supposed to be for continued rail use. See, e.g., Land Conservancy— (5200.3), 2098 (5200.16) 5230.4 and to be assured of consideration. 5230.5. Acq. and Oper.—Burlington Northern, 2 S.T.B. 673 Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) (1997), reconsideration denied, STB Finance Docket Type of Review: Revision. No. 33389 (STB served May 13, 1998), pet. for Title: Applciations for Tobacco OMB Number: 1520–0001. judicial review dismissed sub nom. The Land Products and for Cigarette papers and Form Number: BEP 5283. Conservancy of Seattle and King County v. S.T.B., 238 F.3d 429 (9th Cir. 2000). If Almono elects to Tubes. Type of Review: Extension. file for abandonment authority, it must submit Description: The forms are used by Title: Owner’s Affidavit of Partial evidence showing that abandonment of the line is the tobacco industry members to obtain Destruction of Mutilated Currency. warranted under the Board’s statutory authority and and amend permits necessary to engage Description: The Office of Currency rules, and must, under these circumstances, Redemption and Destruction Standards, demonstrate (e.g., by providing the parties’ in business as a manufacturer of tobacco agreement or a statement from MetalTech) that the products, importer of tobacco products, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, interests of the shipper here will be protected. or proprietor of a export warehouse. requests owners of partially destroyed

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices 61953

U.S. currency to complete a notarized ADDRESSES: You should direct Washington, DC 20503, or e-mail to affidavit (Form BEP 5283) for each claim comments to: [email protected]. submitted when submitted when OCC: Public Information Room, Office FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You substantial portions of notes are of the Comptroller of the Currency, can request additional information from: missing. Mailstop 1–5, Attention: 1557–0160, Respondents: Individuals or OCC: Jessie Dunaway, OCC Clearance 250 E Street, SW., Washington, DC households. Officer, (202) 874–4824, or Camille Estimated Number of Respondents: 20219. Due to delays in the OCC’s Dixon, (202) 874–5090, Legislative 300. mail service since September 11, and Regulatory Activities Division, Estimated Burden Hours Per 2001, commenters are encouraged to Office of the Comptroller of the Response: 36 minutes. submit comments by fax or e-mail. Currency, 250 E Street, SW., Frequency of Response: On occasion. Comments may be sent by fax to (202) Washington, DC 20219. Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 874–4448, or by e-mail to FDIC: Tamara Manly, Management 180 hours. [email protected]. You Analyst, (202) 898–7453, Legal Clearance Officer: Pam Corsini, (202) can inspect and photocopy the Division, Federal Deposit Insurance 874–2647, Bureau of Engraving and comments at the OCC’s Public Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Printing, Room 3.2.C, Engraving and Information Room, 250 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20429. Printing Annex, 14th and C Streets, Washington, DC 20219. You can make OTS: Marilyn K. Burton, Clearance SW, Washington, DC 20228. an appointment to inspect the Officer, (202) 906–6467, Regulations OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, comments by calling (202) 874–5043. and Legislation Division, Chief (202) 395–7860, Office of FDIC: Tamara Manly, Management Counsel’s Office, Office of Thrift Management and Budget, Room Analyst, Legal Division, Room MB– Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., 10202, New Executive Office 3109, Attention: Comments/Legal, Washington, DC 20552; by e-mail to Building, Washington, DC 20503. Federal Deposit Insurance [email protected]; or by Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., facsimile transmission to (202) 906– Lois K. Holland, Washington, DC 20429. All comments 6518. Departmental Reports, Management Officer. should refer to ‘‘Community SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 02–24975 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Reinvestment Act Regulation, 3064– Comments: On May 30, 2002, the BILLING CODE 4840–01–P 0092.’’ Comments may be hand- OCC, Board of Governors of the Federal delivered to the guard station at the Reserve Board, FDIC, and OTS rear of the 550 17th Street Building published a joint request for comments DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (located on F Street), on business days on the proposed extension, without Office of the Comptroller of the between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. [Fax change, of OMB approval of the Currency number (202) 898–3838; Internet information collections contained in the address: [email protected]]. CRA regulations (67 FR 37915). Office of Thrift Supervision Comments may be inspected and The FDIC and OTS each received an photocopied in the FDIC Public identical comment from the same Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Information Center, Room 100, 801 commenter. This commenter did not 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC object to the proposed extension of Agency Information Collection between 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on OMB approval of the information Activities: Submission for OMB business days. collections contained in the CRA Review; Comment Request OTS: Send comments, referring to the regulations. The commenter recommended that the Agencies (1) AGENCIES: Office of the Comptroller of collection by title of the proposal or by OMB approval number to continue all existing data collection and the Currency (OCC) and Office of Thrift reporting requirements; (2) maintain Supervision (OTS), Treasury; and Information Collection Comments, Chief Counsel’s Office, Office of Thrift current public file requirements; and (3) Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation do not consider or require any race data (FDIC). Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552. Comments under CRA. Since these ACTION: Joint notice and request for may also be sent by fax to (202) 906– recommendations are not contrary to the comment. 6518, or by e-mail to proposed extension of OMB approval of the CRA information collections, the SUMMARY: The OCC, FDIC, and OTS infocollection.comments@ots. (collectively, the Agencies), hereby give treas.gov. OTS will post comments Agencies have not made any changes notice that they are submitting the and the related index on the OTS from the proposal in response to this information collections contained in Internet Site at www.ots.treas.gov. In comment. Title: their respective Community addition, interested persons may OCC: Community Reinvestment Act Reinvestment Act regulations to the inspect comments at the Public Regulation—12 CFR part 25; Office of Management and Budget Reading Room, 1700 G Street, NW., by appointment. To make an FDIC: Community Reinvestment Act; (OMB), in accordance with the OTS: Community Reinvestment Act. appointment, call (202) 906–5922, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 OMB Control Numbers: send an e-mail to U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Agencies may OCC: 1557–0160; not conduct or sponsor, and a [email protected], or send a FDIC: 3064–0092; respondent is not required to respond facsimile transmission to (202) 906– OTS: 1550–0012. to, an information collection unless the 7755. Type of Review: Extension, without information collection displays a OMB Desk Officers for the Agencies: change, of a currently approved currently valid OMB control number. Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., Office of collection. DATES: You should submit your Information and Regulatory Affairs, Form Number: None. comments to the Agencies and the OMB Office of Management and Budget, New Abstract: This submission covers an Desk Officer by November 1, 2002. Executive Office Building, Room 10235, extension of the Agencies’ currently

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 61954 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Notices

approved information collections in Dated: September 25, 2002. Committee for Veterans’ Employment their CRA regulations (12 CFR part 25 Mark J. Tenhundfeld, and Training will meet on Thursday, (OCC), 12 CFR part 345 (FDIC), and 12 Assistant Director, Legislative and Regulatory October 17, 2002, beginning at 9 a.m. at CFR part 563e (OTS)). The submission Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller the U.S. Department of Labor, 200 involves no change to the regulations or of the Currency. Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S– to the information collections. Dated at Washington, DC, this 25th day of 2508, Washington, DC 20210. The Agencies need the information September, 2002. Written comments are welcome and collected to fulfill their obligations Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. may be submitted by addressing them under the CRA (12 U.S.C. 2901 et seq.) Robert E. Feldman, to: Mr. John Muckelbauer, Designated to evaluate and assign ratings to the Executive Secretary. Federal Official, Office of the Assistant performance of institutions, in Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and connection with helping to meet the Dated: September 24, 2002. Training, U. S. Department of Labor, 200 credit needs of their communities, Deborah Dakin, Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S– including low- and moderate-income Deputy Chief Counsel, Regulations and 1325, Washington, DC 20210. neighborhoods, consistent with safe and Legislation Division, Office of Thrift The primary items on the agenda are: sound banking practices. The Agencies Supervision. use the information in the examination [FR Doc. 02–24977 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Discussion of the Transition Assistance process and in evaluating applications BILLING CODE 4810–33–P, 6741–01–P, 6720–01–P Program; for mergers, branches, and certain other Discussion on Licensing and corporate activities. Financial Certification; institutions maintain and provide the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Discussion of other programs and information to the Agencies. activities of interest to the Committee. Affected Public: Businesses or other Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans’ Employment and Training The meeting will be open to the for-profit. public. Estimated Number of Respondents: Persons with disabilities needing OCC: 2,141; Secretary of Labor’s Advisory special accommodations should contact FDIC: 5,484; Committee for Veterans’ Employment and Training; Notice of Open Meeting Mr. John Muckelbauer at telephone OTS: 995. number 202/693–4700 no later than Estimated Annual Responses: The Secretary’s Advisory Committee Wednesday, October 16, 2002. OCC: 2,141; for Veterans’ Employment and Training FDIC: 5,484; was established under section 4110 of Signed at Washington, DC, this September OTS: 995. title 38, United States Code, to bring to 26, 2002. Estimated Annual Burden Hours: the attention of the Secretary, problems Frederico Juarbe, Jr., OCC: 322,307; and issues relating to veterans’ Assistant Secretary of Labor for Veterans’ FDIC: 607,603; employment and training. Employment and Training. OTS: 200,964. Notice is hereby given that the [FR Doc. 02–24997 Filed 10–1–02; 8:45 am] Frequency of Response: Annually. Secretary of Labor’s Advisory BILLING CODE 4510–79–P

VerDate Sep<04>2002 01:09 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02OCN1.SGM 02OCN1 Wednesday, October 2, 2002

Part II

Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

42 CFR Part 457 State Children’s Health Insurance Program; Eligibility for Prenatal Care and Other Health Services for Unborn Children; Final Rule

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61956 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND I. Background income child, and her child would HUMAN SERVICES Section 4901 of the Balanced Budget benefit from needed prenatal care and Act, (Pub. L. 105–33), as amended by delivery services by virtue of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Public Law 105–100, added title XXI to mother’s eligibility status, a pregnant Services the Act. Title XXI authorizes the State woman over age 19 could not be eligible Children’s Health Insurance Program as a targeted low-income child. 42 CFR Part 457 We stated that the proposed definition (SCHIP) to assist State efforts to initiate would provide States with the option to and expand the provision of child consider an unborn child to be a [CMS–2127–F] health assistance to uninsured, low- targeted low-income child and therefore income children. Under title XXI, States eligible for SCHIP if other applicable RIN 0938–AL37 may provide child health assistance State eligibility requirements are met. primarily for obtaining health benefits This would permit States to ensure that State Children’s Health Insurance coverage through (1) a separate child Program; Eligibility for Prenatal Care needed services are available to benefit health program that meets the unborn children independent of the and Other Health Services for Unborn requirements specified under section Children mother’s eligibility status. We also 2103 of the Act; (2) expanding eligibility discussed in detail the Department’s AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & for benefits under the State’s Medicaid 1999 report, Trends in the Well-Being of Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. plan under title XIX of the Act; or (3) America’s Children and Youth, which a combination of the two approaches. ACTION: Final rule. describes the benefits of prenatal care To be eligible for funds under this for the mother and the child. We stated SUMMARY: In order to provide prenatal program, States must submit a State that our proposed revisions were care and other health services, this final child health plan (State plan), that intended to benefit both the unborn rule revises the definition of ‘‘child’’ meets the applicable requirements of children and their mothers by under the State Children’s Health title XXI and is approved by the promoting continuity of important Insurance Program (SCHIP) to clarify Secretary. medical care. that an unborn child may be considered Benefits under SCHIP are jointly In order to protect against the a ‘‘targeted low-income child’’ by the financed by the Federal and State substitution of title XXI enhanced State and therefore eligible for SCHIP if governments and are administered by payments for Medicaid payments, we other applicable State eligibility the States. Within broad Federal proposed to add a new paragraph (a)(3) requirements are met. Under this guidelines, each State determines the to § 457.626(a), Prevention of duplicate definition, the State may elect to extend design of its program, eligibility groups, payments, to clarify that payment is not eligibility to unborn children for health benefit packages, payment levels for available under title XXI when payment benefits coverage, including prenatal coverage, and administrative and may be reasonably expected to be made care and delivery, consistent with operating procedures. Under section under Medicaid on the basis of the SCHIP requirements. 2102(b) of the Act, States have Medicaid eligibility or enrollment of the discretion to adopt eligibility standards EFFECTIVE DATE: These regulations are pregnant woman. that are related to age, and thus may effective on November 1, 2002. With regard to maintenance of effort extend SCHIP eligibility only to certain requirements, we proposed that if a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: age groups of targeted low-income State elects to include unborn children Kathleen Farrell, (410) 786–1236. children (who must be under age 19). in the SCHIP definition of children, the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies: To SCHIP provides a capped amount of State must also apply that same order copies of the Federal Register funds to States on a matching basis for interpretation in assessing compliance containing this document, send your Federal fiscal years (FY) 1998 through with the Medicaid maintenance of effort request to: New Orders, Superintendent 2007. Regulations implementing SCHIP provision of section 2105(d)(1) of the of Documents, PO Box 371954, are set forth at 42 CFR 457. Act. Specifically, we proposed to revise Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. Specify the § 457.622, Rate of Federal Financial II. Provisions of the Proposed date of the issue requested and enclose Participation (FFP) for State Regulations a check or money order payable to the expenditures, to provide that the State Superintendent of Documents, or On March 5, 2002, we published a does not adopt eligibility standards and enclose your Visa or Master Card proposed rule in the Federal Register methodologies for purposes of number and expiration date. Credit card that proposed to revise the definition of determining a child’s eligibility under orders can also be placed by calling the ‘‘child’’ under the SCHIP program (67 the Medicaid State plan that were more order desk at (202) 512–1800 or by FR 9936). In the interest of providing restrictive than those applied under faxing to (202) 512–2250. The cost for necessary prenatal care and other health policies of the State plan in effect on each copy is $9. As an alternative, you services to children, we proposed to June 1, 1997. This limitation applies can view and photocopy the Federal clarify and expand the definition of the also to more restrictive standards and Register document at most libraries term ‘‘child’’ so that a State may elect methodologies for determining designated as Federal Depository to make individuals in the period eligibility for services for a child based Libraries and at many other public and between conception and birth eligible on the eligibility of a pregnant woman. academic libraries throughout the for coverage under the State plan. We also stated that, a State that country that receive the Federal Specifically, we proposed to revise the defines children under SCHIP to Register. definition at § 457.10 to clarify that include unborn children would need to This Federal Register document is ‘‘child’’ means an individual under the apply the same definition in the screen- also available from the Federal Register age of 19 and may include any period and-enroll process described in SCHIP online database through GPO access, a of time from conception to birth up to regulations at § 457.350, Eligibility service of the U.S. Government Printing age 19. In this rule, we explained that screening and facilitation of Medicaid Office. The Web site address is http:// while a pregnant woman under age 19 enrollment. We proposed to add a new www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html. could be eligible as a targeted low- § 457.350(b)(2) to clarify that screening

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61957

procedures must identify any applicant appropriate legal protection, before as expands them by offering important or enrollee who would be potentially well as after birth. Other commenters health care that may not otherwise be eligible for Medicaid services based on viewed the proposed rule as available to her. the eligibility of his or her mother under empowering lower-income women to In general, patient education literature one of the poverty level groups choose life for their children and affirms that prenatal care benefits both described in section 1902(l) of the Act, enhance their ability to raise their the mother and the unborn child. For section 1931 of the Act, or a Medicaid families with dignity. example, the Web site of the American demonstration project approved under Many commenters expressed College of Obstetricians and section 1115 of the Act. opposing views on this issue, saying Gynecologists (ACOG) provides excerpts We noted that under our proposed that this is an anti-choice proposal from its patient education material. regulation, States would continue to disguised as a health care proposal. ACOG Education Pamphlet AP098— have the authority to set eligibility Commenters considered the proposal as Special Tests for Monitoring Fetal requirements under their State plans, the Administration’s attempt to create Health explains that, ‘‘[e]arly prenatal including age limits so long as the age legal precedent for viewing unborn care gives your doctor a chance to check limit is under 19 years of age. Hence, children as separate physical and legal on your health and the progress of your States would not be required to extend entities, which they believe devalues pregnancy. Based on the results of coverage to this population. States that women as persons and is routine prenatal care, your doctor may opt to extend eligibility to unborn counterproductive to the health and suggest tests to check the health of the children must submit a State plan well being of both women and children. baby. Most of the time, these tests help amendment in accordance with Commenters stated that the underlying assure you and your doctor that all is § 457.60. States can use the preprinted purpose of the proposed rule is to going well. Monitoring helps you and application template for the State advance fetal personhood and deny the your doctor during your pregnancy by Children’s Health Insurance Program, right of every woman to determine the telling more about the well being of the sections 4.1.2 and 4.4, and the direction of her own life. They believe baby. Monitoring may be done during preprinted budget template in the proposed rule would undermine the pregnancy to help assess the health, submitting this State plan amendment. foundation of the right to choose activity level, and growth of the unborn abortion and threatens a woman’s child. Some of the tests used for III. Analysis of and Responses to Public reproductive freedom. They said the monitoring check the movement, Comments proposed rule would lay the legal heartbeat, blood flow, and rate of growth We received and accepted 7,783 groundwork for an adversarial of the unborn child. If so, the baby may comments. The majority of these were relationship between a woman and her need special care or may need to be form letters that were part of write-in unborn child. delivered right away.’’ campaigns. Because of possible residual Commenters expressed the opinion In another article, ‘‘Nutrition During delays in the Washington, DC mail, that the proposed rule is a tactic for Pregnancy,’’ available through the resulting from new security procedures, extending the rights of a person under Medem.com Web site, ACOG explains we accepted comments that were the constitution to an unborn child that, ‘‘[a] balanced diet is a basic part of postmarked up to and including May through the regulatory process as a good health at all times in your life. 13, 2002. All public comments have means of circumventing the legislative During pregnancy, diet is even more been summarized and are discussed in process where it can be debated and important. The foods you eat are the detail in the following discussion. voted on openly by elected main source of the nutrients for your representatives. Many commenters baby. As your baby grows, you will need 1. General Comments considered the proposed rule an attempt more of most nutrients.’’ In this section, we have summarized to provoke controversy over Roe v. This rule reflects the common and responded to general public Wade and provide the groundwork for understanding that prenatal care comments on the program or the having it overturned with the long-term benefits both mother and child and proposed rule as a whole and not to any goal of having abortion declared illegal. therefore does not create tension particular provision of this rule. All Response: CMS does not believe that between them. other public comments are addressed this revised definition of ‘‘child’’ is It is also useful to bear in mind that below in the context of the particular inconsistent with the United Nations these generally are children who will subpart. Declaration on the Rights of the Child or otherwise be eligible for their respective Comment: We received a great with Roe v. Wade. SCHIP program in a State at birth. It number of comments from people who At the core of a number of only makes sense, and indeed is viewed the proposed rule as having a commenters’ arguments against the rule medically obvious that establishing hidden agenda of providing unborn is a fundamental misconception that eligibility during the prenatal stage children with formal legal rights as the this rule would set up an adversarial advances the likelihood of a healthy first step in abolishing abortion. relationship between the mother and pregnancy, healthy birth, and healthy Commenters stated that since the her unborn child that might threaten the life. child in the womb would be recognized mother’s autonomy. Comment: Many of the commenters as a patient, there would never be a case Such reasoning overlooks the reality asserted that if the intent of the where abortion is justified. Another that the SCHIP program is a voluntary proposed regulation is to provide commenter stated that the unborn assistance program that begins when an additional health care to pregnant child’s status as a patient in need of individual applies for the benefit. If the women, it could be done through health care has long enjoyed woman did not want the health existing regulations. Commenters were international recognition and cited the insurance coverage offered by the State’s concerned that the designation of the United Nations Declaration on the SCHIP program, she simply would not unborn child as a child would raise Rights of the Child and the 1990 apply for it or would discontinue her legal and operational issues that would Convention implementing its principles, participation in the program. take years to resolve, resulting in which declared that the child needs This rule, rather than limiting an litigation that would prevent many special safeguards and care, including uninsured woman’s choices in fact pregnant women from receiving needed

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61958 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

health care. For this reason, numerous otherwise be eligible for Medicaid or Barriers to enrollment have been one of commenters recommended the SCHIP. But the Secretary’s ability to the major areas CMS has worked on withdrawal of this rule. One commenter intervene through one mechanism (a with States in recent years. States were mentioned that for States to adopt this waiver) should not be the sole option for given significant flexibility to simplify rule, they would be required to act States and may in fact be an inferior the eligibility process in the SCHIP through their State legislatures to option. Waivers are discretionary on the statute and regulations, and CMS has redefine a ‘‘child’’ as being from part of the Secretary and time limited encouraged States to take similar steps conception through age 19, which while State plan amendments are within the framework of Medicaid would cause enormous tension in State permanent, and are subject to allotment requirements. States have the option to capitals across the country and neutrality. provide presumptive eligibility for unproductive bipartisan politics, which Commenters recognize that certain pregnant women and the Medicaid would not further the health care needs low-income pregnant women are not regulations have mandated of pregnant women or children. currently eligible for coverage under simplification and streamlining of the Since States already have the means either Medicaid or SCHIP. We recognize enrollment process. It is the State’s to cover pregnant women, the that States already have the ability to option how they choose to accomplish commenter urged HHS to facilitate the provide prenatal care to pregnant this. However, administrative process and not complicate it and many women through expanding their title simplification has its limits and cannot commenters stated that they believe the XIX coverage of pregnant women either bridge the eligibility gap as the regulation is unnecessary. As examples, through an amendment to their proposed regulation would. commenters cited the States of New approved State Plan or through a Comment: A commenter noted that Jersey and Rhode Island that have demonstration project under section the unborn child was a feature of the applied for and received section 1115 1115 of the Act. However, States have Medicaid program until 1986 when it waivers to expand coverage to low- been reluctant to do so under the regular was replaced with a coverage category income women. They noted that SCHIP Medicaid match rate. It is the enhanced tied directly to the woman’s pregnancy waivers are relatively easy for States to match under title XXI that has proven status (Pub. L. 99–509, the Budget secure since under the existing SCHIP to be the incentive for States to increase Reconciliation Act of 1986). The waiver program, the Federal government eligibility. commenter considered that option to be does not require ‘‘budget neutrality’’, The approval process for a SCHIP an invaluable means of permitting States can spend additional funds up to demonstration project to extend coverage of certain children whose the State’s unspent SCHIP allotment and coverage to pregnant women under mothers could not for a variety of there is already a template in place to section 1115 is a relatively streamlined reasons qualify for Medicaid coverage. streamline the waiver application process. However, as the commenters The commenter believes that the process. also acknowledge, only five States have recognition of this option in SCHIP at Commenters suggested alternative applied to cover pregnant women least partially restores this State options to HHS rather than (Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, New flexibility, which was lost 16 years ago, implementing the rule that included: Jersey and Rhode Island) of which two and positions State programs to extend use options under Medicaid to provide have been approved as of July 2002 public health insurance to pregnant comprehensive prenatal and pregnancy- (New Jersey and Rhode Island). women who are currently unqualified in related care to women; use the existing States may decide not to pursue this their own right. authority of approving waivers and option because of the local political Response: We appreciate the implement a process for expediting the climate, the need for State legislative commenter’s support and agree that the approval of waiver applications; amend modifications or a variety of other intent of this regulation is to provide the SCHIP statute to provide prenatal reasons. Our regulation is simply an States with flexibility in selecting the care for pregnant women by expanding option to make it faster and easier for options that are available to them in eligibility to the woman rather than to States that want to use SCHIP funds to providing this vital care. the unborn child; and support and work expand prenatal services for low-income The proposed regulation in fact would with the Congress to approve pending women and to do so without having to restore flexibility that the previous legislation that would provide access to go through the 1115 process or wait for Federal policy provided that allowed prenatal care for uninsured women as the passage of legislation. welfare and Medicaid coverage for not- well as additional funding for States. With respect to comments relating to yet-born children. Response: This regulation bridges a potential legislative changes to the As early as 1941, the Bureau of Public gap in eligibility between the Medicaid Medicaid and SCHIP statute, discussion Assistance, a predecessor agency within and the SCHIP programs that has now of such changes are beyond the scope of the Department of Health, Education existed for five years. Members of the this regulation. and Welfare (HEW), determined that Congress have also recognized this gap Comment: One commenter said that unborn children could be covered under and have introduced various pieces of another way the Administration could the Social Security Act of 1935. It was legislation over the years to address this help ensure prenatal care was to change determined that under the Act, Federal gap. The opportunity to expand vital the Medicaid system to make it less funds could be provided to the States health insurance coverage during a confusing and more accessible, by for the aid of unborn children. The critical time is at hand. reducing the complexity of the Agency’s 1946 Handbook of Public We welcome all of these suggestions eligibility process, the burdensome Assistance Administration permitted for expanding health insurance coverage application forms and by addressing the the inclusion of unborn children among and indeed States and the Secretary lack of knowledge surrounding access those eligible for State-plan aid ‘‘on the have already used the flexibility in and other regulatory barriers that basis of the same eligibility conditions current regulations. However, there are prevent women from accessing this as apply to other children.’’ The still gaps. We also welcome support for health care insurance. operating policy remained unchanged the actions of the Secretary in granting Response: Many States in fact have through 1971. The option remained waivers to States that expand eligibility taken action to lower barriers to with State welfare plans to determine for individuals who would not enrollment, renewal, and access. whether to include unborn children as

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61959

dependents. At the time of the needed medical care to those low- warrant the law’s protection. As institution of the Medicaid program, income children and pregnant women examples, the commenters said that many State social service agencies that would otherwise be without health most States allow recovery in one form adopted similar eligibility definitions insurance. or another for prenatal injuries. Thus, for the purposes of qualifying for Response: We agree and appreciate several commenters cited Roe v. Wade, Medicaid under a State plan. The the commenters’ support. 410 U.S. 113, 161–2 (1973) and an approaches were later changed through 2. Definition of Targeted Low-Income article by Paul Benjamin Linton, a decision by the HEW Secretary. While Child Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 13 St. this change was in part a reaction to the Comment: The commenters expressed Louis U. Public Law Rev. 15, 46–64 determination with respect the historic their belief that life begins at conception (1993). Another commenter noted that Aid to Families with Dependent and unborn children are human beings roughly half the States criminalize fetal Children program in Burns v. Alcala, who should be eligible for health care. homicide. Commenters said that unborn 420 U.S. 575 (1975) that States were not The commenters asserted that any children have long been recognized as required to extend eligibility based on threshold for eligibility other than persons for purposes of inheritance, unborn children, this decision is not conception is inevitably arbitrary, Roe, 410 U.S., at 162, and a child applicable to the SCHIP statute and does because conception is the point when unborn at the time of his or her father’s not reflect the congressional intent to an individual human life comes into wrongful death has been held to be provide broad State flexibility under existence. Commenters stated that the among the children for whose benefit a SCHIP to expand the provision of child proposed rule reflects the medical wrongful death action may be brought, health assistance. These precedents are reality that the life of a child begins 22A Am.Jur.2d death § 99 (1988). A important as we look for ways for all before birth at conception, and is commenter cited a Kansas bill (HB2797) women to receive prenatal care. thoroughly consistent with precedent, that would treat a fetus as ‘‘an unborn Comment: A commenter noted that according legal significance to, and child’’ and declare the ‘‘unborn child’’ several States have sought and obtained protecting the life of the unborn child. to be a ‘‘person or human being’’ so as waivers allowing them to provide The commenters stated that the to allow, under State criminal law, SCHIP coverage to unborn children as proposed rule’s definition of ‘‘child’’ is prosecution following the ‘‘death or beneficiaries of SCHIP and felt that this consistent with a vast body of scientific injury of a fetus.’’ (See Hanna, AP/ offers in itself a strong argument for literature, and with modern medical Topeka Capital-Journal, April 2, 2002.) making that inclusion uniform among practice, which recognizes that the life One commenter said that Federal the States and independent of the of a child begins at conception and statute similarly recognizes the unborn waiver process. continues until adulthood. child as a human subject deserving Response: We agree with the The commenters mentioned that the protection from harmful research as commenter, but note that States still statute defines the maximum age of soon as pregnancy is confirmed, 42 retain the option to apply for section eligibility for services as 19, but U.S.C. 289g(b); 45 CFR part 46 §§ 46.203 1115 waivers to provide prenatal specifies no minimum age. Thus, et seq. Therefore, the commenters did coverage to low-income pregnant without this regulatory clarification, it is not consider it to be an innovation to women. possible that many otherwise eligible treat an unborn child as a human Comment: A commenter noted that children would not receive prenatal care individual for the purpose of providing the U.S. House of Representatives also under this program, and might suffer quality prenatal care to the child and his recognizes the value of Secretary severe health consequences as a result. or her mother. Thompson’s decision and has, therefore, Another commenter noted that Response: We appreciate all of the drafted a Congressional Resolution (H.R. Pediatrics, Vol 81, #5, May 1988, p. 736, comments as important contributions to Res. 346) commending the decision to defines commitment to the health of the the public record, which helps shape recognize that pregnant mothers and individual as beginning at conception. the Secretary’s decision-making. We unborn children are deserving of The commenter supported the proposed recognize that while the intent of this concern about their health and well rule based on the importance of rule is to extend health insurance being. Another commenter mentioned ensuring adequate health care for coverage, policy determinations are the bills currently being considered by children, both before and after birth, often carried into other important public the Congress that would allow States to and the health of their mothers. discussions. We agree with these provide low-income women with Response: We appreciate all of the commenters that unborn children are prenatal coverage under SCHIP, comments as important contributions to often recognized for other purposes specifically the ‘‘Start Healthy, Stay the public record, which helps shape under State law, and thus are retaining Healthy Act of 2001 (S. 1016/H.R. 3729), the Secretary’s decision-making. We our revised definition to permit States the ‘‘Mothers and Newborns Health recognize that while the intent of this such an option in administering the Insurance Act of 2001 (S. 724/H.R. rule is to extend health insurance SCHIP program. 2610), and the ‘‘Legal Immigrant coverage, policy determinations are Comment: Commenters said that Children’s Health Improvement Act of often carried into other important public defining unborn children as children is 2001 (S. 582/H.R. 1143) on which the discussions. We agree with these not an appropriate administrative Congress has yet to schedule action. The commenters that conception can be a decision. Commenters considered commenters said that absent the change logical point to recognize a targeted low defining a child in this way to be in statute, they are pleased that, once income child, and thus, we are retaining arbitrary and they asserted that most of finalized, the proposed CMS regulation our revised definition to permit States this country’s population does not agree will allow States to extend coverage to the option in administering the SCHIP with this position. The commenters go pregnant women without delay. program. on to say that this approach will enforce Commenters concluded that extending Comment: Commenters stated that the a minority point of view, is highly eligibility for SCHIP coverage to unborn proposed rule has ample legal political, and is not in the best interests children, including prenatal care and precedent. Outside the abortion context, of women and their children. One delivery, as consistent with SCHIP they stated that unborn children are commenter noted that the government requirements, is the best way to provide often recognized as persons who should not be in the business of

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61960 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

deciding when life begins. Another unborn child are one and not two important medical and ethical issues commenter noted that to define different people. Another commenter raised in the comments existed prior to childhood as beginning at conception is said that the proposed change would the promulgation of the proposed an idea not universally held by religious make an arbitrary separation between a regulation and are resolved separately or medical experts and imposes a woman and her developing unborn from the specific issue of eligibility for particular theological view on the child and goes onto say that such a a publicly funded health insurance American public. Another commenter separation can only be a concept, for the program. Guardianship is established noted that the proposed rule is both unborn child is a functioning part of the through legal proceedings and is cynical and futile given the widespread mother, sharing physical systems. Other unlikely to be an issue in the routine disagreement and confusion about what commenters noted that the unborn child application, enrollment, and constitutes life and when an unborn is a part of the mother’s body that participation process. child becomes a person. They went on cannot survive without the use of the Comment: Commenters discussed the to say that there is no ethical or medical mother’s heart, the mother’s lungs and language of the majority in Roe v. Wade justification for expanding the so forth. The commenters asserted that that they believe clearly States ‘‘the definition of ‘‘child’’ to include the as a society we must allow women to word ‘person’ as used in the 14th unborn under the SCHIP provisions, control their own bodies and not turn Amendment does not include the when all medical services offered to an them into mere holding vessels for an unborn.’’ The commenters asserted that unborn child must be performed on a unborn child. The commenters believe the Administration does not have the pregnant woman. Another commenter that the emphasis should be placed right to reverse this clear and noted that it is inconceivable that a upon the pregnant woman on whom the unambiguous statement unilaterally in a child be defined as ‘‘from conception to unborn child’s health care is completely regulation. The commenters stated that 19 years of age.’’ If all of the world’s dependent. They believe that life begins the unborn child is not recognized as a greatest theologians, sociologists and at birth, not at conception and noted person in our legal system, where scientists and other great minds cannot that defining childhood as beginning at mothers and fathers are responsible for determine when life begins, the conception is not an idea universally decision making when it comes to commenter asserted, then DHHS held by religious or medical experts. health care for their offspring. certainly cannot. Another commenter Response: We appreciate all of the Response: While we understand the expressed concern that these rules have comments as important contributions to views of the commenters, we do not the hidden agenda of attempting to the public record, which helps shape believe that limiting the definition of define ‘‘when life beings’’—a deeply the Secretary’s decision-making. We child is consistent with the flexibility divisive issue around which the recognize that while the intent of this that Congress accorded to States under American public has not achieved rule is to extend health insurance the SCHIP statute. We believe that the consensus. The commenter stated that coverage, policy determinations are range of comments supports our view the fact of existence outside the body of often carried into other important public that States should have the option to its mother has consistently been the discussions. We disagree with these include unborn children as eligible point at which legal personhood commenters that extending SCHIP targeted low income children. We are (including the ability to receive benefits) eligibility to unborn children would therefore retaining a revised definition has been distinguished from the unborn work to the disadvantage of, or devalue that permits States maximum flexibility child, which is not yet a legal person. the role of, the mother. Indeed, we in extending SCHIP eligibility. The commenter believes that changing believe the extension of SCHIP We appreciate all of the comments as this understanding by an executive eligibility will be in the best interest of important contributions to the public department must inevitably lead to both mother and child, and thus are record, which helps shape the Constitutional challenges. retaining our revised definition to Secretary’s decision-making. We Response: We appreciate all of the permit States such an option in recognize that while the intent of this comments as important contributions to administering the SCHIP program. rule is to extend health insurance the public record, which helps shape Comment: Two commenters asked coverage, policy determinations are the Secretary’s decision-making. We what the status of zygotes held in often carried into other important public recognize that while the intent of this infertility clinics would be. They asked discussions. rule is to extend health insurance if such clinics would be faced with Comment: Commenters asked if coverage, policy determinations are criminal suits for the practice of defining the unborn child as a person often carried into other important public destroying embryos? Another means that we will restructure the discussions. We disagree with these commenter asked why sperm are not National Census and tax forms to commenters’ contention that there is classified as children so sexually active include this new population of citizens? only one appropriate interpretation of men could receive funding to maintain They asked if we will rethink our the statutory term at issue, and we the health of their sperm. The welfare policies to consider unborn believe the range of comments supports commenters asked who will arbitrate children in deciding an individual’s or our view that States should have the when a third party decides the interests family’s benefits? Commenters option to include unborn children as of the woman conflict with those of the expressed concern that the proposed eligible targeted low income children. unborn child she is carrying? And, will rule will lay the legal groundwork for an We are therefore retaining a revised the State decide whether to save the life adversarial relationship between a definition that does not attempt to of the mother or her unborn child? woman and her unborn child by define when life begins but permits Commenters also asked if another defining the unborn child as a person, States maximum flexibility in extending person could be appointed the guardian who would then have full legal status, SCHIP eligibility. of an unborn child? equal to that of the woman. A Comment: The commenters said that Response: While the questions raised commenter noted that an unborn child in their view, unborn children are not by the commenters are interesting, they is not given a social security number; it children who should be deemed eligible are well beyond the issue of providing is not a Medicaid beneficiary; pregnant for health care. The commenters stated eligibility under a publicly funded women do not receive an exemption on that until birth occurs, mother and the health insurance program. The their income taxes for the unborn child;

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61961

and census-takers count only born Response: As previously mentioned, regarding the age determination as post- individuals. recognition of the unborn child in birth. Commenters asserted that the Response: These comments extend Federal assistance programs can be Congress does not mention care for beyond the scope of this regulation, traced back more than half a century. unborn children in SCHIP and that, by which concerns only the ability of Currently some Federally funded omission, Congress has spoken on this States to extend SCHIP eligibility to programs such as Medicaid include, (or issue. Commenters cited Chevron v. unborn children, and would not change as in SCHIP, provide States with the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. any other Federal programs. The only option to include), the unborn child in et al., for the proposition that, in government forms affected are those the size of a family for purposes of constructing a statute, primary weight directly connected to the SCHIP determining eligibility for members of must go to whether Congress has spoken program. that family. Eligibility for some families on the issue and only when Congress Comment: Commenters expressed may indeed rest on counting the unborn has not spoken is weight given to a concern that for women of color, child. permissible agency construction of the distinguishing the needs of the unborn Comment: The commenter stated that statute.’’ Commenters cited State of child from those of the mother has more in numerous cases related to child abuse Wyoming v. United States of America et than once resulted in adverse statutes, courts have ruled that the term al., 279 F. 3d 1214, 1230 (10th Cir. consequences for the mother. The ‘‘child’’ does not include ‘‘unborn 2002) and said the ‘‘question of whether commenters referred to Ferguson v. City children’’ and as such, this rule’s Federal law authorized certain Federal of Charleston, 532 U.S. 67 (2001), where ‘‘clarification’’ is without merit. In agency action is one of congressional the Supreme Court considered issues support of this argument, the intent.’’ The commenters asserted that it related to a South Carolina hospital that, commenter cited U.S. v. Spencer, 839 cannot be assumed that the Congress pursuant to State law, reported women, F.2d 1341 (9th Cir. 1988) in which the would have intended ‘‘child’’ to mean a all of color, to the police because her defendant’s infliction of injuries on an fertilized egg, embryo or fetus unless it unborn child in the third trimester or unborn child, who was born alive, but had been explicitly discussed. As an her newborn tested positive for drugs. died as a result of such injuries, was example, commenters cited State v. Consequently, the commenters asked us within the Federal statutory definition Ashley, 701 So.2d 338, 342–43 (Fla. to reconsider the definition in this rule. of murder. The commenter mentioned 1997) (rejecting homicide prosecution of Response: We appreciate all of the that the key to the holding in that case a woman who shot herself in the comments as important contributions to was that the unborn child was born abdomen while pregnant, causing the public record, which helps shape alive. Under the Uniform Code of premature birth and the subsequent the Secretary’s decision-making. We Military Justice, the term ‘‘human death of her unborn child). recognize that while the intent of this being’’ was defined as a child that was The commenters stated that in the rule is to extend health insurance ‘‘born alive.’’ U.S. v. Nelson, 53 M.J. 319 months leading up to the creation of the coverage, policy determinations are (U.S. Armed Forces, 2000). Moreover, in SCHIP program there was extensive often carried into other important public numerous other cases, courts have held discussion in the Congress about the discussions. that the term ‘‘child’’ contained in a need for a comprehensive children’s While we understand the State’s child abuse statute does not health insurance program. And, the commenters’ concern, we do not agree include ‘‘unborn children.’’ As an commenters said that when describing that extending SCHIP eligibility to example, commenters cited In re the problem of uninsured children, the unborn children would work to the Unborn Child, 18 P.3d342 (Okla.2001) very first statistic Senator Daschle used disadvantage of, or devalue the role of, (holding fetus is not a ‘‘child’’ for was that ‘‘[e] very 48 seconds a child is the mother. Indeed, we believe the purposes of State children’s code); State born without insurance’’ [emphasis extension of SCHIP eligibility will be in v. Dunn, 916 P.2d 952 (Wash. Ct. added]. Commenters mentioned that in the best interest of both mother and App.1996) (dismissing child the House, Congresswoman Furse child. Furthermore, we believe that it is mistreatment charges, finding that the promoted as a model an Oregon policy consistent with congressional intent to legislature did not intend to include that ‘‘cover[ed] a child from birth to 18 provide broad State flexibility under unborn children within the scope of the years.’’ The commenters asserted that SCHIP to expand the provision of child term ‘‘child,’’ which was defined as a not once in the legislative history does health assistance. ‘‘person under eighteen years of age’’); the Congress mention including fetuses Comment: Commenters stated that Reinesto v. Superior Court, 894 P.2d or embryos as beneficiaries of a language in SCHIP suggests that the 733, 735 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995) (ordinary children’s health insurance program, term ‘‘child’’ does not include an meaning of ‘‘child’’ does not include and the problems it identified were unborn child because the statute makes ‘‘activity that affects fetuses’’); State v. problems afflicting children, not reference to the State in which the child Gray, 584 N.E. 2d 710, 711-713 (Ohio embryos and fetuses. Commenters ‘‘resides,’’ 42 U.S.C. section. 1992) (same). continued, that when the Congress 1397jj(b)(1)(ii)(III). Commenters asserted Response: We recognize there is not a spoke of the need for health insurance that in ordinary usage, an unborn child single, uniform standard for treating an for prenatal care, ‘‘uninsured pregnant is not considered to have a unborn child under all State and women were specifically mentioned.’’ ‘‘reside[nce].’’ And, the commenters Federal statutes. We do not agree with The commenters continued by stating continued that Federal courts have the commenter’s basic premise that the that an examination of the Congress’ ruled that in other Federal benefits interpretation of the term ‘‘child’’ under intent in passing the SCHIP statute programs, including AFDC and SCHIP must be controlled by the demonstrates that the Secretary’s action Medicaid, that the term ‘‘child’’ does interpretation of that term under other, in promulgating this rule is ultra vires. not include a fetus. Therefore, the unrelated statutes that deal with They asserted that although the commenters asserted, the same criminal issues or other purposes. Thus Secretary’s interpretation of the term reasoning applies here, and it is clear we are retaining our revised definition ‘‘child’’ is consistent with a possible that the Congress did not intend the in this final rule. legal meaning of the word, it is entirely phrase ‘‘individual under 19 years of Comment: Commenters stated their inconsistent with the legislative history age’’ to include the ‘‘unborn.’’ belief that the statutory language is clear and the structure of the legislation.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61962 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

First, they asserted, there is no evidence taken out of context. The argument that (E.D.N.Y.1991), aff’d on other grounds, from any of the Congressional debates Congress explicitly used the term 965 F.2d 1206 (2d Cir. 1992), the on the SCHIP statute that the Congress ‘‘unborn child’’ in a number of Federal district concluded that fetuses intended to extend SCHIP benefits to legislative enactments and did not do so are not eligible for Medicaid. 794 F. include ‘‘unborn children.’’ And, they in SCHIP goes both ways, because while Supp.at 1198. Commenters stated that it stated, it seems unlikely that the Congress did not expressly include held that in all events, the phrase Congress would have intended the unborn children, Congress did not ‘‘individuals under the age of 21’’ does statute to cover this group unless it had exclude them either. Instead, Congress not easily apply to unborn children been explicitly discussed. clearly sought to provide a maximum under ordinary usage. The unborn are The commenters argued that this is level of State flexibility under SCHIP. not ‘‘persons’’ under the Constitution. further supported by the fact that the Thus we do not see a compelling reason Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. Congress deliberately chose to include to change our proposed interpretation in 705, 35 L. Ed.2d 147 (1973). ‘‘well-baby and well-child care’’ in the this final rule. In addition, one commenter noted list of benefits that must be included in The reference to ‘‘well child’’ benefits that the ‘‘age’’ of any individual is a basic benefit package to determine in the statute simply means that the normally computed from birth. The actuarial equivalence under SCHIP. If Congress chose to specify some benefits commenter asserted that while the the Congress had intended that the rather than others as it gave States wide statute does not require calculation of children covered by this statute would latitude and broad authority to establish the precise age ‘‘under 21,’’ it is include ‘‘unborn children’’ then what benefits would be offered to those apparent that any construction of the including these specific benefits would enrolled in the program. The suggestion phrase ‘‘individuals under the age of have been unnecessary. The that the Congress limited benefits to 21,’’ which will accommodate the commenters said that it seems unlikely those expressly defined is wrong as unborn is not ordinary usage. that coverage for unborn children was indicated by the language of section Accordingly, this commenter concluded intended because it was not included on 2103 (c)(3), ‘‘Nothing in this subsection that the Congress did not intend the the list. shall be construed as preventing a State phrase ‘‘individuals under the age of Furthermore, the commenters noted child health plan from providing 21’’ to include the unborn. that the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 coverage of benefits that are not within Other commenters asserted that the (BBA), contains other sections that a category of services described in same reasoning applies here: under explicitly use the term ‘‘unborn child.’’ paragraph (1) or (2).’’ Furthermore, the ordinary rules of statutory construction, Title IV of that Act amended sections of definition of ‘‘child health assistance’’ at it is clear that the Congress did not the Medicare and Medicaid statutes to section 2110(a)(9) expressly includes intend the phrase ‘‘individual under 19 define the term ‘‘emergency medical prenatal care. years of age,’’ within the meaning of the condition’’ as a medical condition The construction of title XXI is a SCHIP statute, to include the ‘‘unborn.’’ which ‘‘place[es] the health of the broad delegation of authority to the For this reason, commenters asserted individual) or, with respect to a Secretary and the States. The Congress that the Secretary lacks the authority to pregnant woman, the health of the considered various forms of expanding promulgate the proposed regulation. woman or her unborn child) in serious health insurance including one limited The commenters contended that the jeopardy. BBA of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105– solely to the expansion of Medicaid. definition can only be changed by 33, §§ 4001, 4704, 111 Stat. 251, 290, The Congress chose not to duplicate the amending the current statute and that is 496 (1997) (codified as amended at 42 Medicaid program, but rather far beyond the reach of the Department. U.S. C. § 1395w-22(d)(3)(B)(i) and 42 constructed a program that left a great The commenters went onto say that U.S.C. 1396u-2(b)(2)(C)(i)) [emphasis deal of authority up to the Secretary and what the Department calls a added]. the States to design eligibility and ‘‘clarification’’ of the definition is an The commenters asserted that if the benefits. attempt to change what the Congress Congress intended to include a fetus as Comment: Commenters stated that no intended to include in the definition of a ‘‘child’’ eligible for SCHIP, it would regulation or Federal statute currently child for the purposes of SCHIP have explicitly used the term ‘‘unborn on the books treats the unborn child as eligibility. child’’ in this section of the Act as it did the equivalent of a person and no Response: As noted above, the SCHIP in the Medicare and Medicaid sections Federal regulation should do so. The statute is silent on the issue of eligibility of the same statute. The proposed commenters asserted that the SCHIP for unborn children, and we do not amendment to the SCHIP regulations is statute nowhere states or suggests that believe that the interpretation of the therefore unauthorized. The ‘‘child’’ as used in the statute includes term ‘‘child,’’ is appropriately commenters concluded by stating that a fetus and they asserted that defining controlled by the cases cited, which the proposed change appears to use a a ‘‘child’’ to include a fetus is involved other programs and situations. rule change to advance an ideological inconsistent with the plain and ordinary We believe instead that Congress had a position on the ‘‘personhood’’ of an meaning of the term. broader purpose under title XXI, which unborn ‘‘ a position never contemplated Commenters mentioned that Federal included maximizing State flexibility in by the Congress during debate on this courts have been asked to rule on offering access to child health assistance program. whether AFDC and Medicaid apply to under SCHIP. Response: We do not believe that fetuses and in both contexts, Federal There is little doubt that the purpose Congress directly spoke to the issue of courts have concluded that the term of title XXI is to provide access to health whether the term ‘‘child’’ could include ‘‘child’’ does not include a fetus. In insurance. This regulation would unborn children, because the statute Burns v. Alcala, 420 U.S. 575 (1975), the provide eligibility at an earlier point in contains no limitation on such an Supreme Court held that the term time that is also one of the most critical interpretation. We believe the ‘‘dependent child,’’ as used in the AFDC times in the lifecycle. commenters effectively conceded that statute, does not include ‘‘unborn The statute clearly established an age point by focusing on congressional children.’’ 420 U.S. at 580–81. Likewise, ceiling of 19 that could not be silence and raising peripheral issues the commenters asserted, in Lewis v. circumvented absent a waiver. However, and statements by individual legislators Grinker, 794 F. Supp. 1193 other broad eligibility standards were

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61963

left to the States. A State has the precisely the contrary. One commenter controversies over religious authority or authority to target to different ages mentioned that forcing people to dogma.’’ Smith, supra at 877. below age 19. For example, Federal proceed against their religious beliefs in Response: Application for SCHIP statute requires Medicaid eligibility at order to access a public benefit is almost benefits is voluntary, and there is 133 percent of the Federal poverty level certainly illegal and to dangle prenatal nothing in the SCHIP statute that forces up to age 6. After age 6, the Federal care in front of needy women who do a mother to accept SCHIP benefits. minimum is 100 percent of poverty. To not happen to share a particular While it is certainly possible that fill the gap in Medicaid eligibility, a religious viewpoint would not only be acceptance of SCHIP benefits for an State could have used the enhanced illegal, it would be morally unborn child may be contrary to some funding provided by title XXI and reprehensible. women’s religious beliefs, we do not designed their SCHIP program to simply In support of this position, one of the believe this should preclude States from cover children at 133 percent of poverty commenters stated that the Supreme offering such benefits. If a woman has between the ages of 6 and 19. Court found as much in the seminal a religious objection, she simply would A State could target resources to case of Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 not accept SCHIP benefits. younger children as an early childhood (1963), while more recently holding that Comment: Commenters stated that by development program and thus create a State may deny unemployment establishing eligibility benefits from the an eligibility category at higher income benefits for illegal conduct, even if that point of conception, a woman’s right to levels specifically for infants and conduct is religiously motivated. make decisions about her health care is children up to age 4 for example. The commenter continued by saying, undermined. The commenters pointed Many commenters who oppose this that the free exercise of religion means, out that the U.S. Supreme Court has rule have indicated their belief that the first and foremost, the right to believe consistently ruled that women’s health Secretary does have authority to extend and profess whatever religious doctrine interests may not be supplanted by State eligibility to a pregnant woman who is one desires. Thus, the commenter or fetal health interests and cited the over the age limit set by statute and asserted that the First Amendment following cases: in Stenberg v. Carhart, indeed have indicated support for such obviously excludes all ‘‘governmental the Court struck down a State law a waiver. We believe the Secretary’s regulation of religious beliefs as such’’ imposing government restrictions on authority extends to the adoption of and cited Sherbert v. Verner, supra, at abortion that failed to provide an definitions through the rulemaking 402. The commenter asserted that the adequate exception for preservation of process. government may not compel affirmation the woman’s health; and in Colautti v. Comment: One commenter suggested of religious belief, and cited several Franklin, the Court invalidated a statute that the Secretary might be exceeding cases in support of this argument, that failed to guarantee that a woman’s his authority by applying the revised including Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. health would always prevail over the SCHIP definition of child in assessing 488 (1961), United States v. Ballard, 322 life and health of her unborn child. compliance with the Medicaid U.S. 78, 86–88 (1944), McDaniel v. Paty, The commenters believe that this rule maintenance of effort provision of 435 U.S. 618 (1978); Fowler v. Rhode opens up the possibility for the section 2105(d)(1), as stated in the Island, 345 U.S. 67, 69 (1953); cf. Larson government or others to claim the right preamble to the proposed rule at 67 FR v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 245 (1982), to represent such fetal interests, and 9938. Presbyterian Church in U.S. v. Mary thus the right to make decisions about Response: We disagree with the Elizabeth Blue Hull Memorial a woman’s pregnancy over her commenter because we believe the Presbyterian Church, 393 U.S. 440, 445– objections. The commenters asserted Secretary’s authority clearly extends to 452 (1969); Kedroff v. St. Nicholas that amending the definition of a the interpretation of statutory terms Cathedral, 344 U.S. 94, 95–119 (1952); covered ‘‘child’’ to include ‘‘the period such as the SCHIP term ‘‘child.’’ Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese1 v. from conception to birth,’’ thereby Furthermore, in this instance, we have Milivojevich, 426 U.S. 696, 708–725 allowing health insurance coverage for a used rulemaking procedures to ensure (1976), Employment Div. of Oregon v. zygote, embryo and fetus in utero has that we have fully considered the issues. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 877 (1990). legal and practical problems and could We clarify that we interpret the The commenter stated that in the actually undermine the health of the maintenance of effort provision at Sherbert case, a person was denied pregnant woman. The commenters 2105(d)(1) for purposes of the SCHIP unemployment benefits on the basis of stated that current constitutional statute statute, consistent with our overall work related misconduct because she allows States to place limited definition of the term ‘‘child.’’ Thus, refused to work on her Sabbath. The restrictions on a woman’s access to because a State may extend SCHIP Court ruled that forcing a person to abortion, but a pregnant woman holds eligibility to unborn children, we will choose between following her religious an absolute right to make decisions review compliance with SCHIP beliefs and receiving a public benefit about her pregnancy during the first maintenance of effort provisions by violates the First Amendment, and in trimester, including decisions about her including unborn children in our the absence of criminal behavior, that health care. review. The provision at issue is a remains the statute today. The commenters believe the proposed SCHIP provision, and it ensures that The commenter contended that the regulation is inconsistent with the SCHIP funds will not be used to replace regime proposed by CMS will confront constitutionally protected right of a Medicaid coverage. many pregnant women with just such a woman to determine the course of her Comment: Commenters stated that by choice in that they must either be pregnancy. defining an egg as a child and willing to publicly declare the unborn Response: As stated previously, consequently, when life begins, DHHS child they are carrying to be a human enrollment and participation in the is imposing a religious belief on all being, even if their religion teaches SCHIP program is voluntary. There is no women. The commenters stated that for them otherwise, or they must forego conflict as the services to be provided each group of people whose religion perhaps prenatal care and delivery benefit both mother and child. teaches them that an unborn child is a services. The commenter asserted that Comment: One commenter stated that child at any stage of development, there CMS would be attempting to ‘‘lend its the term ‘‘conception’’ should be is another whose religion teaches them power to one or the other side in understood to mean at the time of

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61964 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

fertilization when the new genetically program. States have discretion to program must be redetermined at the complete and unique individual begins determine whose income shall be end of the eligibility period adopted by his or her existence. The commenter considered in determining a child’s the State. Between regularly scheduled said it would be good to define clearly eligibility. Similarly, States have broad redeterminations, States are not what is meant by ‘‘conception’’ since discretion on whether to have a resource required to reevaluate a child’s there are other potentially confusing test for their separate child health continued eligibility, regardless of definitions being used. program and, if so, whose resources to changes in circumstances (other than Response: We do not generally believe count. Thus, in the example cited by the child turning 19). there is any confusion about the term one commenter, a State could opt to Under this regulation, the term ‘‘conception.’’ To the extent that there count the income and/or resources of a ‘‘targeted low-income child’’ is defined is, however, we believe States should pregnant teen’s parents in determining to include an unborn child, who have flexibility to adopt any reasonable eligibility. However, it is not required to otherwise meets the State’s income definition of that term. do so. eligibility criteria. Thus, whatever There are no Federal child support 3. Program Eligibility period of eligibility the State has enforcement requirements for separate adopted for children covered under its Comment: Several commenters asked child health programs. Thus, while separate child health program also about when coverage of the unborn States can impose such requirements, would apply to an unborn child. Birth child would begin, given the logistical they are not required to do so. in and of itself does not alter the baby’s difficulties in establishing the exact date Comment: One commenter asked status as a ‘‘targeted low-income child.’’ of conception. These commenters also whether the baby would be eligible for Thus, once born, the infant would asked whether or not the pregnancy a year of presumptive eligibility. remain eligible for coverage under the would need to be medically verified, Response: In general, infants born to separate child health program until the and whether coverage could be mothers who were eligible for and next regularly scheduled retroactive to the date of conception. receiving Medicaid at the time of the redetermination. Response: Under title XXI, States have infant’s birth automatically are eligible For example, suppose that a State has discretion in adopting administrative for Medicaid for one year. It is unclear adopted a 12-month eligibility period procedures regarding eligibility for whether this commenter is asking if coverage. States, at their option, may babies, who were covered by SCHIP and that an unborn child was elect to offer retroactive coverage or may while in utero, would be covered by this determined eligible for SCHIP three require medical confirmation of the rule, or whether the commenter is months prior to birth. At birth, the pregnancy before any prenatal care asking if such babies would be eligible infant would remain eligible for would be provided. If the application for one year of presumptive eligibility coverage under the State’s separate had been filed prior to such under SCHIP. We will respond to both child health program for 1 year from the confirmation and it turned out that the questions. date of initial eligibility, or, in this case, woman was not pregnant, the costs of Under 42 CFR 457.350(b) regarding nine months from the date of birth. the pregnancy test could be paid as an the SCHIP regulation’s screen and enroll Note that, at any point a parent or administrative cost, at the State’s requirements, if a mother is Medicaid other caretaker has the right to file a option. If the pregnancy were eligible, the unborn child cannot be Medicaid application on behalf of the confirmed, the cost of the pregnancy test eligible for SCHIP. Conversely, if the infant. If such an application were filed, and any prenatal care subsequently unborn child is covered under SCHIP, the State then would be required to provided could be treated as child that means that the State determined, in determine the infant’s eligibility for health assistance. the screening and eligibility process, Medicaid. Comment: One commenter asked that the mother was not eligible for, or Comment: One commenter asked if whether Medicaid rules should be receiving, Medicaid. Accordingly, the the continuous eligibility afforded to applied to SCHIP. A few commenters automatic one-year eligibility enjoyed pregnant women by Medicaid ‘‘ under asked about whose income would be by infants born to mothers on Medicaid which pregnant women retain eligibility used to determine the unborn child’s would not apply to infants covered by for the duration of their pregnancy and eligibility. One specifically asked SCHIP while in utero. postpartum period regardless of changes whether States would need the mother’s If a State has adopted presumptive in income—would be available to income and resource information. eligibility for its separate child health unborn children eligible for SCHIP Another asked whether income from the program, an unborn child could be under this regulation. parents of an unwed pregnant teen determined to be presumptively eligible, Response: No. As explained above, living at home should be counted, as to the same extent as any other child, Medicaid rules do not apply to separate would be the case if the teenager were consistent with the regulations at 42 child health programs. However, as also applying for coverage as a pregnant CFR 457.355. However, presumptive explained above, under current woman under Medicaid. This eligibility cannot be applied to a child regulations at 42 CFR 457.320(e)(2), commenter also asked whether child once the child has been determined to States can adopt continuous eligibility support enforcement requirements be eligible for coverage under SCHIP. for children eligible for their separate apply to the unborn child or to the This basic principle is true for a child child health program, with an eligibility mother. determined eligible for coverage while period of up to 12 months. A child’s Response: Medicaid eligibility rules in utero, as well as one who is first eligibility must be redetermined at the only apply when a State has determined eligible after birth. end of the eligibility period adopted by implemented its SCHIP through a This does not mean, however, that an the State. Between regularly scheduled Medicaid expansion program. Medicaid infant eligible in utero loses coverage at redeterminations, States are not eligibility rules do not apply to separate birth. Under current regulations at 42 required to reevaluate a child’s child health programs. States have CFR 457.320(e)(2), States have the continued eligibility, regardless of broad discretion in defining ‘‘family flexibility to establish an eligibility changes in income or other income’’ for purposes of determining period of up to 12 months. A child’s circumstances (other than the child eligibility under a separate child health eligibility for a separate child health turning 19).

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61965

Comment: One commenter asked does not request, let alone require, that States at the Secretary’s discretion on a whether an unborn child could be it do so. case by case basis. As such, eligible for SCHIP if the mother is not Therefore, we do not anticipate that consideration of this eligibility group eligible for Medicaid because she does an unborn child that is determined to be could be considered for inclusion in an not satisfy the State’s residency eligible for coverage under a separate existing waiver but a sufficient rationale requirement. child health program would be given a would need to be provided by the State. Response: Subject to the provisions of SSN. Consequently, it will be necessary Also, it may not make sense to include 42 CFR 457.320(d), States may establish for States to assign a unique identifier this group, as in the case of family residency requirements for their to appropriately process claims. The planning waivers, for example. separate child health programs. An mechanism used to assign the identifier Comment: Two commenters said that application for an unborn child for this is left to the discretion of each State. all States should be required to cover program would be treated the same as The data collection and reporting the unborn child. any other application for coverage. requirements for separate child health Response: We cannot require States to Thus, it also would be subject to the programs are set forth at 42 CFR subpart cover unborn children. The statute does residency requirements established by G. Regulations governing payment for not require that States cover all children the State. and verification of services provided are who meet the definition of a targeted Comment: One commenter asked found at 42 CFR 457.950 and 42 CFR low-income child. Section 2102(b)(1) of whether States would need the mother’s 457.980. States are required to comply the Act and implementing regulations at social security number (SSN). with these requirements with respect to 42 CFR 457.320(a)(2) specifically permit Response: States are not permitted to coverage of all enrolled individuals. States to adopt eligibility standards require the SSN of anyone, other than This rule does not impose any based on age. Thus, we are precluded the child applying for coverage, as a additional requirements on States with from mandating that all States cover unborn children. condition of eligibility. This rule does respect to services provided to an not change that situation. Thus, States unborn child. 4. Immigration Status Comment: In the March 5, 2002 may not require that the unborn child’s proposed rule, we explained that this Comment: Commenters stated that the mother provide her SSN. However, regulation will give States the option to proposed regulations do not address States would likely assign a unique consider an unborn child to be a how the unborn child will be classified identifier to every unborn child that is targeted low-income child and therefore in determining its citizenship or found eligible for coverage and enrolled eligible for SCHIP ‘‘if other applicable immigration status. Many commenters in a separate child health program in eligibility criteria are met.’’ One urged the Department to make clear in order to perform normal administrative commenter asked whether the ‘‘other the final rule that unborn children will functions. The mechanism used to eligibility criteria’’ applies to the unborn be eligible for SCHIP benefits under the assign such an identifier is left to the child or the pregnant woman. rule, regardless of the immigration discretion of each State. Response: The ‘‘other eligibility status of their mothers. The commenters As in current practice, a State may criteria’’ pertain to the unborn child. asserted that since no unborn child is a request the pregnant woman’s SSN as Comment: One commenter citizen or a qualified immigrant, there is long as the State makes it clear for what emphasized the importance of the no basis for making distinctions among purpose her SSN would be used; and screen and enroll requirements. unborn children on nationality and that she is not required to provide her Response: We agree with the immigration status grounds. SSN and that eligibility will not be commenter that the screen and enroll Commenters stated that low-income affected if she does not do so. requirements are very important. As we pregnant women who are either recent Comment: One commenter asked explained in the March 5, 2002 legal immigrants (subject to the 5 year whether either parent would be able to proposed rule, the purpose of the rule bar on receipt of Federal public benefits) submit an application on behalf of the is to encourage States to increase the or are undocumented immigrants are unborn child. availability of prenatal care. In order to often unable to secure prenatal care, and Response: Under title XXI of the ensure that funding for prenatal care such an exclusion is likely to result in Social Security Act, States have broad under SCHIP does not replace funding serious harm to the unborn child. discretion to adopt administrative for prenatal care under Medicaid, we Yet, commenters noted, the babies procedures governing the filing and explained that States must apply the born to these women in the United processing of applications. Thus, States screen and enroll process described in States will become citizens immediately can, but are not required, to place the SCHIP regulations at 42 CFR upon their birth. Commenters asserted restrictions on who can file an 457.350. Consistent with the terms of that effective health care for these application on behalf of a child. There that regulation, States must screen the children, no less than others, must begin is nothing in this regulation, however, unborn child’s mother for Medicaid with access to prenatal care. In addition, that would permit any individual to eligibility. If the State determines that this would provide effective coverage compel another to seek or use health the mother is potentially eligible for for the maximum number of unborn care services. Medicaid, then the State must assist her children. One commenter noted that the Comment: A few commenters asked in completing the Medicaid application proposed regulation would permit whether an unborn child would have to process, again, consistent with the States to ensure that essential prenatal be issued a SSN or other unique requirements set forth in 42 CFR services are available ‘‘to benefit unborn identifier. These commenters also asked 457.350. children regardless of the mother’s what method the State would use to Comment: One commenter asked eligibility status.’’ (67 FR 9937) The track services provided to the unborn whether a State could include this commenter noted that this position is child. group in an existing Medicaid waiver, consistent with existing statute and Response: We are not aware of any such as the family planning and Healthy practice since many children whose circumstances in which the Social Start waivers. parents would not be eligible for SCHIP Security Administration assigns a SSN Response: Section 1115 waivers are are currently enrolled in the SCHIP to an individual prior to birth. This rule demonstration projects awarded to program. These include children whose

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61966 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

parents are subject to the 5-year bar. The services for prenatal care to the Response: We agree that it is does not commenter states that with the immigration status of the mother. make sense to try to impute an exception of income available to the We do not, however, believe that it is immigration status to an unborn child child, parents’ eligibility for SCHIP is necessary to explicitly amend the based on the status of the mother. As irrelevant. They noted that SCHIP proposed rule to express this discussed above, an unborn child is not eligibility is based upon the age, interpretation of applicable law. Since an alien, and the status of the child is immigration status, insurance coverage unborn children would not be not necessarily tied to the status of the and other factors specific to the child. precluded from receiving benefits under mother. Moreover, to do so would not 42 U.S.C. 1397bb(b)(1)(A); 42 CFR applicable law, there is no reason to be consistent with the purpose of 457.320, as amended by interim final further address the issue in the providing States with the flexibility to rule published at 66 FR 33810 (June 25, regulation text. maximize the availability of prenatal 2001). Comment: One commenter noted that care to ensure healthy infants and The commenters stated that HHS the unborn child of an ineligible children. should amend the proposed regulation immigrant woman is indistinguishable Comment: Commenters stated that the to clarify that all unborn children will from that of any other woman present in rule should be clarified to make clear be treated equally for SCHIP eligibility that State. In the real world, upon birth, that undocumented immigrants may not purposes. One commenter specifically that unborn child becomes a child and be reported to immigration authorities requested that we amend § 457.320(b)(6) a U.S. citizen. This commenter asked, for seeking medical care for their unborn children. Commenters were to state that ‘‘In establishing eligibility ‘‘But if CMS adopts a position that standards and methodologies a State concerned that in the absence of such a deems that fetus a ‘‘child’’ in utero, then may not exclude individuals based on protection, undocumented immigrant what possible justification could there citizenship or nationality to the extent mothers may not seek medical care, and be for denying SCHIP benefits to such that the children are U.S. citizens, their unborn children will not receive a ‘‘child’’?’’ Another commenter which includes unborn children from care they need to help ensure a healthy recommended that the proposed conception to birth who upon birth will birth and are entitled to as a U.S. regulation should not be clarified to be U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals or citizen. Commenters stated that since deny coverage to the unborn children of qualified aliens.’’ Commenters the pregnant woman will never be the immigrant women merely because the contended that if the regulation were recipient, it would seem that a State, women would themselves be ineligible adopted, treating all unborn children as pursuant to the ‘‘Tri-Agency Guidance’’ constructively born in the U.S. would be to receive benefits under Federal statute. issued by the Departments of Health and the most straightforward way to This commenter stated that any Human Services and Agriculture (on 9/ accomplish this end and cited Lewis v. clarification of the regulation should 21/00), would be prohibited from Thompson, 252 F.3rd 567, 581 (2d Cir. make explicit that the woman’s inquiring about her immigration status. 2001), (discussing the ‘‘constructive immigration status is irrelevant to the Response: Nothing in this regulation birth’’ provisions of 42 U.S.C. provision of SCHIP benefits. If the alters section 434 of the 1996 welfare 1396d(n)(1)(A), which treats a childless proposed regulation is adopted, there is reform statute, which prohibits the pregnant woman as a parent with one no principal basis on which to Federal government from restricting child for TANF eligibility purposes.) distinguish the unborn children of State or local government entities from Response: We agree with the immigrant women from the unborn sending to or receiving from the commenters that requiring exclusion of children of citizen women. The Immigration and Naturalization Service unborn children on the basis of commenter said that although Federal information regarding the immigration immigration status is neither legally statute provides that ‘‘an alien who is status of an alien in the U.S. Further, mandated nor desirable. Unborn not a qualified alien is not eligible for nothing in this regulation alters the Tri- children do not have immigration status any Federal public benefit * * *’’ 8 Agency Guidance with respect to as ‘‘aliens’’ and thus are not precluded U.S.C. 1611(a), an unborn child has no inquiries about immigration status of from receiving Federal means-tested citizenship or immigration status nonapplicants. benefits under the provisions of Title IV whatsoever, and is therefore not made Comment: The commenter was of the Personal Responsibility and Work ineligible for coverage by reason of 8 concerned about the additional cost of Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 U.S.C. 1611(a) or any other immigration- covering all unborn children conceived (PRWORA), Public Law No. 104–193. related eligibility restriction. The in the United States by illegal immigrant Under PRWORA, these restrictions commenter stated that any exclusion of women. The commenter believes that apply only to ‘‘aliens’’ who are not the unborn children of ineligible under this rule, the unborn child should ‘‘qualified aliens’’; since unborn immigrant women would thus have to be eligible for benefits if (she is children are not ‘‘aliens,’’ they are not be accomplished by altering the conceived in the United States. The within the scope of this preclusion nor proposed regulation to exclude such commenter was concerned that if are unborn children subject to the 5-year unborn children explicitly. The women are permitted to self-declare bar. Furthermore, as we stated in the commenter contended that such a whether conception occurred in United preamble to the proposed rule, the goal change would be contrary to the avowed States that the Administration’s cost is to permit States to ensure that needed purpose of the proposed regulation and estimate is too low because of the large services are ‘‘available to benefit unborn would have no basis in logic, given that numbers of undocumented immigrants children independent of the mother’s the regulation is premised entirely on who would be receiving coverage. eligibility status’’ (67 FR 9937). Because the unborn child’s status and not the Response: The question of where prenatal care is a key element to woman’s and in support of this position conception occurred is irrelevant to the ensuring healthy infants and children, cited Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 220 question of the unborn child’s this goal would maximize the (1982) (invalidating State law denying immigration status or this final rule. availability of prenatal care and, public schooling to the children of This regulation provides states with the consequently, promote the overall undocumented immigrants because the flexibility to assure essential prenatal health of infants and children. It would denial ‘‘directed the onus of a parent’s care to the maximum number of unborn be inconsistent with this goal to tie misconduct against his children’’). children, regardless of the immigration

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61967

status of their mothers. States, in to low-income women, and the in public expenditures over a child’s deciding whether or not to adopt this commenters view this proposal as lifetime. option under their title XXI state plan, assisting the millions of women of Comment: While commenters agreed will certainly weigh, along with childbearing age who lose or lack health with the importance of prenatal care as numerous other factors, the potential insurance. Proper prenatal care can essential for the mother and child, many costs associated with providing prevent avoidable birth defects. Fetal disagreed with the mechanism this coverage to unborn children since States surgery is able to correct many life- Administration has taken for accessing cannot receive Federal funding that threatening congenital disorders. There that care. They feel very strongly that exceeds title XXI allotment. is no reason the unborn child should be eligibility should be extended to the Comment: One commenter stated that denied the lifesaving procedures that pregnant woman and not to the unborn prenatal care is even more important will permit him or her to live a full, child. Several commenters opposed this among Latinas, who suffer from higher normal life after birth, particularly with approach as a false separation of the rates of pregnancy-induced the recent medical advances that will woman and child. Commenters were hypertension and maternal mortality. continue to develop and evolve. concerned that the medical needs of the The commenter noted that 12 States Providing this care is a benefit, not only embryo would take precedence over the offer prenatal care to immigrant women for the unborn child, but for women and needs of the mother and stressed their who are ineligible for Federally funded families as well. Commenters stated that belief that the benefit should be medical assistance, which has lessened this policy provides a way for the conferred to the woman and not to the the effects of PRWORA. The commenter mother to make positive choices with unborn child. They expressed concern stated that if the new regulation regard to caring for her unborn child that this regulation may create a conflict explicitly covers children of and herself. of interest between the woman and the undocumented immigrants, it would Some commenters noted that coverage unborn child. increase the number of States that would decrease infant mortality rates. They believe that a crucial question is provide prenatal care services to Two commenters cited a DHHS report, whose needs take priority? Many felt pregnant immigrant women and provide ‘‘Trends in the Well-Being of America’s that treating the unborn child as if it an incentive for those States that have Children & Youth 2000,’’ that indicated exists separately and should be seen a large influx of Latina immigrants prenatal care can improve birth considered before and above the health in recent years. outcomes and decrease health costs. of the woman carrying the unborn child Response: This rule ensures that Two commenters also cited an is a false separation that would States have maximum flexibility to American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) ultimately prove detrimental to the extend SCHIP eligibility to unborn policy that indicates ‘‘* * * physical health of many women as well as to children, independent of the and psychosocial growth, development, their unborn children or newborns. immigration status of the mother. We and health of the individual begins prior They believe that this proposal believe that this rule addresses the to birth when conception is interferes with women’s autonomy to concerns of the commenter since the apparent***the responsibility of make medical care decisions and intent of this rule is to benefit both the pediatrics may therefore begin with the represents an arbitrary separation of the unborn child and their mothers by fetus ***.’’ woman and child (since one cannot be promoting continuity of important Commenters expressed a concern that cared for without the other also medical care. it is in the public’s interest to assure receiving care). One commenter that expectant mothers have access to indicated that conflicts of interest 5. Benefits quality prenatal health care coverage as between the mother and child would Comment: Commenters, whether in highlighted in Healthy People 2010. not arise if the woman was determined favor of this rule or not, expressed their Additionally, commenters noted that it the patient, as under the Medicaid belief that all women should receive is less expensive to care for healthy program (42 U.S.C. regular and adequate prenatal care babies than unhealthy babies and that 1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)(III), (IV), (VI), (VII), because there is overwhelming data that access to prenatal care means long-term (A)(ii) and (1).) shows that there are still too many reduction in the cost of health care for Response: We understand the women who receive no or less than these children. Expanding Federal commenters’ concerns. The intent of adequate care during pregnancy. health programs to give more low- this rule is to maximize the availability Commenters agreed that health care income pregnant women access to of SCHIP benefits in the interest of both should be provided from the prenatal prenatal care is an important step in pregnant women and unborn children. stage. making sure children get a healthy start The statutory provisions of title XXI are Many commenters, in support of this in life. very clear that only targeted low-income rule, expressed their belief that all Response: We appreciate the children can be eligible for the program. women should be able to receive commenters’ support of our goal in Although, under § 457.1010 States do prenatal services that increase the developing this rule. By providing have the option of applying for a chances of every child being born States with the option of ensuring that variance to purchase family coverage healthy. This regulation would allow needed prenatal care is available under through which a pregnant woman over pregnant women and unborn children to SCHIP to benefit unborn children, the age of 19 could be determined receive the medical treatment they need. uninsured low-income women, who are SCHIP eligible. Commenters noted that the lack of less likely to receive prenatal care, States do have options available if prenatal care results in increased health would be able to access crucial services they wish to expand eligibility to a costs for taxpayers in caring for that they may not otherwise be able to pregnant woman over the age of 19 problems and complications after birth, receive. This regulatory clarification is whose income is over the current and some noted that coverage of the intended to benefit both the unborn Medicaid income guidelines rather than unborn child may result in the child and the mother by promoting to the unborn child, which include: a incidental improvement in the health of continuity of important medical care. title XIX expansion under one of their the mother. But, all too often proper We agree that healthy pregnancies poverty groups; or a section 1115 waiver prenatal care has been cost prohibitive should also result in significant savings demonstration. However, absent a

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61968 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

waiver, eligibility can only be conferred Questions of medical treatment for the commenter stated that low-income to the targeted low-income child. pregnant woman and/or her unborn are women deserve actual, not merely That being said, nothing in this rule a decision between the pregnant woman incidental, health insurance coverage is intended to affect the traditional and her physician and nothing in this that covers all of their health needs. relationship between the pregnant rule would circumvent or alter that Several commenters indicated that mother and the physician. Questions of relationship. women deserve comprehensive care, not medical treatment for the pregnant Comment: Commenters expressed simply care related to the unborn child, woman and/or her unborn are a concern that certain benefits that would and several referred to the proposal as decision between the pregnant woman provide comfort for the pregnant women ‘‘reducing women to vessels.’’ and her physician and nothing in this would not be covered, such as epidurals Commenters also felt that extending rule would circumvent or alter that or anesthesia during delivery. comprehensive care to the mother relationship. Response: Within the options for would result in women who are Comment: Commenters were benefit coverage selected by a State, as healthier and ultimately would result in concerned that a woman could possibly described at § 457.410, a State selecting better birth outcomes. One commenter be denied medical treatments such as this SCHIP option has the flexibility in felt that targeting coverage for the prescription drugs, psychotropic defining its benefit package to provide unborn child, not the mother raised medications to treat psychiatric benefits it deems necessary. ethical issues and puts the mother’s illnesses, and life-saving radiation or Regarding the specific question asked health at risk by providing inadequate chemotherapy treatments because of the by the commenters, while analgesia coverage. effects they would have on the unborn given as an epidural and/or Commenters expressed concern or child. intramuscular intravenous injections of questioned whether care would be Commenters asked if the pregnant pain relievers, and/or anesthesia given extended to women for injury or disease woman would be denied other care that as regional or general anesthesia is not related to the pregnancy, such as might be harmful to the unborn child, primarily provided during labor and skin melanoma, emergencies, accidents, thus effectively pitting her needs against delivery to relieve the mother’s pain broken bones, or mental illness. One those of the unborn child? One from uterine contractions or to perform commenter advocated for coverage of commenter asked whether the State surgery, that is, C-section, if a woman’s drug treatment programs for mothers would be subjecting women to drug and pain during labor and delivery is not who were addicted. alcohol tests on the alleged ground that reduced or properly relieved, adverse Several commenters indicated that the it is protecting its patient-beneficiary? and sometimes disastrous effects can focus should be on addressing the Several commenters referred to this occur for the unborn child. There is no health care needs of millions of policy as medically unsound, ethically question that analgesia/anesthesia is uninsured women, and one advocated unacceptable, and/or poor public required in order to perform a C-section expanded access to uninsured women to policy. Commenters questioned if and such a procedure cannot even be ‘‘take care of those already here.’’ physicians would be required to consult considered if some form of pain relief is Response: The SCHIP statute provides with the unborn child’s father or not provided. In terms of vaginal States with broad flexibility in defining another legal guardian if these types of deliveries, without relieving the those services for which they choose to issues exist. Several questioned what mother’s pain from uterine contractions, provide coverage under their State plan. entities would have the authority to the progress and labor may be States have the flexibility to define and assert the rights of the unborn child interrupted and not efficient, which in provide comprehensive services that are (such as, State, Federal government, turn can cause fetal complications, such related to the pregnancy or to conditions physician, pregnant woman, father?). as fetal distress and infection from that could complicate the pregnancy. To illustrate their point, two prolonged labor and prolonged rupture Under the regulation, States would commenters cited a court case (In re of membranes and other complications. define what services would be included. A.C., 573 A. 2d 1235, 1235 (D.C.1990) in Therefore, we would expect that this Services related to conditions that could which a woman was compelled by the coverage would be provided. complicate the pregnancy include those court to undergo a caesarean section, Comment: Several commenters were for diagnosis or treatment of illnesses or following which both the mother and concerned about whether States would medical conditions that might threaten unborn child died (Veronica E. B. have the flexibility to use enhanced the carrying of the unborn child to full Kolder et. al, Court-Ordered Obstetrical Federal funds to provide comprehensive term or the safe delivery of the unborn Interventions, 316, New Engl. J. Med. benefits to pregnant women and stated child. Within these parameters, States 1192, 1195 (1987). that the failure to provide a have discretion in the services for which Several commenters also raised the comprehensive range of services for all coverage can be provided. question as to what happens in cases of a pregnant woman’s health care needs However, SCHIP eligibility is limited where continuing the pregnancy itself and treatment of some stated diseases, by statute to targeted low-income endangers the life of the mother, since could compromise her health, as well children and there must be a connection the assumption made by the as, that of the unborn child. between the benefits provided and the commenters is that the life of the Although many commenters health of the unborn child. unborn child would take precedence supported expanded access to prenatal We would point out that the over the life of the mother or that both care among low-income, uninsured regulation is intended to reach would be allowed to die. women, many believed that the benefit individuals who are currently Response: These comments extend should be given to the woman, in uninsured and who therefore lack beyond the scope of this regulation, addition to or instead of her unborn access to any services. which concerns only the ability of child. One commenter stated that one Comment: Commenters believe that, States to extend SCHIP eligibility to cannot effectively treat an unborn child by permitting States to extend SCHIP unborn children. As in Medicaid, without treating the woman carrying it, coverage to unborn children, this rule nothing in this rule is intended to affect believing that a healthy pregnancy would effectively deny women access to the traditional relationship between the resulting in the delivery of a healthy needed postpartum care. They felt that pregnant mother and the physician. baby requires a healthy mother. One pregnancy-related care should be

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61969

viewed as a continuum comprising community. Others noted that maternal title XXI plan to assist in the purchase, three distinctly important periods: mortality represents a serious health in whole or in part, of health benefits prenatal, intrapartum (during labor and problem, particularly for African- coverage that includes coverage of delivery), and postpartum care. American women. abortion other than to save the life of the Commenters stressed that a woman’s One commenter stated that coverage mother or resulting from an act of rape pregnancy-related health care needs do for postpartum care and assistance in or incest. not end the moment her child is born. enrollment in Medicaid or SCHIP Comment: Commenters asserted that The commenters stated that the woman should be a requirement for States fetal surgery saves lives, as in the case still requires many pregnancy-related electing to implement this rule, even in of spina bifida or repair of heart defects services and optimal maternal health is cases where the child is not born alive. and asserted that this type of coverage important for overall family health. Commenters asked clarifying should be offered to unborn children. Under the proposed regulation, covered questions such as: would postpartum Response: We provided a discussion care would be available only during follow-up be covered; would of ‘‘fetal medicine’’ or ‘‘fetology’’ in the ‘‘the period from conception to birth.’’ emergencies arising to the mother preamble to this rule as an example of These commenters are concerned that following delivery be covered; and a distinct and important medical the moment after the birth of the child, would benefits such as the 60 days specialty that represents emerging a woman would lose any incidental postpartum care available through opportunities for services specifically covered care that she had received as a Medicaid be provided? targeted to the care of the unborn child. result of having an SCHIP-covered Response: Again, the intent of this Consistent with section 2103 of the unborn child in utero. The commenters rule is to extend access to individuals Act, States have flexibility in defining continued with their concern that who are currently uninsured. We the benefits that are included as part of woman would therefore not be eligible believe that the benefits that would be the health coverage provided to targeted for any care during the postpartum available to the mother and unborn low-income children. The specific period including but not limited to the child are indeed vital. prenatal and pregnancy related benefits treatment of hemorrhage, infection, The SCHIP statute provides States included in a State’s benefit package episiotomy repair, C-section repair, with flexibility in defining those would be the decision of the State. family planning counseling, treatment services for which they choose to Comment: The commenters stated of complications after delivery, and provide coverage under their State plan. that the practices of ‘‘fetal surgery,’’ as postpartum depression. Several cited States have the flexibility to define and described in the March 5, 2002 this proposal as bad public policy that provide services that are related to the proposed rule, have been deeply will ultimately result in increased pregnancy or to conditions that could plagued by both clinical and ethical health care costs. complicate the pregnancy. Within these problems. The commenters wanted to One commenter questioned whether parameters, States have significant make clear that there is no such thing hospitals and practitioners would be flexibility in the services for which as fetal surgery independent of the compelled to release women coverage can be provided. mother, and that surgery on the unborn immediately after delivery due to lack of Commenters are correct that care after child occurs only through the woman’s maternal coverage. Others expressed delivery, such as postpartum services body and can occur only with her concern that some women will leave the could not be covered as part of the title consent. Commenters stated that surgery hospital immediately after birth to avoid XXI State Plan, (unless the mother is on the fetus presents significant risks to expenses, against ACOG and AAP under age 19 and eligible for SCHIP in the pregnant woman’s life and health recommendations, while others will not her own right), because they are not and the impact this surgery can have on attend the four to six week services for an eligible child. pregnant woman should be recognized recommended follow-up visits Comment: One commenter expressed and strongly considered. Commenters (resulting in decreased maternal health). concern that there are those who would continued that modest improvements Several commenters noted that if the define care to include abortion, which (or no improvements at all) in the mother is ill and does not get the care the commenter felt would be a complete outcomes for fetuses with neonatal she needs, she may not be able to take twisting of the term ‘‘care.’’ This operations often happen in conjunction care of her children, especially an commenter did not want abortions with severe obstetrical complications for infant, appropriately. This indirectly covered by the government. the woman. jeopardizes the health of women, Response: FFP is available in In support of the medical and ethical children and families, and will expenditures for abortions under SCHIP controversy surrounding fetal surgery, inevitably result in compromised health only as specifically authorized by the one commenter cited several articles: outcomes for both the woman and the Congress in the statute and this will not Bruner et al, Fetal surgery for unborn child. change with this regulation. Section myelomeningocele and the incidence of Commenters quoted ACOG and AAP’s 2105(c)(1) and (c)(7) of the Act sets shunt dependent hydrocephalus JAMA recommendation that four to six weeks limitations on payment for abortion 1999;282;1819–25; Sutton et al, after delivery the mother should receive services under SCHIP. Section 457.475 Improvement in hindbrain herniation a postpartum review and examination. of the January 2001 SCHIP final demonstrated by serial fetal magnetic Several commenters referenced regulation, specifies that FFP is not resonance imaging following fetal Medicaid statute and regulations as an available for expenditures for abortion, surgery for myelomeningocele JAMA illustration of how public programs rely or for expenditures for the purchase of 1999;282:1826–31; Simpson JL, Fetal on established medical standards health benefits coverage that includes surgery for myelomeningocele: Promise, (§ 1902(1) of the Act as defined in coverage of abortion services, unless the progress, problems JAMA § 1902(a)(10)(a) (clause VII). abortion is necessary to save the life of 1999;282;1873–4; Lyerly et al, Attitudes One commenter also indicated that the mother or the abortion is performed of maternal-fetal specialists concerning lack of family planning counseling to terminate a pregnancy resulting from maternal-fetal surgery, American creates greater risk of unintended an act of rape or incest. Additionally, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology pregnancy with serious social and FFP is not available to a State for 2001;185;1052–8; Lyerly et al, Toward economic costs to the woman, State, and expenditures of any amount under its the ethical evaluation and use of

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61970 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

maternal-fetal surgery. Obstetrics and it really should be considered research. would still pay for surgery if the unborn Gynecology 2001;98;689–97. This Commenters asserted that this would child were endangered to save the life commenter also cited a National make it appear, then, that this rule is of the pregnant women? Commenters Institutes of Health conference promoting unreviewed and unapproved stated that this proposal raises troubling examining the scientific, clinical, and research on pregnant human subjects, in ethical issues for physicians because ethical issues related to maternal-fetal conflict with statutes regarding human ancillary health care potentially puts surgery. subjects of medical research (Anne E. women’s health at risk. The commenters stressed that a Drapkin Lyerly, MD et al. Toward the Response: We understand the review of the medical literature shows Ethical Evaluation and Use of Maternal- commenters’ concerns, and want to be that maternal-fetal surgery is still Fetal Surgery, 98 ACOG 689 (2001).) very clear that nothing in this rule is considered experimental or They also stated that fetal surgery is intended to affect the traditional investigational by such medical experimental and it is highly unlikely relationship between the pregnant professional organizations as the that this would be covered by Medicaid woman and her physician. Questions of American College of Obstetricians and or any other insurance program (45 CFR medical treatment for the pregnant Gynecologists. One commenter quoted a 46.101 through 45 CFR 46.409, woman and/or her unborn child are a member survey of the Society for promulgated pursuant to the Health decision between the woman and her Maternal-Fetal Medicine, which found Research Extension Act, 42 U.S.C. 289.) physician and nothing in this rule that 57 percent of respondents believed Response: As we have said would circumvent or alter that that a moratorium should be imposed previously, nothing in this rule is relationship. on open fetal surgery for nonlethal intended to affect the traditional Comment: Many commenters were conditions until a multicenter relationship between the pregnant also concerned that coverage would not controlled trial is completed. The woman and her physician. Questions of be extended in the case of miscarriage commenter noted that most of the medical treatment for the pregnant or stillbirth since the SCHIP beneficiary conditions listed by the March 5, 2002 woman and/or her fetus are a decision would no longer exist. Many cited such proposed rule are exceptionally rare and between the pregnant woman and her a policy as disrespectful to women. the mortality rates following surgery physician and nothing in this rule Response: Services provided under have been high. Another commenter would circumvent or alter that those circumstances would be allowable indicated that current Medicaid relationship. costs. We believe that providing programs and most private insurers do Additionally, we are not saying that uninsured women with access to health not cover experimental procedures. States that choose to extend coverage to insurance coverage that benefits both In addition, the commenters the unborn child must provide fetal mother and child contributes to the expressed concern that there is no medicine or fetology. Consistent with respect of women. This proposed research or data to support the assertion section 2103 of the Act, States have regulation is one option that would that fetal surgery can ultimately lower flexibility in defining the benefits that become available to States and is one postpartum medical care costs. They are included as part of the health action out of many that the Secretary indicated that while long-term research coverage provided to targeted low- has taken to promote the health of in this field may someday produce such income children. As such, States have women. results, the March 5, 2002 proposed always had the ability under SCHIP to Comment: Another commenter rule’s claims that cost-savings currently provide treatments or surgery that may indicated that the rule allows for exist is without support. be considered investigational or unscrupulous providers to bill twice for The commenters noted that despite experimental if they determine they are some services—once on the mother’s the fact that fetal surgery is at this stage medically necessary. We note that States account and a second time on the largely experimental, the March 5, 2002 have the same option for providing such unborn child’s account. proposed rule states that the ‘‘Secretary coverage under Medicaid. But, the Response: We believe that States with would like to permit the States the specific prenatal and pregnancy related separate SCHIP programs have flexibility to pay for the medical benefits included in a State’s benefit implemented sufficient safeguards to expenses related to unborn children,’’ package would be the decision of the address the commenter’s concerns. suggesting a departure from State. Specifically, § 457.980 of the June 25, longstanding State and Federal policy We do not have data that fetal surgery 2001 SCHIP implementing rule requires regarding denying coverage for can ultimately lower postpartum States to establish and maintain systems experimental treatments. One medical care costs and did not make to identify, report, and verify the commenter indicated that this rule this assertion. In the preamble to the accuracy of claims for those enrolled seems to signal a radical shift in policy proposed rule we said that conditions in children who meet the requirements of regarding experimental treatments, and utero that can be medically or surgically section 2105(a) of the Act, where if this is the case, there are many corrected can have beneficial enhanced Federal medical assistance patients suffering from cancer and other consequences that can include saving computations apply. Additionally, diseases who might benefit from an the life of the child; elimination of long States are required by § 457.915 of the overall change in policy regarding neo-natal, post-partum medical care for January 2001 SCHIP final rule to experimental treatments. The the child and ultimately lower post- establish procedures for ensuring commenter refers to a May 26, 1993, partum medical care costs for the child program integrity and detecting letter to State Medicaid Directors and and therefore the SCHIP plan. fraudulent or abusive activity. cites the following: Miller by Miller v. Comment: Commenters stated that Comment: The commenter questioned Whitburn, 10 F.3d 1315 (7th Cir. 1993); according to this rule, the unborn child why prenatal care should be provided to Rush v. Parham, 625 F.2d 1150, 1156 is the patient and the one eligible for an expectant mother and indicated care (5th Cir. 1980); Weaver v. Reagan, 886 services and, as such, they asked, should wait until after delivery. F.2d 194 (8th Cir. 1989). ‘‘When the needs of the fetus and Response: Prenatal care has been In addition, commenters are mother diverge, to whom is the medical clearly shown to reduce the likelihood concerned that since fetal surgery is so professional’s ethical duty owed?’’ They of premature delivery or low birth new and lacking in proven benefits that asked whether SCHIP or Medicaid weight, both of which are associated

VerDate Sep<04>2002 19:38 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61971

with a wide range of congenital Medicaid and SCHIP are different 185 percent of the FPL to SCHIP, disabilities as well as infant mortality. programs, authorized through title XIX expand the income limit to 200 percent Moreover, proper prenatal care can and title XXI respectively although of the FPL and use the savings to fund detect a great number of serious and States can expand their Medicaid the expansion. even life-threatening disabilities, many program through the enhanced funding A final commenter felt that the of which can now be successfully made available by title XXI. As in purpose of the maintenance of effort treated in utero. Ensuring prenatal care Medicaid, the specific prenatal services, provision in the March 5, 2002 for more children will significantly help which any given State will cover under proposed rule was unclear. This reduce infant mortality and morbidity SCHIP is left to the discretion of the commenter advocated an interpretation rates and will spare many infants from State. Inasmuch as States are not that ‘‘SCHIP coverage for fetuses picks the burden of congenital disabilities and required to cover the same package of up where Medicaid coverage of reduce the cost of treating those benefits relating to prenatal care under pregnant women ends.’’ However, the congenital disabilities after birth. Medicaid and SCHIP, States can cover commenter was concerned that, through Comment: The commenter noted that the same, fewer or more services under application of the maintenance of effort States have the option under SCHIP to SCHIP than Medicaid. In the event that provisions of title XXI, we might be offer a benefit package that is equivalent a State decided to cover certain prenatal purporting to redefine a child for to benchmark coverage, coverage under services provided to an unborn child purposes of Medicaid. a State-based plan, or Secretary- under SCHIP, but not to pregnant Response: We agree with the first approved coverage. The commenter women under Medicaid, the commenter commenter that title XXI’s maintenance questioned how a State would seems concerned that the State would of effort requirements apply equally to determine a comparable or actuarially be in violation of section 2102(b)(1)(B)(i) unborn and born children. We do not equivalent benefit package for unborn of the Act. agree that such application is punitive. children. Section 2102(b)(1)(B)(i) of the Act By including section 2105(d) in the Response: Rather than carving out prohibits States from covering targeted SCHIP legislation, the Congress sought services and establishing a benefit low-income children at a higher income to ensure that title XXI funds were used package exclusively for unborn children level without covering children at a by States to expand coverage to new as the commenter suggests, we would lower-income level within any defined populations, not to take the place of expect the prenatal benefits for unborn group of targeted low-income children. Medicaid expenditures for populations children to be part of the State’s overall An unborn child who is eligible under already covered. Application of this health benefits coverage package that is SCHIP and a lower-income pregnant principle is no different when coverage consistent with section 2103 of the Act woman who is eligible under Medicaid of prenatal care for an unborn child is and § 457.410 of the final regulation. are not within the same defined group at issue, than when coverage of children The definition of child health of targeted low income children under post-birth is at issue. assistance at § 457.402 provides a SCHIP. Accordingly, the provisions of Accordingly, in applying the comprehensive listing of services that section 2102(b)(1)(B)(i) of the Act would maintenance of effort requirements in includes prenatal care along with other not apply. the case of unborn children, enhanced services that would be pregnancy- Federal Medical Assistance Percentages related. These are services that many 6. Maintenance of Effort (FMAP) will not be available if a State States already provide to SCHIP eligible Comment: One commenter adopts income and resource standards children who become pregnant as part underscored that the Maintenance of and methodologies for purposes of of their current benefit coverage Effort requirements under title XXI determining eligibility for Medicaid Comment: One commenter asked should apply to unborn children to the under a group for pregnant women that whether Medicaid currently covers the same extent that they apply to born are more restrictive than those applied types of services listed in the March 5, children. Several other commenters under the policies of the State plan in 2002 proposed rule. If so, the opposed application of the maintenance effect on June 1, 1997. We are applying commenter asked how this could be so, of effort requirements to unborn the maintenance of effort requirements since unborn children are not covered children. These commenters felt that to the Medicaid eligibility groups for under Medicaid. If not, the commenter doing so punishes States that already pregnant women because the unborn asked whether there are estimates of the have expanded Medicaid coverage to child of a pregnant woman who is cost of providing fetology services to pregnant women beyond the minimum eligible for Medicaid receives the Medicaid eligibles, since States cannot required and may discourage States benefits of the prenatal care covered by offer higher income children greater from expanding coverage to new Medicaid. Thus, to allow States to cover benefits than lower income children. populations in the future. They also this an unborn child under SCHIP Response: Under Medicaid, coverage suggested revising the final rule to would result in precisely the kind of may include services for pregnant clarify that any State that expanded cost shifting between Medicaid and women that are related to pregnancy eligibility for pregnant women after June SCHIP that the Congress intended to (including prenatal, delivery, 1, 1997 be permitted to convert that preclude in § 2105(d) of the Act. postpartum, and family planning expansion to SCHIP. Application of the maintenance of effort services) and to other conditions that One commenter asked whether a requirements in this way does not in may complicate pregnancy. Within proposal to convert optional coverage any way alter the definition of child for those parameters, States have broad for pregnant women with incomes from purposes of Medicaid. discretion in what services to cover in 150 percent to 185 percent of the We agree with the commenters that their Medicaid State plan. While these Federal poverty level (FPL) from title the maintenance of effort requirements types of services are available to eligible XIX to title XXI funding would be do not apply with respect to expansions pregnant women under Medicaid, this consistent with the March 5, 2002 of coverage for pregnant women rule would authorize SCHIP coverage of proposed rule. This commenter asked implemented after June 1, 1997 (just as these types of services to unborn specifically whether a State could shift they do not apply to expansions of children whose mothers are not eligible the current optional coverage of Medicaid coverage of children under Medicaid. pregnant women under Medicaid up to implemented after June 1, 1997.)

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61972 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

However, we do not believe that concern that because the current and children with health problems, revision of this rule is necessary, as this funding for SCHIP is not adequate to provision of prenatal care will result in fact is clearly stated in section 2105(d) support comprehensive care, the rule lower medical expenditures for the of the Act as well as the implementing could represent an unfunded mandate affected children in the long run. regulations at 42 CFR 433.11(b)(1). on States. Comment: One commenter noted that Thus, States generally will not be A number of these commenters this rule is more costly than other permitted to drop optional coverage of argued that the Department should be options, since States will receive the pregnant women under Medicaid and making efforts to address the lack of enhanced match available for services pick up coverage of unborn children in funds to cover existing children. Some provided under SCHIP instead of their the same income range under SCHIP, suggested that money should be added because most States expanded Medicaid to other programs to provide prenatal regular Medicaid match. The coverage of pregnant women prior to care. One commenter noted in particular commenter further notes that, with the June 1, 1997. However, as stated above, that the Administration’s new budget strict budget neutrality requirements of expansions implemented after June 1, contains no additional funding for the Health Insurance Flexibility and 1997 are not subject to the maintenance Maternal and Child Health grants, Accountability (HIFA), States are of effort requirements. Thus, a State which could provide additional cutting back benefits to provide could eliminate an optional expansion resources to pregnant women and their coverage. The commenter argues that of Medicaid coverage for pregnant children. Some of the commenters noted cost savings derived from providing women implemented after June 1, 1997 that some bills currently pending before prenatal services through Medicaid and pick up coverage for the unborn the Congress include additional funds could be used to provide benefits under children of the affected women under for coverage of pregnant women, and HIFA. SCHIP. Similarly, if a State does not that these funds would be available to Response: We agree that States can already cover pregnant women between States that already have expanded accomplish the goal of this regulation— 185 percent and 200 percent of the coverage to pregnant women under increased access to prenatal care—by Federal poverty level under Medicaid, it Medicaid. expanding Medicaid coverage of could extend coverage to unborn Response: We recognize that States do pregnant women, just as States can children in that income range under this not have access to unlimited Federal expand coverage to children under regulation. matching funds for SCHIP. As a result, Medicaid, and that FFP would be To permit a State to eliminate each State will have to set its own available for services provided under coverage of pregnant women priorities regarding the populations and the expansion at the State’s regular implemented on or before June 1, 1997, services to be covered under its SCHIP Medicaid match. and pick up coverage of their unborn program. This rule gives States an children under SCHIP, would require additional option—to cover prenatal With the passage of title XXI, the that the Secretary waive the care for unborn children under SCHIP. Congress created a greater incentive for maintenance of effort requirements Some States may not choose to exercise States to expand coverage of low- found in section 2105(d) of the Act. The this option, because they lack sufficient income children. By expanding the Secretary has never approved a waiver funds or for other reasons. This choice definition of targeted low-income child of these requirements in the past and we is left to each State. to include an unborn child, we are do not believe that doing so would be Nearly all States still have unspent extending the increased incentive consistent with the objectives of title SCHIP funds and the President has created by the Congress to include XXI, as required by section 1115 of the proposed that the Congress extend the coverage of prenatal services for unborn Act. allotments from previous years that children. would otherwise be returned to the 7. Budget Implications HIFA provides a vehicle for States Federal treasury. seeking to expand Medicaid coverage to Comment: Numerous commenters Finally, inasmuch as the regulation populations not typically covered under noted that this rule does not bring new provides States with an option to extend Medicaid. Nothing in this regulation funding to SCHIP. Some stated that this coverage to unborn children under would preclude States from rule also would increase the financial SCHIP, but does not mandate that they incorporating the provision of prenatal burden on SCHIP by expanding do so, it does not represent an unfunded care into a HIFA waiver proposal, and eligibility and could potentially result mandate for States. CMS staff is available to work with any in inadequate funds for SCHIP coverage. Comment: Some commenters State that may want to do so. Others noted that some States already mentioned that healthy babies are less are having trouble maintaining their expensive to care for than unhealthy 8. Miscellaneous SCHIP programs and may be freezing babies, so that the cost of prenatal care enrollment of currently eligible can be recouped through reduced Comment: Several commenters noted children. Some also noted that the high expenditures on subsequent that generally, an American citizen is costs of in utero treatments make intervention and surgeries. The only counted for taxation purposes after expanding care under this regulation commenters noted that this rule will they are born. They asked if granting of less likely. One commenter stated that prevent taxpayers from having to bear legal personhood under this rule mean the expansion in eligibility should be the burden of unhealthy babies, teens, that unborn children could be taxed accompanied by additional funds to and adults. inside the womb? Alternatively, the allow for an increase in enrollment, not Response: We agree with the commenters asked, could they be just a shift in priorities of the ‘‘type’’ of commenters. As explained in the March claimed as a deduction before they are uninsured child to be covered. 5, 2002 proposed rule, it is well born? One commenter felt that the lack of established that access to prenatal care Response: The regulation does not funds for this rule means that States also can improve health outcomes during purport, nor do we have the authority, would have access to less Federal funds infancy as well as over a child’s life. to alter the definition of a child or to provide care to poor immigrant Since healthy babies and children individual for purposes of Federal or women. Another commenter cited require less medical care than babies State tax statutes or regulations.

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 61973

IV. Provisions of the Final Rule government agencies. Most hospitals plans. We also estimate that an In the preamble of the March 5, 2002 and most other providers and suppliers additional 30,000 unborn children will proposed rule, we noted an error that are small entities, either by nonprofit benefit by this change. In States that we have corrected. The preamble stated status or by having revenues of $6 to adopt this option, the health status of that we proposed to revise the definition $29 million in any 1 year. Individuals children will improve to the extent that at § 457.10 to clarify that ‘‘child’’ means and States are not included in the their mothers receive prenatal care. an individual under the age of 19 and definition of a small entity. We developed cost estimates based on In addition, section 1102(b) of the Act may include any period of time from the following assumptions and requires us to prepare a regulatory conception to birth through age 19. This calculations. We excluded from the should have been stated as up to age 19 impact analysis if a rule may have a significant impact on the operations of calculations a few States that already and has been corrected. In this final have eligibility for pregnant women rule, we are adopting the provisions of a substantial number of small rural hospitals. This analysis must conform to under SCHIP, as well as those that the March 5, 2002 proposed rule, appear likely to exhaust their Federal without change. the provisions of 604 of the RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, SCHIP funding at some point. We V. Collection of Information we define a small rural hospital as a assumed that each remaining State Requirements hospital that is located outside of a would have a one-third probability of Metropolitan Statistical Area and has taking the proposed option to cover States that opt to extend eligibility to unborn children. The increase in SCHIP unborn children must submit a State fewer than 100 beds. spending for a State picking up the plan amendment in accordance with Section 202 of the Unfunded option was based on Current Population § 457.60. OMB has approved Mandates Reform Act of 1995 also Survey data on the number of infants information collection requirements requires that agencies assess anticipated relative to the total population of associated with SCHIP State plan costs and benefits before issuing any children between 100 percent and 200 amendments under OMB approval rule that may result in expenditure in percent of poverty in the State. The number OMB–0938–0841. any 1 year by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the infant count was used as a proxy for VI. Regulatory Impact Statement private sector, of $110 million. pregnant women. Per-person costs were We have examined the impacts of this Executive Order 13132 establishes assumed to be twice that of a child on rule as required by Executive Order certain requirements that an agency SCHIP. 12866 (September 1993, Regulatory must meet when it promulgates a final The costs also include an increase in Planning and Review), the Regulatory rule that imposes substantial direct Medicaid spending as a result of the Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 16, costs on State and local governments, rule. The reason for this is that, with 1980, Pub. L. 96–354), section 1102(b) of preempts State law, or otherwise has more SCHIP allotments being spent on the Social Security Act, the Unfunded Federalism implications. The option for unborn children, less is available for Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. States to extend coverage to unborn redistribution to States that expend all 104–4), and Executive Order 13132. children promulgated in this final rule their allotments. Some of these States Executive Order 12866 directs does not meet the criteria for having will run short of funds, and those that agencies to assess all costs and benefits Federalism implications. This provision are using Medicaid expansions in their of available regulatory alternatives and, does not impose direct costs on States SCHIPs will get FFP at the regular if regulation is necessary, to select or local governments, nor does it matching rate, thus increasing title XIX regulatory approaches that maximize preempt State laws. This new option expenditures. net benefits (including potential only increases State flexibility and, economic, environmental, public health therefore, prior consultation is not Regarding state take-up: The and safety effects, distributive impacts, required. estimating model is based on iterative and equity). A regulatory impact This final rule revises and clarifies the simulations using the one-third analysis (RIA) must be prepared for definition of ‘‘child’’ under the State participation probability assumption, so major rules with economically Children’s Health Insurance Program there is not a specific set of States that significant effects ($100 million or more (SCHIP) to provide that an unborn child we assume will take the option. in any 1 year). may be considered a ‘‘targeted low- Although on average the number of The RFA requires agencies to analyze income child’’ by the State and therefore states participating is about a dozen. options for regulatory relief of small eligible for SCHIP if other applicable Based on the assumptions, we businesses. For purposes of the RFA, State eligibility requirements are met. estimate that the budget impact will be small entities include small businesses, We estimate that 13 States will elect to $330 million over a 5-year period. nonprofit organizations, and include this definition in their State Please see the table below.

NET MEDICAID AND SCHIP COSTS—WITH BUYOUT OF POST-BBA

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2003–7

Federal cost...... 98 44 81 93 14 330

Therefore, the provisions set forth in and benefits as required by E.O. 12866 impact on small entities as defined this rule will not have an impact of $110 and the Unfunded Mandates Act for under the RFA or on small rural million or more in any one year. Neither rules with significant economic impacts hospitals as defined under section is this rule expected to impose an or that impose significant unfunded 1102(b) of the Social Security Act. unfunded mandate on States exceeding mandates on States. Also, we believe the Therefore, we are not preparing analyses $110 million in any 1 year. Therefore, changes being promulgated in this for either the RFA or section 1102(b) of we have not prepared an analysis of cost document will have very little direct the Act because we have determined,

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 61974 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

and we certify, that this rule will not Child means an individual under the (5) For States that elect to extend have a significant economic impact on age of 19 including the period from eligibility to unborn children under the a substantial number of small entities or conception to birth. approved Child Health Plan, the State a significant impact on the operations of * * * * * does not adopt eligibility standards and a substantial number of small rural methodologies for purposes of hospitals. Subpart C—State Plan Requirements: determining a child’s eligibility under In accordance with the provisions of Eligibility, Screening, Applications, the Medicaid State plan that were more Executive Order 12866, this regulation and Enrollment restrictive than those applied under was reviewed by the Office of policies of the State plan in effect on 3. Amend § 457.350 as follows: Management and Budget. June 1, 1997. This limitation applies A. Redesignate the text of paragraph also to more restrictive standards and List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 457 (b) following the heading as (b)(1). methodologies for determining B. Add a new paragraph (b)(2) to read eligibility for services for a child based Administrative practice and as follows: on the eligibility of a pregnant woman. procedure, Grant programs-health, Children’s Health Insurance Program, § 457.350 Eligibility screening and * * * * * Reporting and recordkeeping facilitation of Medicaid enrollment. 5. Amend § 457.626 by adding a new requirements. * * * * * paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: (b) Screening objectives. (1) * * * For the reasons set forth in the § 457.626 Prevention of duplicate (2) Screening procedures must also preamble, 42 CFR part 457 is amended payments. identify any applicant or enrollee who as set forth below: (a) * * * would be potentially eligible for (3) Services are for an unborn child PART 457—ALLOTMENTS AND Medicaid services based on the and are payable under Medicaid as a GRANTS TO STATES eligibility of his or her mother under service to an eligible pregnant woman one of the poverty level groups under that program. described in section 1902(l) of the Act, 1. The authority citation for part 457 * * * * * continues to read as follows: section 1931 of the Act, or a Medicaid (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance demonstration project approved under Authority: Section 1102 of the Social Program No. 93.767, State Children’s Health section 1115 of the Act. Insurance Program) Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302). * * * * * Dated: August 4, 2002. Subpart A—Introduction; State Plans Subpart F—Payment to States Thomas A. Scully, for Child Health Insurance Programs Administrator, Centers for Medicare & and Outreach Strategies 4. Revise § 457.622(c)(5) to read as Medicaid Services. follows: Approved: August 8, 2002. 2. In § 457.10, the definition of ‘‘child’’ is revised to read as follows: § 457.622 Rate of FFP for State Tommy G. Thompson, expenditures. Secretary. § 457.10 Definitions and use of terms. * * * * * [FR Doc. 02–24856 Filed 9–27–02; 8:45 am] * * * * * (c) * * * BILLING CODE 4120–01–P

VerDate Sep<04>2002 18:39 Oct 01, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02OCR2.SGM 02OCR2 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 191 Wednesday, October 2, 2002

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. 81...... 61786 Presidential Documents 4 CFR 300...... 61802 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: The United States Government Manual 741–6000 21...... 61542 300...... 61844 Other Services 5 CFR 42 CFR Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 2634...... 61761 413...... 61496 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 2635...... 61761 457...... 61956 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 7 CFR 460...... 61496 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 482...... 61805, 61808 29...... 61467 483...... 61808 1260...... 61762 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 484...... 61808 1400...... 61468 World Wide Web 1412...... 61470 43 CFR Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications Proposed Rules: 4...... 61506 is located at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 97...... 61545 2930...... 61732 300...... 61547 3800...... 61732 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 319...... 61547 6300...... 61732 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 1424...... 61565 8340...... 61732 http://www.archives.gov/federallregister/ 8 CFR 8370...... 61732 E-mail 9260...... 61732 103...... 61474 Proposed Rules: FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 214...... 61474 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 2930...... 61746 Proposed Rules: form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 103...... 61568 44 CFR of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 214...... 61568 PDF links to the full text of each document. 201...... 61512 248...... 61568 206...... 61512 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 264...... 61568 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 47 CFR (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 9 CFR 25...... 61814 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 331...... 61767 73...... 61515, 61816 381...... 61767 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. Proposed Rules: To subscribe, go to http://hydra.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 12 CFR 73...... 61572, 61845 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 226...... 61769 the instructions. 48 CFR FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 13 CFR 206...... 61516 respond to specific inquiries. 207...... 61516 Proposed Rules: 217...... 61516 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 121...... 61829 223...... 61516 Federal Register system to: [email protected] 14 CFR 237...... 61516 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 242...... 61516 39 ...... 61476, 61478, 61481, regulations. 245...... 61516 61770, 61771 247...... 61516 Proposed Rules: 1833...... 61519 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, OCTOBER 25...... 61836 1852...... 61519 39 ...... 61569, 61842, 61843 61467–61760...... 1 1872...... 61519 61761–61974...... 2 15 CFR 49 CFR 990...... 61483 40...... 61521 350...... 61818 21 CFR 360...... 61818 101...... 61773 365...... 61818 173...... 61783 372...... 61818 382...... 61818 24 CFR 383...... 61818 92...... 61752 386...... 61818 387...... 61818 33 CFR 388...... 61818 165...... 61494 390...... 61818 391...... 61818 40 CFR 393...... 61818 52...... 61784, 61786 571...... 61523

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:39 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC 02OCCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Reader Aids

50 CFR 17...... 61531 600...... 61824 635...... 61537 660...... 61824 679...... 61826, 61827 Proposed Rules: 17...... 61845

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:39 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC 02OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Reader Aids iii

REMINDERS Food labeling— Gulf sturgeon; comments Indiana; comments due by The items in this list were Soluble dietary fiber and due by 10-7-02; 10-11-02; published 9-11- editorially compiled as an aid coronary heart disease; published 8-8-02 [FR 02 [FR 02-22979] to Federal Register users. health claims; published 02-20091] ENVIRONMENTAL Inclusion or exclusion from 10-2-02 Fishery conservation and PROTECTION AGENCY this list has no legal TRANSPORTATION management: Air quality implementation significance. DEPARTMENT Alaska; fisheries of plans; approval and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Exclusive Economic promulgation; various Administration Zone— States: RULES GOING INTO Indiana; comments due by Motor carrier safety American Fisheries Act EFFECT OCTOBER 2, 10-11-02; published 9-11- regulations: inshore cooperative 2002 requirements; comments 02 [FR 02-22980] Technical amendments; due by 10-7-02; ENVIRONMENTAL published 10-2-02 AGRICULTURE published 8-23-02 [FR PROTECTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT 02-21457] Air quality implementation Agricultural Marketing COMMENTS DUE NEXT Atlantic coastal fisheries plans; approval and Service WEEK cooperative promulgation; various management— States: Tobacco inspection: American lobster; Maine; comments due by Flue-Cured Tobacco AGRICULTURE environmental impact 10-9-02; published 9-9-02 Advisory Committee; DEPARTMENT statement; comments [FR 02-22359] membership regulations Agricultural Marketing due by 10-7-02; amendments; published Service ENVIRONMENTAL published 9-5-02 [FR 10-1-02 Oranges, grapefruit, PROTECTION AGENCY 02-22620] Air quality implementation COMMERCE DEPARTMENT tangerines, and tangelos grown in— West Coast States and plans; approval and National Oceanic and Western Pacific promulgation; various Florida; comments due by Atmospheric Administration fisheries— States: 10-10-02; published 9-10- Fishery conservation and 02 [FR 02-23027] West Coast salmon; Maine; comments due by management: comments due by 10- 10-9-02; published 9-9-02 Alaska; fisheries of AGRICULTURE 11-02; published 9-26- [FR 02-22360] DEPARTMENT Exclusive Economic 02 [FR 02-24371] ENVIRONMENTAL Zone— Agricultural Marketing EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PROTECTION AGENCY Service Pollock; published 10-2-02 Postsecondary education: Air quality implementation Peanuts, domestic and Institutional eligibility; various plans; approval and ENVIRONMENTAL imported, marketed in loan and grant programs; promulgation; various PROTECTION AGENCY United States; minimum comments due by 10-7- States: Air quality implementation quality and handling 02; published 8-8-02 [FR Minnesota; comments due plans; approval and standards; comments due promulgation; various 02-20058] by 10-11-02; published 9- by 10-9-02; published 9-9- 11-02 [FR 02-22977] States; air quality planning 02 [FR 02-22700] Student Assistance General purposes; designation of Provisions and Federal ENVIRONMENTAL AGRICULTURE areas: Perkins Loan, Federal PROTECTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT Louisiana; published 10-2-02 Family Education Loan, Air quality implementation Animal and Plant Health and William D. Ford plans; approval and GOVERNMENT ETHICS Inspection Service Direct Loan Programs; promulgation; various OFFICE Agricultural Bioterrorism comments due by 10-7- States: Executive Branch regulations: Protection Act: 02; published 8-6-02 [FR Minnesota; comments due Financial disclosure and Biological agents and toxins; 02-19521] by 10-11-02; published 9- standards of ethical possession; comments ENERGY DEPARTMENT 11-02 [FR 02-22978] conduct for Executive due by 10-11-02; Energy Efficiency and ENVIRONMENTAL Branch employees; published 8-12-02 [FR 02- Renewable Energy Office PROTECTION AGENCY published 10-2-02 20354] Energy conservation: Air quality implementation HEALTH AND HUMAN plans; approval and AGRICULTURE Alternative fuel SERVICES DEPARTMENT promulgation; various DEPARTMENT transportation program— Centers for Medicare & States: Food and Nutrition Service Fischer-Tropsch diesel Medicaid Services Pennsylvania; comments Child nutrition programs: fuels; workshop, etc.; Medicare and medicaid: due by 10-9-02; published Free and reduced price comments due by 10- 9-9-02 [FR 02-22727] Hospitals, long-term care meals and free milk in 10-02; published 9-10- ENVIRONMENTAL facilities, and home health schools— 02 [FR 02-22908] agencies; immunization PROTECTION AGENCY Eligibility determination; ENVIRONMENTAL Air quality implementation standards conditions of verification reporting PROTECTION AGENCY participation; published plans; approval and and recordkeeping Air pollution control: 10-2-02 promulgation; various requirements; comments State operating permits States: HEALTH AND HUMAN due by 10-8-02; programs— Pennsylvania; comments SERVICES DEPARTMENT published 8-9-02 [FR Maryland; comments due due by 10-9-02; published 02-20163] Food and Drug by 10-10-02; published 9-9-02 [FR 02-22728] Administration COMMERCE DEPARTMENT 9-10-02 [FR 02-23081] Utah; comments due by 10- Food additives: National Oceanic and ENVIRONMENTAL 10-02; published 9-10-02 Secondary direct food Atmospheric Administration PROTECTION AGENCY [FR 02-22986] additives— Endangered and threatened Air quality implementation ENVIRONMENTAL Peroxyacetic acid, etc.; species: plans; approval and PROTECTION AGENCY published 10-2-02 Critical habitat promulgation; various Air quality planning purposes; Food for human consumption: designations— States: designation of areas:

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:39 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC 02OCCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Reader Aids

Louisiana; comments due by retaining some or all of Dry cask independent spent 02; published 9-5-02 [FR 10-10-02; published 9-10- excess rental charges for fuel and monitored 02-22270] 02 [FR 02-22983] project use, etc.; retrievable storage Flight Operational Quality ENVIRONMENTAL comments due by 10-11- installations; siting and Assurance Program PROTECTION AGENCY 02; published 8-12-02 [FR design; geological and information; protection 02-20022] seismological Air quality planning purposes; from disclosure; characteristics; comments designation of areas: HOUSING AND URBAN comments due by 10-7- due by 10-7-02; published 02; published 9-5-02 [FR Louisiana; comments due by DEVELOPMENT 7-22-02 [FR 02-18436] 02-22269] 10-10-02; published 9-10- DEPARTMENT 02 [FR 02-22984] Mortgage and loan insurance SECURITIES AND Aircraft: EXCHANGE COMMISSION Grants and other Federal programs: Fuel tank system fault assistance: Single family mortgage Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002; tolerance evaluations; insurance— implementation: equivalent safety Clean Air Act Tribal provisions; comments due authority— Section 203(k) consultant Annual and quarterly placement and removal company reports; by 10-10-02; published 9- Idaho, Oregon, and procedures; comments disclosure certification; 10-02 [FR 02-22622] Washington; Indian due by 10-8-02; comments due by 10-9- reservations; Federal TRANSPORTATION published 8-9-02 [FR 02; published 9-9-02 [FR implementation plans; DEPARTMENT 02-20240] 02-22572] comments due by 10- Federal Aviation 10-02; published 8-9-02 INTERIOR DEPARTMENT SMALL BUSINESS Administration [FR 02-19440] Indian Affairs Bureau ADMINISTRATION Airworthiness directives: Hazardous waste program Land and water: Small business size standards: Ballonbau Worner GmbH; authorizations: Indian Reservation Roads Nonmanufacturer rule; comments due by 10-10- Minnesota; comments due Program; comments due waivers— 02; published 8-30-02 [FR by 10-9-02; published 9-9- by 10-7-02; published 8-7- Plain unmounted bearings 02-22128] 02 [FR 02-22810] 02 [FR 02-18801] and mounted bearings; TRANSPORTATION Radiation protection programs: INTERIOR DEPARTMENT comments due by 10- DEPARTMENT Transuranic radioactive Fish and Wildlife Service 11-02; published 9-27- Federal Aviation waste for disposal at Endangered and threatened 02 [FR 02-24558] Administration Waste Isolation Pilot species: TRANSPORTATION Airworthiness directives: Plant; waste Black-footed ferrets; DEPARTMENT Bell; comments due by 10- characterization program nonessential experimental Coast Guard 7-02; published 8-6-02 documents availability— population establishment Anchorage regulations: [FR 02-19486] Nevada Test Site, NV; in south-central South Maine; comments due by TRANSPORTATION comments due by 10-9- Dakota; comments due by 10-7-02; published 7-8-02 DEPARTMENT 02; published 9-9-02 10-11-02; published 9-11- [FR 02-17003] Federal Aviation [FR 02-22801] 02 [FR 02-23068] Drawbridge operations: Administration Critical habitat EQUAL EMPLOYMENT Connecticut; comments due Airworthiness directives: OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION designations— by 10-10-02; published 9- Bell; comments due by 10- Gila chub; comments due Age Discrimination in 10-02 [FR 02-22947] 7-02; published 8-7-02 by 10-8-02; published Employment Act: [FR 02-19875] 8-9-02 [FR 02-19872] Florida; comments due by Processing of age 10-7-02; published 8-7-02 Gulf sturgeon; comments TRANSPORTATION discrimination charges; [FR 02-19998] DEPARTMENT comments due by 10-11- due by 10-7-02; Ports and waterways safety: Federal Aviation 02; published 8-12-02 [FR published 8-8-02 [FR Administration 02-20126] 02-20091] Boston Harbor, MA; Flat-tailed horned lizard; Aggregate Industries Airworthiness directives: FEDERAL ELECTION Fireworks display; safety COMMISSION comments due by 10-9- Bell; correction; comments 02; published 9-24-02 [FR zone; comments due by due by 10-7-02; published Coordinated and independent 02-24025] 10-10-02; published 9-20- 8-21-02 [FR C2-19486] expenditures; comments due 02 [FR 02-23916] JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION by 10-11-02; published 9- Oahu, Maui, Hawaii, and Radiation Exposure DEPARTMENT 24-02 [FR 02-23813] Kauai, HI; anchorages Compensation Act Federal Aviation HEALTH AND HUMAN and security zones; Amendments of 2000; Administration SERVICES DEPARTMENT comments due by 10-8- claims: Airworthiness directives: Centers for Medicare & 02; published 9-3-02 [FR Uranium millers, ore Medicaid Services 02-22340] Boeing; comments due by transporters, and miners; Vessel documentation and 10-7-02; published 8-23- Medicare: coverage expansion; measurement: 02 [FR 02-21509] Hospital outpatient representation and fees; TRANSPORTATION prospective payment comments due by 10-7- Coastwise trade vessels; DEPARTMENT system and 2003 FY 02; published 8-7-02 [FR lease financing; comments rates; comments due by 02-19222] due by 10-8-02; published Federal Aviation 8-9-02 [FR 02-20244] Administration 10-8-02; published 8-9-02 NUCLEAR REGULATORY Airworthiness directives: [FR 02-20146] COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION Boeing; comments due by HOUSING AND URBAN Federal Advisory Committee DEPARTMENT 10-11-02; published 8-12- DEVELOPMENT Act regulations; comments Federal Aviation 02 [FR 02-19878] DEPARTMENT due by 10-7-02; published Administration Mortgage and loan insurance 8-8-02 [FR 02-19941] Administrative regulations: TRANSPORTATION programs: Spent nuclear fuel and high- Aviation Safety Action DEPARTMENT Owners of projects receiving level radioactive waste; Programs information; Federal Aviation section 236 rental independent storage; protection from disclosure; Administration assistance; participation in licensing requirements: comments due by 10-7- Airworthiness directives:

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:39 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC 02OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2002 / Reader Aids v

McDonnell Douglas; Correction; comments due TREASURY DEPARTMENT nara005.html. Some laws may comments due by 10-7- by 10-7-02; published Internal Revenue Service not yet be available. 02; published 8-7-02 [FR 9-24-02 [FR 02-24123] Income taxes: 02-19879] TRANSPORTATION Welfare beneft fund; H.R. 1646/P.L. 107–228 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT guidance regarding Foreign Relations DEPARTMENT Surface Transportation whether part of 10 or Authorization Act, Fiscal Year Federal Aviation Board more employer plan; 2003 (Sept. 30, 2002; 116 Administration Fees: comments due by 10-9- Stat. 1350) Airworthiness directives: Licensing and related 02; published 7-11-02 [FR H.J. Res. 111/P.L. 107–229 McDonnell Douglas; services; 2002 update; 02-17469] comments due by 10-7- comments due by 10-11- Income, employment, and gift Making continuing 02; published 8-23-02 [FR 02; published 9-11-02 [FR taxes: appropriations for the fiscal 02-21508] 02-22918] Split-dollar life insurance year 2003, and for other Class D and Class E Practice and procedure: arrangements; comments purposes. (Sept. 30, 2002; airspace; comments due by Rate challenges; expedited due by 10-7-02; published 116 Stat. 1465) 10-7-02; published 8-28-02 resolution under stand- 7-9-02 [FR 02-17042] Last List September 26, 2002 [FR 02-21136] alone cost methodology; comments due by 10-9- TRANSPORTATION LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS DEPARTMENT 02; published 9-11-02 [FR 02-22808] Public Laws Electronic Federal Aviation This is a continuing list of Administration TREASURY DEPARTMENT public bills from the current Notification Service Class E airspace; comments Alcohol, Tobacco and session of Congress which (PENS) due by 10-10-02; published Firearms Bureau have become Federal laws. It 9-4-02 [FR 02-22496] Alcoholic beverages: may be used in conjunction TRANSPORTATION Wine; labeling and with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws PENS is a free electronic mail DEPARTMENT advertising— Update Service) on 202–741– notification service of newly 6043. This list is also enacted public laws. To Federal Aviation American wines; Petite available online at http:// subscribe, go to http:// Administration Sirah and Zinfandel; new prime grape variety www.nara.gov/fedreg/ hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ Class E airspace; comments names; comments due plawcurr.html. publaws-l.html or send E-mail due by 10-11-02; published by 10-8-02; published to [email protected] The text of laws is not 8-27-02 [FR 02-21137] 6-6-02 [FR 02-14132] with the following text Class E airspace; correction; published in the Federal TREASURY DEPARTMENT message: comments due by 10-11-02; Register but may be ordered published 8-30-02 [FR C2- Foreign Assets Control in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L 21576] Office pamphlet) form from the Your Name. Sudan, Libya, and Iran; Superintendent of Documents, TRANSPORTATION agricultural commodities, U.S. Government Printing Note: This service is strictly DEPARTMENT medicine, and medical Office, Washington, DC 20402 for E-mail notification of new National Highway Traffic devices exportation; (phone, 202–512–1808). The laws. The text of laws is not Safety Administration licensing procedures; text will also be made available through this service. Motor vehicle safety comments due by 10-7-02; available on the Internet from PENS cannot respond to standards: published 9-6-02 [FR 02- GPO Access at http:// specific inquiries sent to this Accelerator control systems 22689] www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ address.

VerDate Sep 04 2002 02:39 Oct 02, 2002 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\02OCCU.LOC 02OCCU