6–7–00 Wednesday Vol. 65 No. 110 June 7, 2000 Pages 36053–36306

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:33 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07JNWS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNWS

1 II Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000

The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 523–5243 Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ fedreg. FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, HOW TO USE IT the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. Regulations. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register system and the public’s role in the development of as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions regulations. (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text of Federal Regulations. and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register documents. documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system. Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), WHY: To provide the public with access to information necessary to or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check research Federal agency regulations which directly affect them. retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations. downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access WASHINGTON, DC can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to WHEN: July 11, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log WHERE: Office of the Federal Register in as guest with no password. Conference Room For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access 800 North Capitol Street, NW. User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at Washington, DC (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll (3 blocks north of Union Station Metro) free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, RESERVATIONS: 202–523–4538 except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $638, or $697 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 $253. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $9.00 for each issue, or $9.00 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: 65 FR 12345.

.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:33 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07JNWS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNWS

2 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110

Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Agriculture Department Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: See Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Elementary and secondary education— Service Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National See Forest Service Programs, 36124–36125 See Natural Resources Conservation Service Energy Department Air Force Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES See Western Area Power Administration Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, NOTICES 36121–36123 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Weatherization Training and Program Enhancement, Antitrust Division 36125 NOTICES Meetings: Competitive impact statements and proposed consent Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory judgments: Board— Allied Waste Industries, et al., 36223–36242 Kirtland Area Office (Sandia), NM, 36126 Los Alamos National Laboratories, NM, 36125–36126 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Pantex Plant, TX, 36126–36127 NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Environmental Protection Agency Infectious diseases; postdoctoral fellowship training RULES program, 36145–36148 Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for designated facilities and pollutants: Coast Guard Alabama; correction, 36067 NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel, 36133–36134 Recreational boating safety projects, programs, and Science Advisory Board, 36134 activities, 36215–36218 Pesticides: Meetings: Worker protection standards— Chemical Transportation Advisory Committee, 36218 Cut roses, 36134–36137

Commerce Department Federal Aviation Administration See International Trade Administration RULES See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Aircraft products and parts; certification procedures: NOTICES Changed products; type certification procedures, 36243– Agency information collection activities: 36266 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36109– Airworthiness directives: 36110 Ayres Corp., 36055–36059 Eurocopter France, 36059–36060 Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Lockheed, 36053–36055 Service Class B airspace, 36060–36066 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Airworthiness directives: Small Business Innovation Research Program, 36267– Boeing, 36095–36097 36269 Federal Election Commission Corporation for National and Community Service RULES NOTICES Reports by political committees: Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36121 Campaign finance reports and statements; copies filed with State officers, 36053 Defense Department See Air Force Department Federal Emergency Management Agency RULES Delaware River Basin Commission Flood elevation determinations: NOTICES Various States, 36068–36074 Meetings and hearings, 36123 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Education Department Proposed collection; comment request, 36137–36138 NOTICES Disaster and emergency areas: Agency information collection activities: Maine, 36138–36139 Proposed collection; comment request, 36123–36124 Missouri, 36139

VerDate 112000 22:27 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07JNCN.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Contents

New Mexico, 36139–36140 See Food and Drug Administration South Dakota, 36140 See Health Resources and Services Administration Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: See National Institutes of Health U.S. Fire Administrator’s National Fire Safety Campaign NOTICES grant program, 36140–36141 Meetings: Medicare Trustees Reports Technical Review Panel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 36145 NOTICES Electric utilities (Federal Power Act): Health Resources and Services Administration Open access same-time information system (OASIS) and NOTICES standards of conduct— Agency information collection activities: OASIS Standards and Communication Protocols Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36149 Document; availability, 36283–36287 Meetings: Housing and Urban Development Department Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 36131 RULES Sunshine Act notice; format change, 36132 Mortgage and loan insurance programs: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Multifamily housing projects; tenant participation, Columbia Gas Transmission Corp., 36127 36271–36282 Dominion Transmission, Inc., 36127–36128 Horizon Pipeline Co., L.L.C., et al., 36128–36129 Interior Department Midwest Electric Power, Inc., 36129 See Land Management Bureau Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, 36129–36130 See National Park Service New Hampshire Electric Cooperative, Inc., 36130 See Reclamation Bureau Sumas International Pipeline, Inc., 36130 See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office Trailblazer Pipeline Co., 36130–36131 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 36131 Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc., 36131 International Trade Administration NOTICES Federal Housing Finance Board Antidumping: RULES Circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from— Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Taiwan, 36110–36112 Financial Office; issuance of consolidated obligations on Polyvinyl alcohol from— which Federal home loan banks are jointly and Japan, 36112–36116 severally liable, 36289–36304 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Special American Business Internship Training Program, Federal home loan bank system: 36117–36120 Financial management policy ; changes, 36305–36306 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Purdue University, 36116–36117 Federal Maritime Commission NOTICES International Trade Commission Agreements filed, etc., 36141–36142 NOTICES Casualty and nonperformance certificates: Agency information collection activities: American Classic Voyages Co. et al., 36142 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36163 Celebrity Cruises Inc. and Millennium Inc. et al., 36142– Import investigations: 36143 Coumarin from— Freight forwarder licenses: China, 36163–36164 Youngtrans, Inc., et al., 36143 Magnesium from— Canada, 36164 Federal Reserve System Mechanical transfer presses from— NOTICES Japan, 36164 Banks and bank holding companies: Non-frozen concentrated apple juice from— Change in bank control, 36143 China, 36165 Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 36143–36144 Permissible nonbanking activities, 36144 Justice Department Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36144 See Antitrust Division See Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Office Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Food additive petitions: Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Office Wesley Jessen Corp., 36148–36149 NOTICES Meetings: Forest Service Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention NOTICES Coordinating Council, 36165 Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 36108–36109 Labor Department NOTICES Health and Human Services Department Agency information collection activities: See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Proposed collection; comment request, 36165–36166

VerDate 112000 22:27 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07JNCN.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCN Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Contents V

Land Management Bureau National Park Service NOTICES NOTICES Motor vehicle use restrictions: Agency information collection activities: Montana, 36159 Proposed collection; comment request, 36161–36162 Public land orders: Meetings: Oregon, 36160 Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail Advisory Utah, 36160–36161 Council, 36162 Withdrawal and reservation of lands: California, 36161 Natural Resources Conservation Service NOTICES Maritime Administration Environmental statements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Upper Deckers Creek Watershed, WV, 36109 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Farrell Lines Inc., 36218–36219 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36169 Merit Systems Protection Board Regulatory agreements: NOTICES Oklahoma, 36169–36174 Privacy Act: Systems of records, 36166–36167 Public Health Service See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Archives and Records Administration See Food and Drug Administration NOTICES See Health Resources and Services Administration Agency records schedules; availability, 36167–36169 See National Institutes of Health

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Reclamation Bureau PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Motor vehicle safety standards: Agency information collection activities: Occupant crash protection— Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36162– Occupant protection in interior impact; head impact 36163 protection, 36106–36107 Securities and Exchange Commission National Institutes of Health NOTICES Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36174– Proposed collection; comment request, 36149–36150 36175 Investment Company Act of 1940: Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, Exemption applications— 36150–36151 Strategist Growth Fund, Inc., et al., 36177–36178 Meetings: Toronto Dominion Bank, et al., 36175–36176 Clinical Center, 36151 Share substitution application— National Cancer Institute, 36151–36152 Nationwide Life Insurance Co., et al., 36178–36180 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Options price reporting authority: 36153 Temporary capacity allocation plan, 36180–36182 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Securities: Skin Diseases, 36152–36153 Suspension of trading— National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research, Asthma Disease Management, Inc.; correction, 36222 36153–36154 Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, American Stock Exchange LLC, 36182–36185 36152 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 36185–36188 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Depository Trust Co., 36188–36189 36152 Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 36189–36191 National Institute on Drug Abuse, 36153 National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, 36154 correction, 36191–36203 Scientific Review Center, 36154–36159 National Securities Clearing Corp., 36203–36206 Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially New York Stock Exchange, Inc.; correction, 36222 exclusive: Pacific Exchange, Inc., 36206–36208 Mallinckrodt, Inc., 36159 Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 36209–36210 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Small Business Administration RULES NOTICES Endangered and threatened species: Disaster loan areas: West Coast steelhead; Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Oklahoma, 36210 California populations, 36074–36094 NOTICES Social Security Administration Meetings: NOTICES Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 36120 Disability determination procedures: Permits: Disability claims process redesign prototype, 36210– Marine mammals, 36120–36121 36213

VerDate 112000 22:27 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07JNCN.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Contents

State Department Western Area Power Administration NOTICES NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Power rate adjustments: U.S.-China Youth Exchange Initiative, 36213–36215 Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Intertie Project, 36132–36133 Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office PROPOSED RULES Permanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation Separate Parts In This Issue plan submissions: Colorado, 36098–36101 Part II New Mexico, 36101–36106 Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, 36223–36242 Surface coal mining and reclamation operations: Ownership and control of mining operations; definitions, Part III permit requirements, enforcement actions, etc., Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 36097–36098 Administration, 36243–36266 Part IV Transportation Department Department of Agriculture, Cooperative State Research, See Coast Guard Education, and Extension Service, 36267–36269 See Federal Aviation Administration See Maritime Administration Part V See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Department of Housing and Urban Development, 36271– 36282

Treasury Department Part VI NOTICES Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Meetings: Commission, 36283–36287 Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, 36219 Part VII Federal Housing Finance Board, 36289–36306 Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Reader Aids Proposed collection; comment request, 36219–36220 Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Submission for OMB review; comment request, 36220– phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, 36221 and notice of recently enacted public laws.

VerDate 112000 22:27 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\07JNCN.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCN Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Contents VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

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

11 CFR 108...... 36053 12 CFR 900...... 36290 905...... 36290 965...... 36290 966...... 36290 969...... 36290 985...... 36290 989...... 36290 14 CFR 11...... 36244 21...... 36244 25...... 36244 39 (3 documents) ...... 36053, 36055, 36059 71...... 36060 Proposed Rules: 39...... 36095 24 CFR 245...... 36272 30 CFR Proposed Rules: 701...... 36097 724...... 36097 773...... 36097 774...... 36097 778...... 36097 842...... 36097 843...... 36097 846...... 36097 906...... 36098 931 (2 documents) ...... 36101, 36104 40 CFR 62...... 36067 44 CFR 65 (3 documents) ...... 36068, 36069, 36070 67...... 36072 49 CFR Proposed Rules: 571...... 36106 50 CFR 223...... 36074

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:34 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07JNLS.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNLS 36053

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110

Wednesday, June 7, 2000

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER that support or oppose them, which are DATES: Effective July 12, 2000. The contains regulatory documents having general filed with the Secretary of the Senate. incorporation by reference of certain applicability and legal effect, most of which The new rules also exempt from State publications listed in the regulations is are keyed to and codified in the Code of receipt and maintenance requirements approved by the Director of the Federal Federal Regulations, which is published under reports filed with the Secretary of the Register as of July 12, 2000. 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Senate that can be accessed ADDRESSES: The service information The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by electronically from the Commission’s referenced in this AD may be obtained the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of Web site, www.fec.gov. from Lockheed Martin Aircraft & new books are listed in the first FEDERAL Section 438(d) of Title 2, United Logistics Center, 120 Orion Street, REGISTER issue of each week. States Code, requires that any rules or Greenville, South Carolina 29605. regulations prescribed by the This information may be examined at Commission to carry out the provisions the Federal Aviation Administration FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION of Title 2 of the United States Code be (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, transmitted to the Speaker of the House Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 11 CFR Part 108 of Representatives and the President of Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, [Notice 2000±12] the Senate thirty legislative days prior to Small Airplane Directorate, Atlanta final promulgation. These rules were Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown Filing Copies of Campaign Finance transmitted to Congress on March 17, Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite Reports and Statements With State 2000. Thirty legislative days expired in 450, Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of Officers the Senate on May 16, 2000, and the the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol House of Representatives on May 23, AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. 2000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Final rule; announcement of effective date. Darryl R. Wold, Thomas Peters, Aerospace Engineer, Chairman, Federal Election Commission. Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE– 116A, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, SUMMARY: On March 22, 2000 at 65 FR [FR Doc. 00–14241 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 15221, the Commission published the BILLING CODE 6715±01±P text of revised regulations governing One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix filing of campaign finance reports with Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia State officers and the duties of State 30349; telephone (770) 703–6063; fax officers concerning the reports. The DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (770) 703–6097. Commission announces that these rules SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A are effective as of June 7, 2000. Federal Aviation Administration proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal EFFECTIVE DATE: Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to The amendment to 11 14 CFR Part 39 CFR 108.1, 108.2, 108.3, 108.4, and include an airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to all Lockheed Model 108.6 as publiched at 65 FR 15221 [Docket No. 98±NM±311±AD; Amendment (March 22, 2000), are effective as of June 39±11744; AD 2000±10±20] L–1011–385 series airplanes was 7, 2000. published in the Federal Register on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. RIN 2120±AA64 February 16, 2000 (65 FR 7801). That Rosemary C. Smith, Assistant General action proposed to require require Counsel, or Ms. Rita A. Reimer, Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed repetitive inspections to detect cracking Attorney, 999 E Street, NW., Model L±1011±385 Series Airplanes of the fuselage skin in the areas of the Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694–1650 left- and right-hand stringerless sidewall AGENCY: Federal Aviation window belts, and repair, if necessary. or toll free (800) 424–9530. Administration, DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ACTION: Final rule. Comments Commission is announcing the effective Interested persons have been afforded date of revised regulations at 11 CFR SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a an opportunity to participate in the Part 108, governing filing copies of new airworthiness directive (AD), making of this amendment. No campaign finance reports and applicable to all Lockheed Model L– comments were submitted in response statements with State officers. These 1011–385 series airplanes, that requires to the proposal or the FAA’s rules implement a 1995 amendment to repetitive inspections to detect cracking determination of the cost to the public. the Federal Election Campaign Act at 2 of the fuselage skin in the areas of the U.S.C. 439(c) that exempts States left- and right-hand stringerless sidewall Conclusion meeting certain criteria from receipt and window belts, and repair, if necessary. The FAA has determined that air maintenance requirements for reports This amendment is prompted by reports safety and the public interest require the filed in connection with federal of fatigue cracks found in the fuselage adoption of the rule as proposed. elections. skin where the skin thickness steps from The statutory amendment specifically 0.40 to 0.23 inch. The actions specified Cost Impact covers reports and statements filed with by this AD are intended to detect and There are approximately 235 the Commission, i.e., all except those correct cracking of the fuselage skin, airplanes of the affected design in the filed by Senate candidates, their which could result in reduced structural worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that authorized committees, and committees integrity of the airplane. 117 airplanes of U.S. registry will be

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36054 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations affected by this AD, that it will take 2000–10–20 Lockheed: Amendment 39– any affected inspection zone in accordance approximately 48 work hours per 11744. Docket 98–NM–311–AD. with Part II of the Accomplishment airplane to accomplish the required Applicability: All Model L–1011–385 Instructions of the service bulletin. Such series airplanes, as listed in Lockheed repair constitutes terminating action for the inspection, and that the average labor repetitive inspection requirements of this AD rate is $60 per work hour. Based on Service Bulletin 093–53–279, dated May 6, 1998; certificated in any category. for the repaired inspection zone only. these figures, the cost impact of the AD (ii) If the results of the LFEC inspection Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane on U.S. operators is estimated to be specified by paragraph (c)(1) of this AD are identified in the preceding applicability within the reject zone: Prior to further flight, $336,960, or $2,880 per airplane. provision, regardless of whether it has been repair any affected inspection zone in The cost impact figure discussed modified, altered, or repaired in the area accordance with Part II of the above is based on assumptions that no subject to the requirements of this AD. For Accomplishment Instructions of the service operator has yet accomplished any of airplanes that have been modified, altered, or bulletin. Such repair constitutes terminating repaired so that the performance of the the requirements of this AD action, and action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD is affected, the that no operator would accomplish requirements of this AD for the repaired those actions in the future if this AD owner/operator must request approval for an inspection zone only. were not adopted. alternative method of compliance in (2) If the results of the LFEC inspection are accordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. The within the reject zone, as defined in the Regulatory Impact request should include an assessment of the service bulletin: Prior to further flight, repair effect of the modification, alteration, or repair The regulations adopted herein will any affected inspection zone in accordance on the unsafe condition addressed by this with Part II of the Accomplishment not have a substantial direct effect on AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been the States, on the relationship between Instructions of the service bulletin. Such eliminated, the request should include repair constitutes terminating action for the the national Government and the States, specific proposed actions to address it. repetitive inspection requirements of this AD or on the distribution of power and Compliance: Required as indicated, unless for the repaired inspection zone only. responsibilities among the various accomplished previously. (d) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of levels of government. Therefore, it is To detect and correct cracking of the this AD: For any reading of 50 percent or determined that this final rule does not fuselage skin, which could result in reduced greater obtained at any inspection zone have federalism implications under structural integrity of the airplane, during the ultrasonic inspection required by Executive Order 13132. accomplish the following: paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further For the reasons discussed above, I (a) Perform an ultrasonic inspection on the flight, perform a LFEC inspection to measure fuselage skin in the area of the stringerless the depth of the cracking, in accordance with certify that this action (1) is not a sidewall window belts, at the radii on both Lockheed Service Bulletin 093–53–279, ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under the forward and aft sides of the machined dated May 6, 1998. Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a cutout where the fuselage skin steps from (1) If the results of the LFEC inspection are ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 0.40 to 0.23 inch, to detect cracking in the outside the reject zone, as defined in the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 base of the radii. Accomplish the inspection service bulletin: Within 300 flight cycles, FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) in accordance with Lockheed Service repeat both the ultrasonic and LFEC will not have a significant economic Bulletin 093–53–279, dated May 6, 1998, at inspections specified in paragraphs (a) and impact, positive or negative, on a each of the 6 specific inspection zones (c), respectively, of this AD. identified in the service bulletin at the later (i) If the results of the LFEC inspection substantial number of small entities of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1) specified by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD are under the criteria of the Regulatory and (a)(2) of this AD. outside the reject zone: Within 600 flight Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has (1) Prior to the accumulation of 20,000 cycles after the initial crack finding, as been prepared for this action and it is total flight cycles; or detected during the ultrasonic inspection contained in the Rules Docket. A copy (2) Within 600 flight cycles or 6 months specified in paragraph (a) of this AD, repair of it may be obtained from the Rules after the effective date of this AD, whichever any affected inspection zone in accordance Docket at the location provided under occurs first. with Part II of the Accomplishment (b) For readings of less than 20 percent Instructions of the service bulletin. Such the caption ADDRESSES. obtained at all 6 inspection zones during the repair constitutes terminating action for the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 ultrasonic inspection required by paragraph repetitive inspection requirements of this AD (a) of this AD: Repeat the ultrasonic for the repaired inspection zone only. Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation inspection thereafter at intervals not to (ii) If the results of the LFEC inspection safety, Incorporation by reference, exceed 1,500 flight cycles. specified by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD are Safety. (c) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of within the reject zone: Prior to further flight, this AD: For any reading of 20 percent or repair any affected inspection zone in Adoption of the Amendment greater and less than or equal to 50 percent accordance with Part II of the Accordingly, pursuant to the obtained at any inspection zone during the Accomplishment Instructions of the service authority delegated to me by the ultrasonic inspection required by paragraph bulletin. Such repair constitutes terminating (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, perform action for the repetitive inspection Administrator, the Federal Aviation a low frequency eddy current (LFEC) requirements of this AD for the repaired Administration amends part 39 of the inspection to measure the depth of the inspection zone only. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR cracking, in accordance with Lockheed (2) If the results from the LFEC inspection part 39) as follows: Service Bulletin 093–53–279, dated May 6, are within the reject zone, as defined in the 1998. service bulletin: Prior to further flight, repair PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS (1) If the results of the LFEC inspection are any affected inspection zone in accordance DIRECTIVES outside the reject zone, as defined in the with Part II of the Accomplishment service bulletin: Within 1,500 flight cycles, Instructions of the service bulletin. Such 1. The authority citation for part 39 repeat both the ultrasonic and LFEC repair constitutes terminating action for the continues to read as follows: inspections specified by paragraphs (a) and repetitive inspection requirements of this AD Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. (c), respectively, of this AD. for the repaired inspection zone only. (i) If the results of the LFEC inspection (e) For any inspection results that require § 39.13 [Amended] specified by paragraph (c)(1) of this AD are repair in two adjacent zones: Prior to further outside the reject zone: Within 1,800 flight flight, repair in accordance with a method 2. Section 39.13 is amended by cycles after the initial crack finding, as approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft adding the following new airworthiness detected during the ultrasonic inspection Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Small directive: specified in paragraph (a) of this AD, repair Airplane Directorate.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36055

Alternative Methods of Compliance which currently requires you to • Inspect the 1/4-inch and 5/16-inch (f) An alternative method of compliance or accomplish the following on Ayres bolt hole areas on the lower spar caps adjustment of the compliance time that Corporation (Ayres) S2R Series and for fatigue cracking; provides an acceptable level of safety may be Model 600 S2D airplanes: inspect the • Replace any lower spar cap where used if approved by the Manager, Atlanta 1⁄4-inch and 5⁄16-inch bolt hole areas on fatigue cracking is found; and ACO. Operators shall submit their requests the lower spar caps for fatigue cracking; • Report any fatigue cracking to FAA. through an appropriate FAA Principal Investigation of all resources available Maintenance Inspector, who may add replace any lower spar cap where comments and then send it to the Manager, fatigue cracking is found; and report any to FAA at the time of the accident Atlanta ACO. fatigue cracking. This AD retains the showed nine occurrences of fatigue Note 2: Information concerning the inspection and replacement (if cracking in the lower spar caps of Ayres existence of approved alternative methods of necessary) requirements of the lower S2R airplanes, specifically emanating compliance with this AD, if any, may be spar caps that are currently required in from the 1⁄4-inch and 5⁄16-inch bolt obtained from the Atlanta ACO. AD 97–17–03. This AD also makes these holes. Investigation of the above- inspections repetitive, adds additional referenced accident revealed that the Special Flight Permits airplanes to the Applicability of the AD, cause can be attributed to fatigue cracks (g) Special flight permits may be issued in changes the initial compliance time for emanating from the 1⁄2-inch and 5⁄16- accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 all airplanes, and arranges the affected inch bolt holes in the lower spar caps. of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to airplanes into groups (six) based on Because the Ayres Model 600 S2D a location where the requirements of this AD usage and configurations. The existing airplanes have a similar type design to can be accomplished. AD was the result of an accident of an that of the S2R series airplanes, they Ayres S2R series airplane where the were included in the Applicability of Incorporation by Reference wing separated from the airplane in AD 97–17–03. (h) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of flight. The actions specified by this AD Data indicates that the fatigue cracks this AD, the actions shall be done in are intended to detect and correct on these Ayres S2R series airplanes accordance with Lockheed Service Bulletin become detectable at different times 093–53–279, dated May 6, 1998. This fatigue cracking of the lower spar caps, incorporation by reference was approved by which could result in the wing based upon the type of engines and the Director of the Federal Register in separating from the airplane with design of the airplane. With this in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR consequent loss of control of the mind, FAA categorized these airplanes part 51. Copies may be obtained from airplane. into three groups for the Applicability of Lockheed Martin Aircraft & Logistics Center, DATES: This AD becomes effective on AD 97–17–03. 120 Orion Street, Greenville, South Carolina Since issuing AD 97–17–03, we 29605. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, July 25, 2000. The Director of the Federal Register received data specifying 29 additional Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind occurrences of fatigue cracks found in Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the approved the incorporation by reference FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Atlanta of certain publications listed in the the lower spar caps of Ayres S2R and Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown regulations as of July 25, 2000. Model 600 S2D airplanes. The data from these occurrences indicate the Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450, ADDRESSES: You may get the service following: Atlanta, Georgia; or at the Office of the information referenced in this AD from Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, • Several of these occurrences the Ayres Corporation, P.O. Box 3090, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. involved airplanes that had not One Rockwell Avenue, Albany, Georgia (i) This amendment becomes effective on accumulated enough hours to require 31706–3090. You may examine this July 12, 2000. the initial inspection of AD 97–17–03; information at the Federal Aviation Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 17, • Detectable cracks could still 2000. Administration (FAA), Central Region, develop after the initial inspection on Office of the Regional Counsel, Donald L. Riggin, the affected airplanes; and Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–CE–56– Acting Manager, Transport Airplane • Ayres has manufactured additional Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, airplanes that have a similar type design Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the [FR Doc. 00–14018 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] to that of the airplanes affected by AD Federal Register, 800 North Capitol BILLING CODE 4910±13±U 97–17–03. The existing AD should also Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC. cover these airplanes. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To address the above areas, FAA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Satish Lall, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, (NPRM) to supersede AD 97–17–03. Federal Aviation Administration One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix This NPRM was published in the Boulevard, Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia Federal Register on January 13, 1999 14 CFR Part 39 30349; telephone: (770) 7036082; (64 FR 2157). The NPRM proposed to facsimile: (770) 703–6097. [Docket No. 98±CE±56±AD; Amendment 39± supersede AD 97–17–03 with a new AD 11764; AD 2000±11±16] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that would: • Retain the inspection and Events Leading to the Issuance of This RIN 2120±AA64 replacement (if necessary) requirements AD of the lower spar caps that are currently Airworthiness Directives; Ayres Has FAA taken any action to this required in AD 97–17–03; Corporation S2R Series and Model 600 point? An accident on an Ayres S2R • Make these inspections repetitive; S2D Airplanes series airplane where the wing • Add additional airplanes to the AGENCY: Federal Aviation separated from the airplane in flight Applicability of the AD; Administration, DOT. caused FAA to issue AD 9717–03, • Change the initial compliance time ACTION: Final rule. Amendment 39–10195 (62 FR 43296, for all airplanes; and August 18, 1997). AD 97–17–03 • Arrange the affected airplanes into SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes currently requires you to accomplish the four groups instead of three based on Airworthiness Directive (AD) 97–17–03, following: usage and configurations.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36056 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Was the public invited to comment on the number of wing spar caps that may GROUP 1 AIRPLANES the NPRM? The FAA invited interested need to be replaced based upon the persons to participate in the making of results of the inspections. Model Serial numbers the amendment. Based on the comments Regulatory Impact to this NPRM, we changed the NPRM S±2R ...... 5000R through 5099R, except and reopened the comment period The regulations adopted herein will 5010R 5031R, 3038R, 5047R, and 5085R. through a supplemental NPRM. The not have a substantial direct effect on supplemental NPRM specifically S2R±R1820 R1820±001 through R1820± the States, on the relationship between 035. proposed to organize the affected the national government and the States, airplanes into six groups based on usage S2R±T34 .... 6000R through 6049R, T34± or on the distribution of power and 001 through T34±143, T34± and configurations, adjust the repetitive responsibilities among the various 145, T34±147 through T34± inspection intervals, provide levels of government. Therefore, FAA 167, T34±171, T34±180, and alternatives for inspection methods, and determines that this final rule does not T34±181*. include modification alternatives to have federalism implications under S2R±T15 .... T15±001 through T15±033**. replacing the spar cap. Executive Order 13132. S2R±G1 ..... G1±101 through G1±106. The FAA again invited interested The FAA has determined that this persons to participate in the making of *The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T34 action: this amendment. No comments were airplanes could incorporate T34±xxx, T36±xxx, (1) is not a ‘‘significant regulatory T41±xxx, or T42±xxx. This AD applies to all of received. these serial number designations as they are action’’ under Executive Order 12866; all Model S2R±T34 airplanes. The FAA’s Determination (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under **The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T15 What is FAA’s final determination on DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures airplanes could incorporate T15±xxx and T27± this issue? After careful review of all xxx. This AD applies to both of these serial (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and number designations as they are both Model available information related to the (3) will not have a significant S2R±T15 airplanes. subject presented above, we have economic impact, positive or negative, determined that air safety and the on a substantial number of small entities GROUP 2 AIRPLANES public interest require the adoption of under the criteria of the Regulatory the rule as proposed except minor Flexibility Act. The FAA has prepared Model Serial numbers editorial corrections. a final evaluation and placed it in the How do the minor editorial Rules Docket. You can get a copy of this S2R±R1820 R1820±036. corrections affect the AD? We have evaluation at the location listed under S2R±T65 .... T65±001 through T65±017. determined that the minor corrections the caption ADDRESSES. S2RHG± T65±002 through T65±017. will not change the meaning of the AD T65. and will not add any additional burden List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 S2R±T34 .... T34±144, T34±146, T34±168, upon the public than was already T34±169, T34±172 through Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation proposed. T34±179, and T34±189 safety, Incorporation by reference, through T34±232. And T34± Cost Impact Safety. 234.* How many airplanes does this AD Adoption of the Amendment S2R±T45 .... T45±001 through T45±014. impact? We estimate that this AD will S2R±G6 ..... G6±101 through G6±147. affect 1,000 airplanes in the U.S. Accordingly, under the authority S2R±G10 ... G10±101 through G10±136, registry. delegated to me by the Administrator, G10±138, G10±140, and What is the cost impact of the initial the Federal Aviation Administration G10±141. inspection on owners/operators of the amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation S2R±G5 ..... G5±101 through G5±105. affected airplanes? We estimate 3 Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: *The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T34 workhours per airplane to accomplish airplanes could incorporate T34±xxx, T36±xxx, the initial inspection, at an average PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS T41±xxx, or T42±xxx. This AD applies to all of DIRECTIVES these serial number designations as they are labor rate of $60 an hour. Parts to all Model S2R±T34 airplanes. accomplish the initial inspection cost approximately $417 per airplane. Based 1. The authority citation for part 39 GROUP 3 AIRPLANES* on these figures, we estimate the cost continues to read as follows: impact of the initial inspection of this Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Model Serial numbers AD on U.S. operators at $597,000, or § 39.13 [Amended] $597 per airplane. 600 S2D ..... All serial numbers beginning What about the cost of repetitive 2. FAA amends Section 39.13 is with 600±1311D. inspections and possible repairs and amended by removing Airworthiness S±2R ...... 1380R and 1416R through replacements? The figures above only Directive (AD) 97–17–03, Amendment 4999R. take into account the cost of the initial 39–10105 (62 FR 43926, August 18, S2R±R1340 R1340±001 through R1340± inspection and do not take into account 1997), and by adding a new AD to read 035. the cost of repetitive inspections. We as follows: S2R±R3S ... R3S±001 through R3S±011. have no way of determining how many S2R±T11 .... T11±001 through T11±005. repetitive inspections each owner/ 2000–11–16 Ayres Corporation: Docket No. 98–CE–56–AD, Amendment 39–11764; *Any Group 3 airplane that has been modi- operator of the affected airplanes would Supersedes AD 97–17–03, Amendment fied with a hopper of a capacity over 410 gal- incur. These figures are based upon the 39–10105. lons, a piston engine greater than 600 horse- power, or any gas turbine engine, makes the presumption that no affected airplane (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? operator has accomplished the airplane a Group 1 airplane for the purposes Airplanes with the following model and of this AD. The owner/operator must inspect inspection, and do not take into account serial number (S/N) designations with or the airplane at the Group 1 compliance time the cost for replacement if a crack is without a –DC or –X suffix, certificated in specified in this AD. found. We have no way of determining any category:

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36057

GROUP 4 AIRPLANES subparagraphs) to obtain the initial and (i) Group 1 Airplanes: Required upon the repetitive inspection compliance times. accumulation of 2,000 hours time-in-service Model Serial numbers (i) The cracks may emanate from the bolt (TIS) on each lower spar cap or within 50 hole on the face of the spar cap or they may flight hours after the effective date of this AD, S2R±T34 .... T34±225, T34±236, T34±237, occur in the shaft of the hole. whichever occurs later, unless already and T34±238.* (ii) You must inspect both of these areas. accomplished (compliance with AD 97–1703 S2R±G1 ..... G1±107, G1±108, and G1±109. (2) If any cracking is found during any or AD 97–13–11). S2R±G10 ... G10±137, G10±139, and G10± inspection required by this AD, you must (ii) Group 2 Airplanes: Required upon the 142. accomplish the following: accumulation of 2,200 hours TIS on each (i) Use the cold work process to ream out lower spar cap or within 50 flight hours after The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T34 small cracks as defined in Ayres Service the effective date of this AD, whichever occur airplanes could incorporate T34±xxx, T36±xxx, Bulletin No. SB–AG–39, dated September 17, later, unless already accomplished T41±xxx, or T42±xxx. This AD applies to all of 1996; or replace the affected spar cap in these serial number designations as they are (compliance with AD 97–17–03 or AD 97– accordance with the maintenance manual; or 13–11). all Model S2R±T34 airplanes. 1 5 ream the ⁄4-inch bolt holes to ⁄16 inches (iii) Group 3 Airplanes: Required upon the diameter as defined in Part I of Ayres Custom GROUP 5 AIRPLANES accumulation of 6,400 hours TIS on each Kit No. CK–AG–29, dated December 23, lower spar cap or within 50 flight hours after 1997; and the effective date of this AD, whichever Model Serial numbers (ii) Submit a report of inspection findings occurs later, unless already accomplished to the Manager, Atlanta ACO, One Crown (compliance with AD 97–17–03 or AD 97– S2R±T34 .... T34±239 through T34±266.* Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450, 13–11). S2RHG± T34HG±102. Atlanta, Georgia 30349; facsimile: (770) 703– (iv) Group 4 Airplanes: Required upon the T34. 6097. You must include the airplane serial S2R±T15 .... T15±034 through T15±040.** number and engine model number; the total accumulation of 2,500 hours TIS on each S2R±T45 .... T45±015. number of flight hours on the lower spar cap lower spar cap or within 50 flight hours after S2R±G1 ..... G1±110 Through G1±114. that is cracked; time on the spar cap since the effective date of this AD, whichever S2R±G6 ..... G6±148 through G6±151. last inspection, if applicable; and the type of occurs later, unless already accomplished S2R±G10 ... G10±143 through G10±160. inspection used for the last inspection. (compliance with AD 97–17–03 or AD 97– Indicate if cold working has been 13–11). *The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T34 accomplished or modifications incorporated (v) Group 5 Airplanes: Required upon the airplanes could incorporate T34±xxx, T36±xxx, accumulation of 6,200 hours TIS on each T41±xxx, or T42±xxx. This AD applies to both such as installation of big butterfly plates. Include the time on the spar cap when the lower spar cap or within 50 flight hours after of these serial designations as they are both the effective date of this AD, whichever Model S2R±T34 airplanes. cold working or modifications were **The serial numbers of the Model S2R±T15 accomplished. Indicate which bolt hole is occurs later, unless already accomplished airplanes could incorporate T15±xxx and T27± cracked and the length of the crack. (compliance with AD 97–17–03 or AD 97– xxx. This AD applies to both of these serial Information collection requirements 13–11). designations as they are both Model S2R±T15 contained in this regulation have been (vi) Group 6 Airplanes: As presented airplanes. approved by the Office of Management and below. Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the (A) For S/N 5010R: Required upon the GROUP 6 AIRPLANES Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. accumulation of 5,530 hours TIS on each 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB lower spar cap or within the next 50 hours Model Serial numbers Control Number 2120–0056. TIS after the effective date of this AD, (e) What is the compliance time of this AD? whichever occurs later. S2R ...... 501R, 5031R, 5038R, 5047R, The compliance times for each of the actions (B) For S/N 5038R: Required upon the and 5085R. of this AD are as follows: accumulation of 5,900 hours TIS on each (1) Any required repair or replacement: lower spar cap or within the next 50 hours (b) Who must comply with this AD? Prior to further flight after the inspection TIS after the effective date of this AD, Anyone who wishes to operate any of the where the crack(s) was/were found. whichever occurs later. above airplanes on the U.S. Register. (2) Reporting requirement: (C) For S/N’s 5031R and 5047R: Required (c) What problem does this AD address? (i) Submit the report within 10 days after upon the accumulation of 6,400 hours TIS on The actions specified by this AD are intended finding any crack(s) during any inspection each lower spar cap or within the next 50 to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the required by this AD. hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, lower spar caps. This could result in the (ii) For airplanes where cracking was found whichever occurs later. wing separating from the airplane with during any inspection accomplished in (D) For S/N 5085R: Required upon the consequent loss of control of the airplane. accordance with AD 97–17–03, which is accumulation of 6,290 hours TIS on each (d) What actions must I accomplish to superseded by this AD; or by AD 97–13–11, lower spar cap or within the next 50 hours address this problem? To address this which was superseded by AD 97–17–03, TIS after the effective date of this AD, problem, you must accomplish the following: submit the report within 10 days after the whichever occurs later. (1) Repetitively inspect, using magnetic effective date of this AD, unless already (4) Repetitive Inspections: The following particle, ultrasonic, or eddy current accomplished. chart gives the required repetitive inspection procedures, the 1⁄4-inch and 5⁄16-inch bolt (3) Initial Inspection: The following is for intervals based on the work performed and hole areas on each lower spar cap for fatigue the initial inspections required by this AD. the method of inspection utilized. Each time cracking. Reference paragraph (e)(3) and The affected airplanes are categorized into is hours TIS intervals after the last (e)(4) of this AD (including all six different groups. inspection:

Work previously performed Magnetic particle Ultrasonic Eddy current

(i) No cracks found previously on wing spar and no op- 500 hours TIS ...... 550 hours ...... 700 hours TIS. tional cold work or bolt hole reaming accomplished. (ii) One of the following where the airplane does not have 500 hours TIS ...... 550 hours TIS ...... 700 hours TIS butterfly plates, part number (P/N) 20211±09 and P/N 20211±11, installed per CK±AG±29, Part II ***. (A) Small cracks repaired through cold work (or done as an option if never cracked) accomplished per SB±AG± 39; or

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36058 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Work previously performed Magnetic particle Ultrasonic Eddy current

(B) Small cracks repaired through 1/4-inch bolt hole reamed to 5/16 inches diameter (or done as an option if never cracked) per CK±AG±29, Part I; or (C) Small cracks repaired through previous Alternative Methods of Compliance ** (iii) One of the following where the airplane has butterfly 900 hours TIS ...... 950 hours TIS ...... 1,250 hours TIS. plates, part number (P/N) 20211±09 and P/N 20211±11, installed per CK±AG±29, Part II ***. (A) Small cracks repaired through cold work (or done as an option if no cracks found) accomplished per SB±AG± 39; or (B) Small cracks repaired through 1/4-inch bolt hole reamed to 5/16 inches diameter (or done as an option if no cracks found) per CK±AG±29, Part I; or (C) Small cracks repaired through previous Alternative Methods of Compliance. ** (iv) Cracked wing spar found during previous inspection Time for initial and repet- Time for initial and repet- Time for initial and repet- wing spar replacement. itive inspection intervals itive inspection intervals itive inspection intervals start over when wing start over when wing start over when wing spar is replaced. spar is replaced. spar is replaced. * Aircraft S/N's T45±007DC and T45±10DC had modified splice block assemblies installed at Ayres (Ayres/Kaplan Assembly No. 88±251) and must still follow the repetitive inspection intervals listed here. ** If a crack is found, the reaming associated with the cold work process may remove a crack if it is small enough. Some aircraft owners/opera- tors were issued alternative methods of compliance with AD 97±17±03 to ream the 1¤4-inch bolt hole to 5¤16 inches diameter to remove small cracks. Ayres CK±AG±29, Part I, also provides procedures to ream the 1¤4-inch bolt hole to 5¤16 inches diameter. If you use either of these two methods to remove cracks and the airplane is reinspected immediately with no cracks found, you may continue to follow the repetitive inspection intervals listed above. *** Group 4 and Group 5 airplanes had the butterfly plates installed at the factory and may follow this repetitive inspection interval.

(f) What procedures must I use to (3) Replacement: Utilize the procedures telephone: (770) 703–6082; facsimile: (770) accomplish the actions required in this AD? contained in the maintenance manual. 703–6097. (1) Inspections: (g) Can I comply with this AD in any other (i) What if I need to fly the airplane to (i) For the magnetic particle inspection, way? (1) You may use an alternative method another location to comply with this AD? The utilize the procedures contained in Ayres of compliance or adjust the compliance time FAA can issue a special flight permit under Service Bulletin No. SB–AG–39, dated if: September 17, 1996. Use only sections titled sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal (i) Your alternative method of compliance Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and ‘‘Inspection Accomplishment Instructions’’ provides an equivalent level of safety; and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location and ‘‘Lower Splice Fitting Removal and (ii) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft where you can accomplish the requirements Installation Instructions.’’ You must follow Certification Office, approves your American Society for Testing Materials alternative. Submit your request through an of this AD, provided that: (ASTM) E1444–94A, using wet particles FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who (1) The hopper is empty. meeting the requirements of the Society for may add comments and then send it to the (2) Vne is reduced to 126 miles per hour Automotive Engineers (SAE) AMS 3046. Manager. (109 knots) indicated airspeed (IAS). Caution: You must firmly support the wings (2) This AD applies to each airplane (3) Flight into known turbulence is during the inspection to prevent movement identified in the preceding applicability prohibited. of the spar caps when the splice blocks are provision, regardless of whether it has been (j) Are any service bulletins incorporated removed. This will allow easier realignment modified, altered, or repaired in the area of the splice block holes and the holes in the into this AD by reference? You must spar cap for bolt insertion. subject to the requirements of this AD. For accomplish the actions required by this AD airplanes that have been modified, altered, or in accordance with Ayres Service Bulletin (ii) The FAA must approve ultrasonic or repaired so that the performance of the eddy current inspection procedures. To No. SB–AG–39, dated September 17, 1996, requirements of this AD is affected, the obtain FAA approval, you must send your and Ayres Custom Kit No. CK–AG–29, dated owner/operator must request approval for an proposed procedure to the Manager, Atlanta December 23, 1997. The Director of the alternative method of compliance in Aircraft Certification (ACO), One Crown Federal Register approved this incorporation accordance with paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450, by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR The request should include an assessment of Atlanta, Georgia 30349. You are not required part 51. You can get copies from the Ayres to remove the splice block for either the the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by Corporation, P.O. Box 3090, One Rockwell ultrasonic or eddy current inspections, Avenue, Albany, Georgia 31706–3090. You unless corrosion is visible. this AD; and, if you have not eliminated the can look at copies at FAA, Central Region, (iii) All inspections required by this AD unsafe condition, specific actions you must be accomplished by a Level 2 or Level propose to address it. Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, 3 inspector certified for that inspection (3) Alternative methods of compliance Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the method using the guidelines established by approved in accordance with AD 97–17–03, Office of the Federal Register, 800 North the American Society for Nondestructive which is superseded by this AD; or in Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, Testing or MIL–STD–410. accordance with AD 97–13–11, which was DC. (2) Repair: Utilize the procedures superseded by AD 97–17–03, are approved as (k) Does this AD affect any other AD contained in Ayres Service Bulletin No. SB– alternative methods of compliance with this actions? This amendment supersedes AD 97– AG–39, dated September 17, 1996; or in Part AD, unless otherwise noted in this AD. 17–03, Amendment 39–10105. (h) Where can I get information about any I of Ayres Custom Kit No. CK–AG–29, dated (l) When does this amendment become December 23, 1997 if necessary to remove already-approved alternative methods of effective? This amendment becomes effective small cracks. You must then immediately re- compliance? Contact the Atlanta ACO, One inspect and continue to accomplish the Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, on July 25, 2000. repetitive inspections. Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 303496;

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36059

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May telephone (817) 222–5490, fax (817) Adoption of the Amendment 26, 2000. 222–5961. Accordingly, pursuant to the Larry E. Werth, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A authority delegated to me by the Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aircraft Certification Service. Administrator, the Federal Aviation Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) Administration amends part 39 of the [FR Doc. 00–14016 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] by superseding AD 98–10–04, Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR BILLING CODE 4910±13±P Amendment 39–10515 (63 FR 25158, part 39) as follows: May 7, 1998), which applies to Eurocopter France Model SA–365N1, PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS–365N2, and SA–366G1 helicopters, DIRECTIVES was published in the Federal Register Federal Aviation Administration on March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12489). That 1. The authority citation for part 39 action proposed to require the same continues to read as follows: 14 CFR Part 39 actions required by the existing AD and Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. [Docket No. 99±SW±45±AD; Amendment correct an incorrectly stated P/N in the 39±11765; AD 2000±11±17] existing AD. § 39.13 [Amended] Interested persons have been afforded 2. Section 39.13 is amended by RIN 2120±AA64 an opportunity to participate in the removing Amendment 39–10515 (63 FR Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter making of this amendment. No 25158), and by adding a new France Model SA±365N1, AS±365N2, comments were received on the airworthiness directive (AD), and SA±366G1 Helicopters proposal or the FAA’s determination of Amendment 39–11765, to read as the cost to the public. The FAA has follows: AGENCY: Federal Aviation determined that air safety and the Administration, DOT. public interest require the adoption of AD 2000–11–17 Eurocopter France: ACTION: Final rule. the rule as proposed. Amendment 39–11765. Docket No. 99– The FAA estimates that 47 helicopters SW–45–AD. Supersedes AD 98–10–04, SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes of U.S. registry will be affected by this Amendment 39–10515, Docket No. 97– an existing airworthiness directive (AD) AD, that it will take approximately 4 SW–49–AD. that applies to Eurocopter France Model work hours per helicopter to accomplish Applicability: Model SA–365N1, AS– SA–365N1, AS–365N2, and SA–366G1 the required actions, and that the 365N2, and SA–366G1 helicopters, with tail helicopters and that currently requires rotor blade (blade), Part Number 365A12– average labor rate is $60 per work hour. 010–all dash numbers, 365A12–0020–00, initial and repetitive inspections of the Required parts will cost approximately 365A33–2131–all dash numbers, or 365A12– tail rotor blade Kevlar tie-bar (Kevlar tie- $3,000 per blade. Based on these figures, 0020–02, installed, certificated in any bar) for cracks or delaminations. This the total cost impact of the AD on U.S. category. amendment requires the same actions operators is estimated to be $152,280 to Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter required by the existing AD and corrects replace one blade and perform one identified in the preceding applicability an incorrectly stated part number (P/N) inspection on each helicopter. provision, regardless of whether it has been in the existing AD. This amendment is The regulations adopted herein will otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in prompted by a report of delamination of not have a substantial direct effect on the area subject to the requirements of this a Kevlar tie-bar. The actions specified the States, on the relationship between AD. For helicopters that have been modified, the national Government and the States, altered, or repaired so that the performance by this AD are intended to detect cracks of the requirements of this AD is affected, the that could lead to delamination of the or on the distribution of power and owner/operator must request approval for an Kevlar tie-bar, loss of tail rotor control, responsibilities among the various alternative method of compliance in and subsequent loss of control of the levels of government. Therefore, it is accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. helicopter. determined that this final rule does not The request should include an assessment of have federalism implications under the effect of the modification, alteration, or DATES: Effective July 12, 2000. The Executive Order 13132. repair on the unsafe condition addressed by incorporation by reference of certain For the reasons discussed above, I this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not publications listed in the regulations certify that this action (1) is not a been eliminated, the request should include was approved previously by the Director ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under specific proposed actions to address it. of the Federal Register as of June 11, Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 1998 (63 FR 25158, May 7, 1998). ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT accomplished previously. ADDRESSES: The service information Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 To detect cracks that could lead to delamination of the tail rotor blade Kevlar referenced in this AD may be obtained FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) from American Eurocopter Corporation, tie-bar (Kevlar tie-bar), loss of tail rotor will not have a significant economic control, and subsequent loss of control of the 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas impact, positive or negative, on a 75053–4005; telephone (972) 641–3460, helicopter, accomplish the following: substantial number of small entities (a) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), fax (972) 641–3527. This information under the criteria of the Regulatory and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 may be examined at the FAA, Office of Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has hours TIS, inspect each Kevlar tie-bar for a the Regional Counsel, Southwest been prepared for this action and it is crack or delamination in accordance with Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room contained in the Rules Docket. A copy paragraph B, Operational Procedure, of 663, Fort Worth, Texas; or at the Office of it may be obtained from the Rules Eurocopter France Service Bulletin 05.00.34, of the Federal Register, 800 North Revision 3, dated November 14, 1996. Docket at the location provided under (b) If any delamination or cracking is found Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, the caption ADDRESSES. Washington, DC. during any of the inspections required by List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 paragraph (a) of this AD, remove the blade FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim and replace it with an airworthy blade before Grigg, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation further flight. Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations safety, Incorporation by reference, (c) An alternative method of compliance or Group, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0111; Safety. adjustment of the compliance time that

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36060 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations provides an acceptable level of safety may be airspace floor in a few areas; combines Altitude Reporting Capability used if approved by the Manager, Regulations and reconfigures several existing areas; Requirement Final Rule in the Federal Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. and creates some new areas. The FAA Register (53 FR 23356). This rule Operators shall submit their requests through is taking this action to enhance safety, requires all aircraft to have an altitude an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may concur or comment and then send to reduce the potential for midair encoding transponder when operating it to the Manager, Regulations Group. collision, and to improve the within 30 nautical miles (NM) of any Note 2: Information concerning the management of air traffic operations designated Class B airspace area existence of approved alternative methods of into, out of, and through the San primary airport from the surface up to compliance with this AD, if any, may be Francisco Class B airspace area, while 10,000 feet MSL. This rule excluded obtained from the Regulations Group. accommodating the concerns of airspace those aircraft that were not originally (d) Special flight permits may be issued in users. certificated with an engine-driven accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, September 7, electrical system (or those that have not of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 2000. subsequently been certified with such a 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: system), balloons, or gliders operating to a location where the requirements of this Joseph C. White, Airspace and Rules outside of the Class B airspace area, but AD can be accomplished. within 30 NM of the primary airport. (e) The inspection shall be done in Division, ATA–400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal Aviation On October 14, 1988, the FAA accordance with paragraph B, Operational published the Terminal Control Area Procedure, of Eurocopter France Service Administration, 800 Independence Bulletin 05.00.34, Revision 3, dated Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; Classification and Terminal Control November 14, 1996. The incorporation by telephone: (202) 267–8783. Area Pilot and Navigation Equipment Requirements Final Rule in the Federal reference of that document was approved SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: previously by the Director of the Federal Register (53 FR 40318). This rule, in Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) Availability of Final Rule part, requires the pilot-in-command of a and 1 CFR part 51, as of June 11, 1998 (63 An electronic copy of this document civil aircraft operating within a Class B FR 25158, May 7, 1998). Copies may be airspace area to hold at least a private obtained from American Eurocopter may be downloaded from the FAA regulations section of the Fedworld pilot certificate, except for a student Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand pilot who has received certain Prairie, Texas 75053–4005; telephone (972) electronic bulletin board service 641–3460, fax (972) 641–3527. Copies may be (telephone: (703) 321–3339) or the documented training. inspected at the FAA, Office of the Regional Federal Register’s electronic bulletin On December 17, 1991, the FAA Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham board service (telephone: (202) 512– published the Airspace Reclassification Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas; or at the 1661) using a modem and suitable Final Rule in the Federal Register (56 Office of the Federal Register, 800 North communications software. FR 65638). This rule discontinued the Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, Internet users may reach the FAA’s use of the term ‘‘Terminal Control Area’’ DC. web page at http://www.faa.gov or the and replaced it with the designation (f) This amendment becomes effective on ‘‘Class B airspace area.’’ This change in July 12, 2000. Federal Register’s web page at http:// www.access.gpo.gov/nara for access to terminology is reflected in this final Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed rule. in Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile recently published rulemaking (France) AD 92–185–33(B)R4, dated documents. Background December 4, 1996. Any person may obtain a copy of this final rule by submitting a request to the The Class B airspace area program Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 26, Federal Aviation Administration, Office was developed to reduce the potential 2000. of Air Traffic Airspace Management, for midair collision in the congested Henry A. Armstrong, Attention: Airspace and Rules Division, airspace surrounding airports with high Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft ATA–400, 800 Independence Avenue, density air traffic operations by Certification Service. SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by providing an area wherein all aircraft [FR Doc. 00–14193 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] calling (202) 267–8783. are subject to certain operating rules and BILLING CODE 4910±13±P Communications must identify the equipment requirements. docket number of this final rule. Persons The density of traffic and the type of interested in being placed on a mailing operations being conducted in the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION list for future NPRM’s or final rules airspace surrounding major terminals should contact the Federal Aviation increase the probability of midair Federal Aviation Administration Administration, Office of Rulemaking, collisions. In 1970, an extensive study (202) 267–9677, to request a copy of found that the majority of midair 14 CFR Part 71 Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of collisions occurred between a general aviation (GA) aircraft and an air carrier [Airspace Docket No. 97±AWA±1] Proposed Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application or military aircraft, or another GA RIN 2120±AA66 procedure. aircraft. The basic causal factor common to these conflicts was the mix of aircraft Modification of the San Francisco Related Rulemaking Actions operating under visual flight rules (VFR) Class B Airspace Area; CA On May 21, 1970, the FAA published and aircraft operating under instrument AGENCY: Federal Aviation the Designation of Federal Airways, flight rules (IFR). Class B airspace areas Administration (FAA), DOT. Controlled Airspace, and Reporting provide a method to accommodate the ACTION: Final rule. Points Final Rule in the Federal increasing number of IFR and VFR Register (35 FR 7782). This rule operations. The regulatory requirements SUMMARY: This action modifies the San provided for the establishment of of these airspace areas afford the Francisco, CA, Class B airspace area. Terminal Control Airspace (TCA) areas greatest protection for the greatest Specifically, this action raises the (now known as Class B airspace areas). number of people by giving air traffic airspace ceiling from 8,000 to 10,000 On June 21, 1988, the FAA published control (ATC) the increased capability feet mean sea level (MSL); lowers the the Transponder With Automatic to provide aircraft separation service,

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36061 thereby minimizing the mix of officials. The most common reason cited new Class B airspace area between controlled and uncontrolled aircraft. for opposition was that the proposed 25NM and 30NM from SFO VOR/DME The standard configuration of these modification would adversely affect the should be limited to the airspace located airspace areas normally contain three Bay Meadows noise abatement south and west of the SFO VOR/DME concentric circles centered on the departure procedure from San Carlos 082° radial. The reason cited for this primary airport extending to 10, 20, and Airport which supports a busy VFR recommendation was that northwest 30 NM, respectively. The standard route used primarily for general aviation winds over Mt. Diablo often extend the vertical limit of these airspace areas flights to Half Moon Bay. One viable soaring area to about 10 miles normally should not exceed 10,000 feet commenter stated that the 5NM south of the peak. Because very few MSL, with the floor established at the boundary line sufficiently protects low sailplanes have VOR receivers, the surface in the inner area and at levels altitude arrivals from the northwest commenters suggested a revision to the appropriate to the containment of entering downwind for Runways 28L proposed airspace boundary line that operations in the outer areas. Variations and 28R at San Francisco. Another would allow pilots to use visual of these criteria may be utilized observation was expressed that during reference to Interstate 580 as a guideline contingent on the terrain, adjacent operations in the East configuration, for remaining outside Class B airspace. regulatory airspace, and factors unique departures were not assigned headings The FAA appreciates receiving the to the terminal area. any further right than 120 degrees due recommendation of a prominent to steep terrain south of the airport. The landmark to enhance safety and reduce Public Input predominant viewpoint expressed by deviations. The rationale offered by the On March 1, 1999, the FAA published those who commented on Area A was commenters is reasonable, and their a notice of proposed rulemaking that the existing airspace should not be suggested revision to the airspace (NPRM) in the Federal Register modified. boundary line is adopted in this final (Airspace Docket No. 97–AWA–1; 64 FR Based on the information received rule. 9940) proposing to modify the San during the NPRM comment process, and Several comments were received Francisco, CA, Class B airspace area. after further airspace analysis, the FAA regarding the FAA proposal to The comment period for this NPRM agrees that the existing Area A southern implement Class B airspace in the Sunol closed on April 30, 1999. boundary line should not be modified at gap area, also known as the ‘‘keyhole’’, The FAA received 145 written this time. The final rule has been from 15NM to 25NM east of San comments in response to the proposal. revised accordingly. Francisco. The primary concerns All comments received were considered Several commenters suggested that expressed were related to the fact that before making a determination on this the floor of the airspace near Mt. the area if heavily used as a VFR route final rule. An analysis of the comments Tamalpais should be higher that to and from the San Francisco area received and the FAA’s response is proposed 4,000 feet MSL. Many communities. Since the airspace is also summarized below. expressed concern that the proposed frequently subject to marine layer floor would adversely affect hang stratus cloud formations during spring Discussion of Comments gliders, paragliders, and other soaring and summer, concerns were expressed The FAA received some letters that activity, and that the proposed change that VFR traffic might become overly fully endorsed and supported the entire might increase the potential for conflicts compressed in the area between the airspace modification proposal based on between powered and non-powered proposed airspace floor and the the positive benefits expected from aircraft. One commenter believed that mountainous terrain, thereby increasing aviation safety improvements. On the the proposed expansions of Area H and collision risks. Some commenters other hand, an equal number of letters Area I were not warranted because only suggested that the floor of the airspace expressed complete opposition to the one instrument departure procedure should be 4,000 feet MSL to the east proposal, viewing it as either from San Francisco would be between 15NM and 20NM from the SFO unnecessary or overly restrictive. The encompassed in the proposed airspace VOR/DME to allow additional altitude remaining majority of comments (over areas. Some commenters suggested that for safety. 100) focused on one or more specific a 6,000 feet MSL floor at Mt. Tamalpais The FAA agrees with the airspace design issues. The following would allow recreational soaring to recommendation and has adopted a discussion provides an overview of the continue in a safe manner at that floor at 4,000 feet MSL in this final rule key airspace issues of concern, and location. in order to reduce the potential for related FAA decisions reflected in this The FAA agrees that the Mt. overcrowded airspace along this final rule. Tamalpais area users would be popular route. This airspace has been Several commenters noted that the constrained if the proposed expansion combined with adjacent 4,000′ MSL feet NPRM document was difficult for them of Class B airspace were implemented. floor areas both north and south of it, to decipher due to the use of true north, Therefore, the FAA has determined, forming a large Area D. The new rather than magnetic north. The FAA based on a clearer understanding of user airspace will provide adequate Class B understands how it is possible that this needs and additional analysis of the coverage for Runway 10 departures, and may have confused some readers. airspace, that the MOLEN departure for Runway 28L/R arrivals during However, due to magnetic variation procedure can be adequately and safely arrival rush periods when aircraft are changes over time, it is FAA policy to protected in Class B airspace without vectored to final. use reference to true north in airspace disrupting activities at Mt. Tamalpais. In the eastern section of the ‘‘keyhole’’ rulemaking documents. This final rule establishes a smaller area, between 20NM and 25NM from The proposed expansion of the Area airspace area with a floor of 4,000 feet SFO VOR/DME, several commenters A southern boundary from 5NM to 6NM MSL located southwest of Mt. suggested that the airspace floor should from the San Francisco (SFO) VHF Tamalpais to provide protection for the be designated at 6,000 feet MSL to Omni-directional Range/Distance MOLEN departures from San Francisco. accommodate hang glider activity near Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) was Several comments from glider pilots, Mission Ridge, Mt. Alison, and strongly opposed by nearly all general and the organizations representing Monument Peak. Many believed that the aviation pilots and by some airport them, recommended that the proposed proposed 5,000 MSL floor would place

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36062 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations too many general aviation flights in Class B protection for numerous IFR commenters for opposing the higher unsafe close proximity to numerous Part turboprop air taxis carrying passenger to ceiling. A few commenters felt the 103 operators. SFO. These aircraft are regularly higher ceiling could not be justified The FAA agrees that a higher floor at vectored through airspace over Half without more comprehensive traffic 6,000 feet MSL in this area will better Moon Bay at 4,000 feet MSL for radar count data covering all operations serve the needs of both the general sequencing into the flow of jets landing between 8,000 and 10,000 feet MSL, or aviation community and the Part 103 at San Francisco. ATC operational without presentation of statistical data operators while simultaneously requirements dictate the need for these concerning near-midair collision providing necessary Class B protection aircraft to be descended to 4,000 feet reports. Some recommended that the for SFO traffic flows. The area has now MSL near Half Moon Bay for effective current ceiling should remain been combined with adjacent 6,000′ sequencing into the SFO arrival flow. unchanged to allow VFR traffic MSL floor areas to the north and south, However, in order to accommodate unrestricted transition access at 8,500 forming a large Area E. retention of aerobatic practice in this and 9,500 feet MSL without causing Several commenters suggested that area, the proposed Area D has been unnecessary frequency congestion or the San Francisco Class B airspace slightly modified in this final rule and excessive workload requiring more air modification should be designed to a new Area K with a 5,000 feet MSL traffic controllers. One commenter accommodate full protection for floor has been designated offshore near expressed concern that the higher Simultaneous Offset Instrument the Half Moon Bay airport. It should ceiling might preclude overflights by Approach (SOIA) procedures. Concern also be noted that ten miles of shoreline some aircraft not equipped with oxygen. was expressed that SOIA operations are airspace will remain available only a Another said that the proposed ceiling anticipated to begin at San Francisco few miles south of the current aerobatic would be overly restrictive, and that a International Airport in the near future, practice area in the vicinity of San ceiling at 9,000 feet MSL would be and there would be insufficient time to Gregorio. adequate. complete another Class B rulemaking The Aircraft Owners and Pilots While reports of near midair action to include the new procedures in Association (AOPA), and some collisions have not been filed in the San a timely manner. Runway 28L SOIA individual pilots, expressed opposition Francisco area that would explicitly operations would require that aircraft be to the various low altitude Class B suggest raising the Class B airspace established on final no closer than 20 airspace floor levels proposed over the ceiling, such reports would be neither miles from the airport, with glideslope Pacific Ocean because they were intercept at an altitude lower than the perceived to be barriers that would desirable nor necessary to justify the current Class B airspace coverage. It was severely limit access to Victor Airway FAA’s decision. The Class B airspace suggested that the area from the SFO 27 (V27) for users wishing to transition program is designed to ensure VOR/DME 107° radial clockwise to the northbound or southbound along the proactively that specific safety levels SFO VOR/DME 167° radial between airway. within congested terminal airspace are 20NM and 25NM be lowered to 5,000 The FAA acknowledges that V27 maintained by designating areas feet MSL for protection of anticipated penetrates the new SFO Class B Areas wherein all aircraft are subject to Runway 28L SOIA arrivals. D, E, G, H, J, and K as designated in this standardized operating rules and The FAA acknowledges and final rule. While this could initially equipment requirements. The FAA appreciates the foresight demonstrated appear to limit access for general evaluated San Francisco International in the suggestion offered by these aviation, V27 actually remains an Airport operations using criteria commenters. However, in formulating excellent route for VFR flights. Bay specified in FAA Order 7400.2D, final rule decisions on regulatory Approach personnel predict that flights Procedures for Handling Airspace airspace, the FAA cannot legally impose requesting VFR transition along V27 at Matters, and with particular attention to additional restrictions on access to appropriate VFR altitudes will rarely, if the unique characteristics of air traffic airspace that would be more stringent ever, be denied access. It is also flow in the San Francisco terminal area. than those originally proposed in the expected that international traffic The analysis showed that the existing NPRM. transitioning to and from the oceanic airspace ceiling does not provide The proposed lowering of the airspace environment will no longer need to adequate regulatory airspace protection floor in the area surrounding Half Moon level off at unnecessary interim consistent with the expectations of the Bay down to a level of 4,000 feet MSL altitudes to avoid uncontrolled traffic on majority of airline passengers and concerned some users who reported that V27. Additional safety benefits for VFR airspace users. The Class B airspace they accomplish aerobatic training and aircraft will include more efficient program was developed to ensure that practice offshore along the Pacific coast. avoidance of heavy jet wake turbulence specific protection is afforded within With the existing class B airspace floor while under positive air traffic control the airspace surrounding high-density at 6,000 feet MSL over much of the area, and separation from other air traffic. commercial airports. Class B airspace airspace from 5,900 feet MSL down to These factors are highly consistent with operating rules are deemed to provide 1,500 feet MSL is currently used for FAA’s Class B airspace design criteria the level of protection appropriate for teaching, maneuvers requiring extra that specify the airspace should afford a the large numbers of aircraft and vertical space. The commenters on this level of protection appropriate for the passengers served by this type of issue suggested a few alternative large numbers of aircraft and passengers airport. The FAA’s thorough analysis of airspace boundary reconfigurations to served in the airspace. actual airspace utilization within the allow retention of some airspace Although fewer than 8 percent of all San Francisco terminal area included available for aerobatic maneuvers. commenters expressed opposition to the usage of available modeling and The FAA has carefully reviewed proposed airspace ceiling at 10,000 feet simulation resources at the Airspace available airspace options near Half MSL, the FAA has nonetheless carefully Planning and Analysis Division, ATA– Moon Bay and finds its necessary to reconsidered airspace operational 200, Air Traffic Airspace Lab in establish a 4,000 feet MSL floor in the requirements with due regard to all Herndon, VA. The results of that reconfigured Area D. The airspace is comments received on this issue. A analysis, along with review of the required in order to provide adequate variety of reasons were cited by original facility staff study concerning

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36063 this airspace, revealed that all airspace document will be published changes will be required to maintain the between 8,000 and 10,000 feet MSL is subsequently in the Order. modified Class B airspace area. used on a regular basis by air traffic The FAA contends that the final rule Regulatory Evaluation Summary controllers for the purpose of handling will not impose any additional costs on instrument operations to and from SFO Changes to Federal Regulations must general aviation aircraft operators. Since airport. San Francisco International undergo several economic analyses. the San Francisco Class B airspace area Airport handled 432,046 total airport First, Executive Order 12866 directs that will reside within the existing Mode C operations during 1998 and 19,079,664 each Federal agency shall propose or Veil, no additional avionics equipment passengers enplaned during the same adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned will be required for any aircraft time period. These figures continue a determination that the benefits of the operating in the vicinity of the Class B trend of significant growth. Current intended regulation justify its costs. airspace area. Even with the FAA aviation forecasts for the 1999 to Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act establishment of new areas and the 2010 time period project that the FAA requires agencies to analyze the expansion of existing areas, VFR aircraft Western-Pacific Region will lead all economic effect of regulatory changes operators should not have difficulty other FAA regions with a rate of growth on small businesses and other small circumnavigating the Class B airspace of aircraft operations increasing 21.6 entities. Third, the Office of area. Additionally, aircraft operators percent over the forecast period. Management and Budget directs have the options of circumnavigating Accordingly, this final rule raises the agencies to assess the effect of outside the San Francisco VOR/DME 15 San Francisco Class B airspace ceiling to regulatory changes on international NM arc and operate under the higher 10,000 feet MSL. trade. In conducting these analyses, the floor of 6,000 feet MSL. For those FAA has determined that this final rule: aircraft operators who choose not to The Rule (1) Will generate benefits that justify its circumnavigate or fly below the Class B This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 minimal costs and is not a ‘‘significant airspace, standard procedures may be modified the San Francisco Class B regulatory action’’ as defined in the used to enter the San Francisco Class B airspace area. Specifically, this action Executive Order; (2) is not significant as airspace area. raises the airspace ceiling from 8,000 to defined in the Department of The FAA has determined that this final rule will be cost-beneficial. The 10,000 feet MSL; lowers the airspace Transportation’s Regulatory Policies and final rule will generate benefits in the floor in some areas; combines and Procedures; (3) will not have a form of improved flow of air traffic reconfigures several existing areas; and significant impact on a substantial operations into and out of SFO; clearer creates three new areas. Areas A, B, and number of small entities; (4) will not airspace boundaries; improved ATC C remain unchanged from the existing constitute a barrier to international containment of transport aircraft airspace configuration, except for the trade; and (5) will not contain any (containment refers to aircraft operating new ceiling at 10,000 feet MSL. Area D, Federal intergovernmental or private in controlled airspace and receiving with its floor at 4,000 feet MSL, has sector mandate. These analyses are ATC separation from other aircraft); and been combined with other areas summarized here in the preamble, and reduced potential for midair collisions including the previous Area H, part of the full Regulatory Evaluation is in the in the terminal area. previous Areas E and J, and a new area docket. east of the primary airport. The The FAA is modifying the San Initial Regulatory Flexibility reconfigured Area E retains its floor at Francisco Class B airspace area by Determination 6,000 feet MSL, and now includes the raising the ceiling from 8,000 feet mean The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 previous Area I, a small corner from the sea level (MSL) to 10,000 feet MSL, by establishes ‘‘as a principle of regulatory previous Area J, and a new area east of combining and reconfiguring the lateral issuance that agencies shall endeavor, the primary airport. The only change to boundaries of several existing areas, by consistent with the objective of the rule the existing Area F is the new ceiling at establishing three new areas, and by and of applicable statutes, to fit 10,000 feet MSL. Area G has been lowering base altitudes. This action will regulatory and informational slightly modified into a simpler arc increase the overall size of the Class B requirements to the scale of the configuration. Area K has been renamed airspace area thereby increasing air business, organizations, and Area I. A new Area H, with a floor of traffic control’s (ATC) ability to manage governmental jurisdictions subject to 4,000 feet MSL, has been designated and control air traffic complexity in the regulation.’’ To achieve that principal, over the ocean to the west of Area G. A San Francisco area. The FAA contends the Act requires agencies to solicit and new Area J, with a floor of 8,000 feet that this final rule will improve consider flexible regulatory proposals MSL, has been designated 25NM to operational efficiency and enhance and to explain the rational for their 30NM from the SFO VOR/DME, forming aviation safety in the Class B airspace actions. The Act covers a wide-range of a new southern and eastern airspace area. The final modifications will also small entities, including small boundary. Lastly, a new Area K, with a include clearer boundaries defining the businesses, not-for-profit organizations floor of 5,000 feet MSL, has been Class B airspace areas. and small governmental jurisdictions. designated over the ocean to the The final rule will impose minimal Agencies must perform a review to southeast of Area G. costs on the FAA or airspace users. determine whether a proposed or final The coordinates for this airspace Notices will be sent to all pilots within rule will have a significant economic docket are based on North American a 100-mile radius of the San Francisco impact on a substantial number of small Datum 83. Class B airspace areas are International Airport (SFO) at a total entities. If the determination is that it published in Paragraph 3000 of FAA cost of $200.00 for postage. Printing of will, the agency must prepare a Order 7400.9G, Airspace Designations aeronautical charts which reflect the regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as and Reporting Points, dated September changes to the Class B airspace area will described in the Act. 1, 1999, and effective September 16, be accomplished during a scheduled However, if an agency determines that 1999, which is incorporated by chart printing, and will result in no a proposed or final rule is not expected reference in 14 CFR section 71.1. The additional costs for plate modification to have a significant economic impact Class B airspace area listed in this and updating of charts. No staffing on a substantial number of small

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36064 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act upon State, local, and tribal Oakland (OAK) VORTAC provides that the head of the agency governments in the aggregate of $100 (lat. 37°43′33″N., long. 122°13′25″W.) Sausalito (SAU) VORTAC may so certify and an FRA is not million (adjusted annually for inflation) ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ required. The certification must include in any one year. Section 203 of the Act, (lat. 37 51 19 N., long. 122 31 22 W.) a statement providing the factual basis 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements Boundaries for this determination, and the section 204(a), provides that, before Area A. That airspace extending upward reasoning should be clear. establishing any regulatory from the surface to and including 10,000 feet The FAA has determined that the requirements that might significantly or MSL within a 7-mile radius of the San final rule will have only a minimal uniquely affect small governments, the Francisco (SFO) VOR/DME extending impact on small entities. This clockwise from the SFO VOR/DME 247° agency shall have developed a plan, ° determination is based on the premise which, among other things, must radial to the SFO VOR/DME 127 radial, and within a 5-mile radius of the SFO VOR/DME that potentially impacted aircraft provide for notice to potentially affected ° operators regularly fly into airports between the SFO VOR/DME 127 radial small governments, if any, and for a clockwise to SFO VOR/DME 247° radial, where radar approach control services meaningful and timely opportunity to excluding that airspace within a 3-mile have been established such as the SFO provide input in the development of radius of the Oakland VORTAC and Class B airspace area. These operators regulatory proposals. excluding that airspace west of the Pacific already have the required equipment, This final rule does not contain any coast shoreline. and, therefore, there will be no Federal intergovernmental or private Area B. That airspace extending upward additional cost to these entities. sector mandates. Therefore, the from 1,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 Accordingly, pursuant to the Regulatory requirements of Title II of the Unfunded feet MSL bounded on the northwest by a 5- Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not mile radius arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the Federal Aviation Administration southeast by a 10-mile radius arc of the SFO apply. VOR/DME, on the northeast by the SFO certifies that this rule will not have a Paperwork Reduction Act VOR/DME 107° radial, and on the southwest significant economic impact on a by the SFO VOR 137° radial excluding that substantial number of small entities. This rule contains no information airspace within Area A. collection requests requiring approval of International Trade Impact Statement Area C. That airspace extending upward the Office of Management and Budget from 2,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 The final rule will not constitute a pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction feet MSL bounded on the northwest by a 10- barrier to international trade, including Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)). mile radius arc of the SFO VOR/DME, on the the export of U.S. goods and services to southeast by a 15-mile radius arc of the SFO foreign countries or the import of List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 VOR/DME, on the northeast by the SFO VOR/DME 107° radial and on the southwest foreign goods and services into the Airspace, Incorporation by reference, ° United States. Navigation (air). by the SFO VOR/DME 137 radial. Area D. That airspace extending upward Federalism Implications Adoption of the Amendment from 4,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 feet MSL, bounded by a line beginning at the The regulations adopted herein will In consideration of the foregoing, the 5-mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME not have a substantial direct effect on Federal Aviation Administration 137° radial thence southeast along the SFO the States, on the relationship between amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: VOR/DME 137° radial to and the national government and the States, counterclockwise along the 15-mile DME arc or on the distribution of power and PART 71ÐDESIGNATION OF CLASS A, of the SFO VOR/DME to and northwest along responsibilities among the various CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND the Oakland VORTAC 305° radial to and levels of government. Therefore, it is CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; northeast along the Sausalito VORTAC 052° determined that this final rule does not AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING radial to and clockwise along the 20-mile have federalism implications under E.O. POINTS DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and northwest along the SFO VOR/DME 167° 12612. 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR radial to and clockwise along the 15-mile Unfunded Mandates Assessment part 71 continues to read as follows: DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and northeast along the SFO VOR/DME 247° Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, radial to and counterclockwise along the 5- Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), enacted as 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to the Public Law 104–4 on March 22, 1995, 1963 Comp., p. 389. point of beginning, excluding that airspace requires each Federal agency, to the within Area K. § 71.1 [Amended] extent permitted by law, to prepare a Area E. That airspace extending upward written assessment of the effects of any 2. The incorporation by reference in from 6,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 Federal mandate in a proposed or final 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the 15-mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME agency rule may result in the Administration Order 7400.9G, Airspace ° Designations and Reporting Points, 277 radial thence counterclockwise along expenditure of $100 million or more the 15-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME (when adjusted annually for inflation) dated September 1, 1999, and effective to and southeast along the SFO VOR/DME in any one year by State, local, and September 16, 1999, is amended as 167° radical to and counterclockwise along tribal governments in the aggregate, or follows: the 20-mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME by the private sector. Section 204(a) of to and northeast along the Sausalito VORTAC the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires input Paragraph 3000—Subpart B—Class B 052° radial, to and clockwise along the 25- by elected officers (or their designees) of Airspace mile DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and ° State, local, and tribal governments on * * * * * northeast along the SFO VOR/DME 227 a proposed ‘‘significant radial to and clockwise along the 20-mile AWP CA B San Francisco, CA DME arc to and northeast along the SFO intergovernmental mandate.’’ A San Francisco International (SFO) Airport VOR/DME 277° radial to the point of ‘‘significant intergovernmental (Primary Airport) beginning. mandate’’ under the Act is any (lat. 37°37′09″N., long. 122°22′30″W.). Area F. That airspace extending upward provision in a Federal agency regulation San Francisco (SFO) VOR/DME from 2,100 feet MSL to and including 10,000 that would impose an enforceable duty (lat. 37°37′10″N., long. 122°22′26″W.) feet MSL bounded by a line beginning at the

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36065

10-mile DME point on the SFO VOR/DME Area H. That airspace extending upward Area K. That airspace extending upward 247° radial thence clockwise along the 10- from 4,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 from 5,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 mile DME arc to and west along the SFO feet MSL between the 15- and 20-mile radii feet MSL between the 10- and 15-mile radii VOR/DME 107° radial to and of the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/ of the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/ ° counterclockwise along the 7-mile DME arc DME 277° radial clockwise to the SFO VOR/ DME 217 radial clockwise to the SFO VOR/ ° of the SFO VOR/DME to and clockwise along DME 317° radial. DME 247 radial. the 3-mile DME arc of the Oakland VORTAC Area I. That airspace extending upward * * * * * to and counterclockwise along the 7-mile from 1,500 feet MSL to and including 10,000 Issued in Washington, DC, on May 30, DME arc of the SFO VOR/DME to and feet MSL bounded on the west by a 7-mile 2000. ° southwest along the SFO VOR/DME 247 radius arc of the SFO VOR/DME and on the Reginald C. Matthews, radial to the point of beginning. east by the Pacific coast shoreline. Manager, Airspace and Rules Division. Area G. That airspace extending upward Area J. That airspace extending upward from 3,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 from 8,000 feet MSL to and including 10,000 Note: The following Appendix will not feet MSL between the 10- and 15-mile radii feet MSL between the 25- and 30-mile radii appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. Appendix—San Francisco Class B Airspace of the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/ of the SFO VOR/DME from the SFO VOR/ Area. DME 247° radial clockwise to the SFO VOR/ DME 082° radial clockwise to the SFO VOR/ DME 107° radial. DME 227° radial. BILLING CODE 4910±13±M

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36066 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

[FR Doc. 00–14046 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910±13±C

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36067

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION have determined that there is good examining the takings implications of AGENCY cause for making today’s rule final the rule in accordance with the without prior proposal and opportunity ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental 40 CFR Part 62 for comment because we are merely Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk correcting an incorrect citation in a [AL52±200014; FRL±6708±6] and Avoidance of Unanticipated previous action. Thus, notice and public Takings’’ issued under the executive Approval and Promulgation of State procedure are unnecessary. We find that order. This rule does not impose an Plans for Designated Facilities and this constitutes good cause under 5 information collection burden under the Pollutants: Alabama; Correction U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The Congressional AGENCY: Environmental Protection Administrative Requirements Agency. Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by the Small Business Regulatory ACTION: Direct final rule; correction. 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, SUMMARY: The United States is therefore not subject to review by the generally provides that before a rule Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Management and Budget. may take effect, the agency published in the Federal Register on Because the agency has made a ‘‘good promulgating the rule must submit a April 10, 2000, a document approving cause’’ finding that this action is not rule report, which includes a copy of the section 111(d) Plan submitted by the subject to notice-and-comment the rule, to each House of the Congress Alabama Department of Environmental requirements under the Administrative and to the Comptroller General of the Management for the State of Alabama on Procedure Act or any other statute as United States. Section 808 allows the April 20, 1999. This plan enables the indicated in the Supplementary issuing agency to make a rule effective State of Alabama to implement and Information section above, it is not sooner than otherwise provided by the enforce the Emissions Guidelines (EG) subject to the regulatory flexibility CRA if the agency makes a good cause for existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility finding that notice and public procedure Waste Incinerator (HMIWI) units. In the Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or to sections is impracticable, unnecessary or April 10, 2000, rule, EPA inadvertently 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates contrary to the public interest. This referenced an incorrect citation to Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public determination must be supported by a Alabama’s state implementation plan in Law 104–4). In addition, this action brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA is does not significantly or uniquely affect stated previously, EPA had made such correcting the citation with this small governments or impose a document. significant intergovernmental mandate, a good cause finding, including the as described in sections 203 and 204 of reasons therefore, and established an EFFECTIVE DATE: This correction is effective date of June 9, 2000. EPA will effective on June 9, 2000. UMRA. This rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the submit a report containing this rule and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: communities of tribal governments, as other required information to the U.S. Kimberly Bingham at (404) 562–9038, specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 Senate, the U.S. House of [email protected] or Scott FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will Representatives, and the Comptroller Davis at (404) 562–9127, not have substantial direct effects on the General of the United States prior to [email protected]. States, on the relationship between the publication of the rule in the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: national government and the States, or Register. This correction to the Throughout this document wherever on the distribution of power and identification of plan for Missouri is not ‘‘we,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used we mean EPA. responsibilities among the various a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. Our April 10, 2000, (65 FR 18909– levels of governments, as specified by 804(2). 18911) rulemaking indicated that we Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, Dated: May 19, 2000. approved the section 111d plan for the August 10, 1999). This rule also is not State of Alabama. This plan enables the subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR A. Stanley Meiburg, State of Alabama to implement and 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. enforce the Emissions Guidelines (EG) economically significant. For the reasons stated in the for existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious This technical correction action does Waste Incinerator (HMIWI) units. In that not involve technical standards; thus preamble, in FR Doc. 00–8142 document we inadvertently codified the the requirements of section 12(d) of the published at 65 FR 18909 make the revisions into 40 CFR 62.100. Our April National Technology Transfer and following corrections: 10, 2000, document indicated that we Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. PART 62Ð[CORRECTED] were removing 40 CFR 62.104 and 272 note) do not apply. The rule also renaming the section. In that document does not involve special consideration 1. On page 18911, in the third we should not have removed 40 CFR of environmental justice related issues column, in amendatory instruction 3, 62.104, but instead added a new section as required by Executive Order 12898 40 CFR 62.105. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In correct ‘‘62.104’’ to read ‘‘62.105.’’ Section 553 of the Administrative issuing this rule, EPA has taken the 2. On page 18911, in the third Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), necessary steps to eliminate drafting column, under the title Air Emissions provides that, when an agency for good errors and ambiguity, minimize From Hospital/Medical/Infectious cause finds that notice and public potential litigation, and provide a clear Waste Incinerators, correctly designate procedure are impracticable, legal standard for affected conduct, as § 62.104 as § 62.105. unnecessary or contrary to the public required by section 3 of Executive Order [FR Doc. 00–13846 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] interest, the agency may issue a rule 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). without providing notice and an EPA has complied with Executive Order BILLING CODE 6560±50±P opportunity for public comment. We 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by

VerDate 112000 14:24 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR1 36068 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

FEDERAL EMERGENCY this notice. However, this rule includes environmental impact assessment has MANAGEMENT AGENCY the address of the Chief Executive been prepared. Officer of the community where the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 44 CFR Part 65 modified base flood elevation Associate Director, Mitigation determinations are available for Directorate, certifies that this rule is Changes in Flood Elevation inspection. exempt from the requirements of the Determinations The modifications are made pursuant Regulatory Flexibility Act because to section 206 of the Flood Disaster AGENCY: Federal Emergency modified base flood elevations are Management Agency, FEMA. Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, required by the Flood Disaster and are in accordance with the National ACTION: Final rule. Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. and are required to maintain community SUMMARY: Modified base (1% annual 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. eligibility in the National Flood chance) flood elevations are finalized For rating purposes, the currently Insurance Program. No regulatory for the communities listed below. These effective community number is shown flexibility analysis has been prepared. modified elevations will be used to and must be used for all new policies Regulatory Classification. This final calculate flood insurance premium rates and renewals. rule is not a significant regulatory action The modified base flood elevations for new buildings and their contents. under the criteria of section 3(f) of are the basis for the floodplain Executive Order 12866 of September 30, EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective dates for management measures that the 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, these modified base flood elevations are community is required to either adopt 58 FR 51735. indicated on the following table and or to show evidence of being already in revise the Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) effect in order to qualify or to remain Executive Order 12612, Federalism. (FIRMs) in effect for each listed qualified for participation in the This rule involves no policies that have community prior to this date. National Flood Insurance Program. federalism implications under Executive ADDRESSES: The modified base flood These modified elevations, together Order 12612, Federalism, dated October elevations for each community are with the floodplain management criteria 26, 1987. available for inspection at the office of required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice the Chief Executive Officer of each minimum that are required. They Reform. This rule meets the applicable community. The respective addresses should not be construed to mean that standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive are listed in the following table. the community must change any Order 12778. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: existing ordinances that are more List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards stringent in their floodplain Study Branch, Mitigation Directorate, management requirements. The Flood insurance, Floodplains, Federal Emergency Management community may at any time enact Reporting and recordkeeping Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, stricter requirements of its own, or requirements. DC 20472, (202) 646–3461, or (e-mail) pursuant to policies established by other Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is [email protected]. Federal, state or regional entities. amended to read as follows: These modified elevations are used to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meet the floodplain management PART 65Ð[AMENDED] Federal Emergency Management Agency requirements of the NFIP and are also makes the final determinations listed used to calculate the appropriate flood 1. The authority citation for part 65 below of modified base flood elevations insurance premium rates for new continues to read as follows: for each community listed. These buildings built after these elevations are Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; modified elevations have been made final, and for the contents in these Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, published in newspapers of local buildings. 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, circulation and ninety (90) days have The changes in base flood elevations 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. elapsed since that publication. The are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. § 65.4 [Amended] Associate Director has resolved any National Environmental Policy Act. appeals resulting from this notification. This rule is categorically excluded from 2. The tables published under the The modified base flood elevations the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, authority of § 65.4 are amended as are not listed for each community in Environmental Consideration. No follows:

Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.

Alabama: Jeffer- Unincorporated May 12, 1999, May 19, Mr. Gary White, President of the Jef- August 17, 1999 .. 010217 E son (FEMA Areas. 1999, Birmingham ferson County Board of Commis- Docket No. News. sioners, Courthouse, Room A±360, 7293). Birmingham, Alabama 35263. Connecticut: Fair- Town of Wilton ..... June 17, 1999, June 24, Mr. Robert H. Russell, First Select- September 22, 090020 C field (FEMA 1999, Wilton Bulletin. man of the Town of Wilton, Wilton 1999. Docket No. Town Hall, 238 Danbury Road, Wil- 7293). ton, Connecticut 06897. Florida: Orange City of Ocoee ...... June 24, 1999, July 1, The Honorable S. Scott Vandergrift, June 17, 1999 ...... 120185 C (FEMA Docket 1999, The Orlando Sen- Mayor of the City of Ocoee, City No. 7293). tinel. Hall, 150 North Lakeshore Drive, Ocoee, Florida 34761±2258.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36069

Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.

Kentucky: Fayette Lexington-Fayette June 23, 1999, June 30, The Honorable Pam Miller, Mayor of June 16, 1999 ...... 210067 C (FEMA Docket Urban County 1999, Lexington Herald. the Lexington-Fayette Urban Coun- No. 7293). Government. ty Government, 200 East Main Street, 12th Floor, Lexington-Fay- ette Government Building, Lex- ington, Kentucky 40507. Illinois: Will (FEMA City of Crest Hill ... March 25, 1999, April 1, The Honorable Donald R. Randich, June 30, 1999 ...... 170699 D Docket No. 1999, The Herald-News. Mayor of the City of Crest Hill, 7293). 1610 Plainfield Road, Crest Hill, Illi- nois 60435. Kane (FEMA Village of Hamp- April 28, 1999, May 5, Mr. William Schmidt, Hampshire Vil- July 27, 1999 ...... 170327 C Docket No. shire. 1999, Hampshire Reg- lage President, P.O. Box 457, 234 7293). ister-News. South State Street, Hampshire, Illi- nois 60140. Minnesota: Anoka City of Coon Rap- April 9, 1999, April 16, The Honorable Lonni McCauley, July 15, 1999 ...... 270011 A (FEMA Docket ids. 1999, Coon Rapids Her- Mayor of the City of Coon Rapids, No. 7293). ald. 11155 Robinson Drive, Coon Rap- ids, Minnesota 55433. North Carolina: City of Greensboro May 25, 1999, June 1, The Honorable Carolyn S. Allen, May 17, 1999 ...... 375351 C Guilford (FEMA 1999, News and Record. Mayor of the City of Greensboro, Docket No. One Governmental Plaza, P.O. Box 7293). 3136 Greensboro, North Carolina 27402. Ohio: Lake (FEMA Village of Madison March 30, 1999, April 6, The Honorable David G. Reed, Jr., March 23, 1999 .... 390316 B Docket No. 1999, The News-Herald. Mayor of the Village of Madison, 7293). 126 West Main Street, Madison, Ohio 44057±0007. Pennsylvania: Lan- Township of East April 28, 1999, May 5, Mr. Allen D. Esbenshade, President, April 16, 1999 ...... 421768 B caster (FEMA Donegal. 1999, Lancaster News- Board of Supervisors, Township Docket No. paper. Municipal Office, 190 Rock Point 7293). Road, Marietta, Pennsylvania 17547.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. effect for each listed community prior to determinations are available for 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’) this date. inspection. Dated: May 16, 2000. ADDRESSES: The modified base flood The modifications are made pursuant Michael J. Armstrong, elevations for each community are to Section 206 of the Flood Disaster Associate Director for Mitigation. available for inspection at the office of Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, [FR Doc. 00–14297 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the Chief Executive Officer of each and are in accordance with the National BILLING CODE 6718±04±P community. The respective addresses Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. are listed in the table below. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR Part 65. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For rating purposes, the currently FEDERAL EMERGENCY Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards effective community number is shown MANAGEMENT AGENCY Study Branch, Mitigation Directorate, and must be used for all new policies 44 CFR Part 65 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC and renewals. 20472, (202) 646–3461, or (e-mail) The modified base flood elevations Changes in Flood Elevation [email protected]. are the basis for the floodplain Determinations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The management measures that the Federal Emergency Management Agency community is required to either adopt AGENCY: Federal Emergency makes the final determinations listed or to show evidence of being already in Management Agency (FEMA). below of the final determinations of effect in order to qualify or to remain qualified for participation in the ACTION: Final rule. modified base flood elevations for each community listed. These modified National Flood Insurance Program elevations have been published in (NFIP). SUMMARY: Modified base (1-percent- These modified elevations, together annual-chance) flood elevations are newspapers of local circulation and with the floodplain management criteria finalized for the communities listed ninety (90) days have elapsed since that required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the below. These modified elevations will publication. The Associate Director for minimum that are required. They be used to calculate flood insurance Mitigation has resolved any appeals should not be construed to mean that premium rates for new buildings and resulting from this notification. The modified base flood elevations the community must change any their contents. are not listed for each community in existing ordinances that are more EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective dates for this notice. However, this rule includes stringent in their floodplain these modified base flood elevations are the address of the Chief Executive management requirements. The indicated on the table below and revise Officer of the community where the community may at any time enact the Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) in modified base flood elevation stricter requirements of its own, or

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36070 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations pursuant to policies established by other Flexibility Act because modified base List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 Federal, State, or regional entities. flood elevations are required by the These modified elevations are used to Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Flood insurance, Floodplains, meet the floodplain management 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are required to Reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the NFIP and are also maintain community eligibility in the requirements. used to calculate the appropriate flood NFIP. No regulatory flexibility analysis Accordingly, 44 CFR Part 65 is insurance premium rates for new has been prepared. amended to read as follows: buildings built after these elevations are Regulatory Classification. This final made final, and for the contents in these rule is not a significant regulatory action PART 65Ð[AMENDED] buildings. under the criteria of Section 3(f) of The changes in base flood elevations Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1. The authority citation for Part 65 are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, continues to read as follows: National Environmental Policy Act. 58 FR 51735. This rule is categorically excluded from Executive Order 12612, Federalism. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; the requirements of 44 CFR Part 10, This rule involves no policies that have Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, Environmental Consideration. No federalism implications under Executive 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. environmental impact assessment has Order 12612, Federalism, dated October been prepared. 26, 1987. § 65.4 [Amended] Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice Associate Director for Mitigation Reform. This rule meets the applicable 2. The tables published under the certifies that this rule is exempt from standards of Section 2(b)(2) of Executive authority of § 65.4 are amended as the requirements of the Regulatory Order 12778. follows:

Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.

Arizona: Pima City of Tucson ...... September 30, 1999, Oc- The Honorable George Miller, Mayor, September 10, 040076 (FEMA Docket tober 7, 1999, The Ari- City of Tucson, P.O. Box 27210, 1999. No. 7308). zona Daily Star. Tucson, Arizona 85726. Oklahoma: Tulsa (FEMA City of Tulsa ...... September 30, 1999, Oc- The Honorable M. Susan Savage, September 8, 405387 Docket No. tober 7, 1999, Tulsa Mayor, City of Tulsa, 200 Civic 1999. 7308). World. Center, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Tulsa (FEMA City of Broken September 28, 1999, Oc- The Honorable James Reynolds, September 8, 400236 Docket No. Arrow. tober 5, 1999, Broken Mayor, City of Broken Arrow, P.O. 1999. 7308). Arrow Ledger.. Box 610, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma 74013.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. DATES: These modified base flood interim rule. However, the address of 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’) elevations are currently in effect on the the Chief Executive Officer of the Dated: May 17, 2000. dates listed in the table and revise the community where the modified base Michael J. Armstrong, Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) in effect flood elevation determinations are Associate Director for Mitigation. prior to this determination for each available for inspection is provided. [FR Doc. 00–14296 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] listed community. Any request for reconsideration must BILLING CODE 6718±04±P From the date of the second be based upon knowledge of changed publication of these changes in a conditions, or upon new scientific or newspaper of local circulation, any technical data. FEDERAL EMERGENCY person has ninety (90) days in which to The modifications are made pursuant MANAGEMENT AGENCY request through the community that the to Section 201 of the Flood Disaster Associate Director for Mitigation Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, 44 CFR Part 65 reconsider the changes. The modified and are in accordance with the National elevations may be changed during the Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. [Docket No. FEMA±7324] 90-day period. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. ADDRESSES: The modified base flood For rating purposes, the currently Changes in Flood Elevation effective community number is shown Determinations elevations for each community are available for inspection at the office of and must be used for all new policies AGENCY: Federal Emergency the Chief Executive Officer of each and renewals. Management Agency (FEMA). community. The respective addresses The modified base flood elevations ACTION: Interim rule. are listed in the table below. are the basis for the floodplain management measures that the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: This interim rule lists community is required to either adopt communities where modification of the Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards or to show evidence of being already in base (1-percent-annual-chance) flood Study Branch, Mitigation Directorate, effect in order to qualify or to remain elevations is appropriate because of new 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC qualified for participation in the scientific or technical data. New flood 20472, (202) 646–3461, or (e-mail) National Flood Insurance Program insurance premium rates will be [email protected]. (NFIP). calculated from the modified base flood SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The These modified elevations, together elevations for new buildings and their modified base flood elevations are not with the floodplain management criteria contents. listed for each community in this required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36071 minimum that are required. They Flexibility Act because modified base List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 should not be construed to mean that flood elevations are required by the the community must change any Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Flood insurance, Floodplains, existing ordinances that are more 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are required to Reporting and recordkeeping stringent in their floodplain maintain community eligibility in the requirements. management requirements. The NFIP. No regulatory flexibility analysis Accordingly, 44 CFR part 65 is community may at any time enact has been prepared. amended to read as follows: stricter requirements of its own, or Regulatory Classification. This pursuant to policies established by other interim rule is not a significant PART 65Ð[AMENDED] Federal, State, or regional entities. regulatory action under the criteria of The changes in base flood elevations Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of 1. The authority citation for Part 65 are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. September 30, 1993, Regulatory continues to read as follows: National Environmental Policy Act. Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. This rule is categorically excluded from Executive Order 12612, Federalism. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, This rule involves no policies that have Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, Environmental Consideration. No federalism implications under Executive 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, environmental impact assessment has Order 12612, Federalism, dated October 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. been prepared. 26, 1987. § 65.4 [Amended] Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice Associate Director for Mitigation Reform. This rule meets the applicable 2. The tables published under the certifies that this rule is exempt from standards of Section 2(b)(2) of Executive authority of § 65.4 are amended as the requirements of the Regulatory Order 12778. follows:

Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.

California: Orange ...... City of Anaheim ... January 20, 2000, Janu- The Honorable Tom Daly, Mayor, City January 13, 2000 060213 ary 27, 2000, Anaheim of Anaheim, P.O. Box 3222, Ana- Bulletin. heim, California 92803. Orange ...... City of Irvine ...... January 31, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Christina Shea, December 29, 060222 ruary 7, 2000, Orange Mayor, City of Irvine, P.O. Box 1999. County Register. 19575, Irvine, California 92623± 9575. Orange ...... City of Irvine ...... February 24, 2000, March The Honorable Christina Shea, January 27, 2000 060222 2, 2000, The Irvine Mayor, City of Irvine, P.O. Box World News. 195575, Irvine, California 92623± 9575. Orange ...... City of Tustin ...... January 31, 2000, Feb- Mr. Thomas Saltarelli, Mayor, City of December 29, 060235 ruary 7, 2000, Orange Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, 1999. County Register. California 92780. Los Angeles .. City of Santa February 17, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Joanne Darcy, Mayor, January 18, 2000 060729 Clarita. ruary 24, 2000, The City of Santa Clarita, 23920 Valen- Signal. cia Boulevard, Suite 300, Santa Clarita, California 91355. Colorado: Arapahoe ...... Unincorporated February 10, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Steve Ward, Chair- May 17, 2000 ...... 080011 Areas. ruary 17, 2000, The Vil- man, Arapahoe County Board of lager. Commissioners, 5334 South Prince Street, Littleton, Colorado 80166± 0060. Boulder ...... City of Louisville ... February 23, 2000, March The Honorable Tom Davidson, January 19, 2000 085076 1, 2000, Louisville Mayor, City of Louisville, 749 Main Times. Street, Louisville, Colorado 80027. Idaho: Blaine ...... City of Bellevue .... February 9, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Steve Fairbrother, January 4, 2000 ... 160021 ruary 16, 2000, Wood Mayor, City of Bellevue, P.O. Box River Journal. 449, Bellevue, Idaho 83313. Blaine ...... Unincorporated February 9, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Mary Ann Mix, Chair- January 4, 2000 ... 165167 Areas. ruary 16, 2000, Wood person, Blaine County Board of River Journal. Commissioners, 206 First Avenue South, Suite 300, Hailey, Idaho 83333 March 1, 2000. Kansas: Miami ..... City of Paola ...... February 23, 2000, March The Honorable Floyd J. Grimes, May 30, 2000 ...... 200224 1, 2000, Miami County Mayor, City of Paola, 19 East Republic. Teoria Paola, Kansas 66071. Nebraska: Colfax Village of Howells February 23, 2000, March The Honorable Larry Jakubowski, May 30, 2000 ...... 310380 1, 2000, Howells Jour- Chairperson, Village of Howells, nal. Board of Commissioners, 128 North Third Street, Howells, Ne- braska 68641±0351.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36072 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.

Nevada: Clark ...... Unincorporated February 17, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Bruce Woodbury, January 7, 2000 ... 320003 Areas. ruary 24, 2000, Las Chairperson, Clark County Board of Vegas Review-Journal. Commissioners, P.O. Box 551601, Las Vegas, Nevada 89155. New Mexico: Bernalillo ...... Unincorporated February 25, 2000, March The Honorable Tom Rutherford, January 19, 2000 350001 Areas. 3, 2000, Albuquerque Chairperson, Board of County Journal. Commissioners, Bernalillo County, 2400 Broadway Southeast, Albu- querque, New Mexico 87102. Oklahoma: Stephens ...... City of Duncan ..... February 7, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Dennis Johnson, December 29, 400202 ruary 14, 2000, The Mayor, City of Duncan, P.O. Box 1999. Duncan Banner. 969, Duncan, Oklahoma 73534. Tulsa ...... City of Tulsa ...... February 24, 2000, March The Honorable M. Susan Savage, May 31, 2000 ...... 405381 2, 2000, Tulsa World. Mayor, City of Tulsa, City Hall, 200 Civic Center, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Texas: Tarrant ...... City of Bedford ..... February 23, 2000, March The Honorable Rick Hurt, Mayor, City January 24, 2000 480585 1, 2000, Fort Worth of Bedford, 2000 Forest Ridge Star-Telegram. Drive, Bedford, Texas 76021. Bexar ...... Unincorporated February 15, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Cyndi Taylor Krier, January 7, 2000 ... 480035 Areas. ruary 22, 2000, San An- Bexar County Judge, Bexar County tonio Express-News. Courthouse, 100 Dolorosa, Suite 101, San Antonio, Texas 78205± 3036. Dallas ...... City of Carrolton ... February 11, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Milburn Gravely, January 7, 2000 ... 480167 ruary 18, 2000, Mayor, City of Carrolton, P.O. Box Metrocrest News. 110535, Carrolton, Texas 75011± 0535. Dallas ...... City of Dallas ...... February 7, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Ron Kirk, Mayor, City May 15, 2000 ...... 480171 ruary 14, 2000, Dallas of Dallas, City Hall, 1500 Marilla, Morning News. Dallas, Texas 75201. Tarrant ...... City of Euless ...... February 23, 2000, March The Honorable Mary Lib Saleh, January 24, 2000 480593 1, 2000, Fort Worth Mayor, City of Euless, 201 North Star-Telegram. Ector Drive, Euless, Texas 76039. Tarrant ...... City of Fort Worth February 29, 2000, March The Honorable Kenneth Barr, Mayor, January 24, 2000 480596 7, 2000, Fort Worth City of Fort Worth, City Hall, 1000 Star-Telegram. Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102±6311. Tarrant ...... City of North Rich- February 8, 2000, Feb- The Honorable Charles Scoma, January 11, 2000 480607 land Hills. ruary 15, 2000, Fort Mayor, City of North Richland Hills, Worth Star-Telegram. P.O. Box 820609, North Richland Hills, Texas 76182±0609. Tarrant ...... City of Saginaw .... February 29, 2000, March The Honorable Monte Nichols, Mayor, January 24, 2000 480610 7, 2000, Fort Worth City of Saginaw, P.O. Box 79070, Star-Telegram. Saginaw, Texas 76179. Bexar ...... City of San Anto- February 25, 2000, March The Honorable Howard W. Peak, January 24, 2000 480045 nio. 3, 2000, San Antonio Mayor, City of San Antonio, P.O. Express-News. Box 839966, San Antonio, Texas 78283±3966.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. FEDERAL EMERGENCY floodplain management measures that 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’) MANAGEMENT AGENCY each community is required either to Dated: May 17, 2000. adopt or to show evidence of being Michael J. Armstrong, 44 CFR Part 67 already in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the Associate Director for Mitigation. Final Flood Elevation Determinations [FR Doc. 00–14295 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] National Flood Insurance Program AGENCY: Federal Emergency (NFIP). BILLING CODE 6718±04±P Management Agency (FEMA). EFFECTIVE DATE: The date of issuance of ACTION: Final rule. the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) SUMMARY: Base (1-percent-annual- showing base flood elevations and chance) flood elevations and modified modified base flood elevations for each base flood elevations are made final for community. This date may be obtained the communities listed below. The base by contacting the office where the FIRM flood elevations and modified base is available for inspection as indicated flood elevations are the basis for the in the table below.

VerDate 112000 14:24 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36073

ADDRESSES: The final base flood 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, # Depth in elevations for each community are 58 FR 51735. feet above ground. available for inspection at the office of Executive Order 12612, Federalism. Source of flooding and location *Elevation the Chief Executive Officer of each in feet This rule involves no policies that have (NGVD). community. The respective addresses federalism implications under Executive are listed in the table below. Order 12612, Federalism, dated October KANSAS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 26, 1987. Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards Holton (City), Jackson Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice County (FEMA Docket No. Study Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Reform. This rule meets the applicable 7306) 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC standards of Section 2(b)(2) of Executive 20472, (202) 646–3461, or (e-mail) Order 12778. Banner Creek: [email protected]. At Union Pacific Railroad ...... *1,017 List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 At ``P'' Road ...... *1,035 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Maps are available for in- Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrative practice and spection at City Hall, 430 makes final determinations listed below procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting Pennsylvania Avenue, Hol- of base flood elevations and modified and recordkeeping requirements. ton, Kansas. base flood elevations for each Accordingly, 44 CFR Part 67 is ÐÐÐ community listed. The proposed base amended to read as follows: Jackson County (Unincor- flood elevations and proposed modified porated Areas) (FEMA Docket No. 7306) base flood elevations were published in PART 67Ð[AMENDED] newspapers of local circulation and an Banner Creek: opportunity for the community or 1. The authority citation for Part 67 At its confluence with Elk Creek ...... *1,002 individuals to appeal the proposed continues to read as follows: At ``M'' Road ...... *1,092 determinations to or through the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, Maps are available for in- community was provided for a period of spection at the Planning and ninety (90) days. The proposed base 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, Zoning Office, 500 Illinois Av- flood elevations and proposed modified 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. enue, Holton, Kansas. base flood elevations were also § 67.11 [Amended] ÐÐÐ published in the Federal Register. Reno County and Incor- This final rule is issued in accordance 2. The tables published under the porated Areas (FEMA with Section 110 of the Flood Disaster authority of § 67.11 are amended as Docket No. 7306) Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, follows: Arkansas River: and 44 CFR part 67. Just downstream of State # Depth in Route 50 ...... *1,517 FEMA has developed criteria for feet above floodplain management in floodprone ground. Just downstream of Union Source of flooding and location *Elevation Pacific Railroad ...... *1,523 areas in accordance with 44 CFR part in feet Unnamed Tributary to Sand 60. (NGVD). Creek: Interested lessees and owners of real Just upstream of U.S. High- property are encouraged to review the IOWA way 50 ...... *1,519 proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM Just downstream of Main Harrison County (Unincor- Street ...... *1,531 available at the address cited below for porated Areas) (FEMA each community. Docket No. 7302) Maps are available for in- spection at the Public Works The base flood elevations and Missouri River: Department, 206 W. 1st Ave- modified base flood elevations are made Approximately 20,000 feet nue, Hutchinson, Kansas. final in the communities listed below. downstream of Highway 30 *1,005 Maps are available for in- Elevations at selected locations in each Approximately 10,000 feet spection at City Hall, 2 upstream of 120th Street .. *1,032 community are shown. South Main, South Hutch- Maps are available for in- inson, Kansas. National Environmental Policy Act. spection at the Harrison This rule is categorically excluded from County, Emergency Manage- Maps are available for in- spection at the Planning De- the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, ment Agency, 116 North 2nd Avenue, Logan, Iowa. partment, 125 E. Avenue B, Environmental Consideration. No Hutchinson, Kansas. environmental impact assessment has ÐÐÐ been prepared. Polk County (Unincor- NEVADA porated Areas) (FEMA Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Docket No. 7306) Associate Director for Mitigation Mineral County (Unincor- certifies that this rule is exempt from Beaver Creek: porated Areas) (FEMA At mouth (approximately Docket No. 7302) the requirements of the Regulatory 3,950 feet downstream Corey Creek: Flexibility Act because final or modified from Northwest Beaver Drive) ...... *805 Approximately 50 feet down- base flood elevations are required by the stream of U.S. Highway 95 *4,253 Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Approximately 950 feet downstream from North- Approximately 3.6 miles up- 42 U.S.C. 4104, and are required to west Beaver Drive ...... *806 stream of 1st Street in establish and maintain community Approximately 5,650 feet up- Hawthorne ...... *5,028 eligibility in the NFIP. No regulatory stream of Northwest Bea- Corey Creek Overflow: ver Drive ...... *810 Approximately 500 feet up- flexibility analysis has been prepared. stream of State Highway Regulatory Classification. This final Maps are available for in- spection at the Planning Di- 359 ...... *4,858 rule is not a significant regulatory action vision, 5895 NE 14th Street, Approximately 1,500 feet up- under the criteria of Section 3(f) of Des Moines, Iowa. stream of State Highway Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 359 ...... *4,906

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36074 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

# Depth in # Depth in # Depth in feet above feet above feet above ground. ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation in feet in feet in feet (NGVD). (NGVD). (NGVD). Maps are available for in- ÐÐÐ WASHINGTON spection at the Mineral Sandy (City), Clackamas County Courthouse, Clerk County (FEMA Docket No. Clark County (Unincor- and Treasurer's Office, Cor- 7302) porated Areas) (FEMA ner of 1st and A Street, Haw- Docket No. 7250) thorne, Nevada. Tickle Creek: East Fork Lewis River: Approximately 1,980 feet Approximately 17,000 feet OKLAHOMA downstream of 362nd Ave- downstream of Daybreak nue ...... *684 Road ...... *32 Roger Mills County and In- Approximately 1,620 feet up- Approximately 400 feet corporated Areas (FEMA stream of Highway 211 ..... *946 downstream of Daybreak Docket No. 7306) Maps are available for in- Road ...... *75 White Shield Creek Tributary spection at the Planning and Maps are available for in- ``B'': Development Department, spection at the Clark County At its confluence with White 39250 Pioneer Boulevard, Department of Community Shield Creek ...... *1,737 Sandy, Oregon. Development, Development Approximately 150 feet up- Services Division, Office of stream of Steele Street ..... *1,778 TEXAS Engineering Review, 1408 White Shield Creek: Franklin Street, Vancouver, At State Route 34 ...... *1,702 Kerr County and Incor- Washington. Approximately 50 feet up- porated Areas (FEMA stream from Steele Street *1,754 Docket No. 7278) Memorial Park Tributary: (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. At its confluence with Ser- Stream TC±1: 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) geant Major Creek ...... *1,938 Approximately 2,300 feet Dated: May 17, 2000. Approximately 884 feet up- downstream of Interstate Michael J. Armstrong, stream from U.S. Highway Highway 10 ...... *1,662 283 (Main Street) ...... *1,977 Just upstream of Interstate Associate Director for Mitigation. Dry Creek: Highway 10 ...... *1,718 [FR Doc. 00–14293 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] At its confluence with Ser- Stream QC±2: BILLING CODE 6718±04±P geant Major Creek ...... *1,941 Just downstream of State Approximately 8,400 feet up- Highway 16 ...... *1,706 stream of confluence with Just upstream of Interstate Sergeant Major Creek ...... *1,985 Highway 10 ...... *1,761 Sergeant Major Creek: Stream QC±1: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE At its confluence with Just upstream of Leslie Road *1,688 Washita River ...... *1,923 Approximately 8,600 feet up- Approximately 200 feet up- National Oceanic and Atmospheric stream from confluence stream of Interstate High- Administration with Dry Creek ...... *1,974 way 10 ...... *1,801 Washita River: Quinlan Creek: 50 CFR Part 223 At State Route 34 ...... *1,703 Just upstream of State High- Approximately 16,800 feet way 27 ...... *1,606 upstream from its con- Approximately 900 feet up- [Docket No. 000202022±0156±02; I.D. fluence with Sergeant stream of Interstate High- 012100F] Major Creek ...... *1,949 way 10 ...... *1,719 Town Creek: Maps are available for in- RIN 0648±AN58 spection at the County Just upstream of State High- Courthouse, Llmales and way 27 ...... *1,624 Broadway Avenue, Chey- Approximately 200 feet Endangered and Threatened Species: enne, Oklahoma. downstream of Schreiner Threatened Status for One Steelhead Maps are available for in- Road ...... *1,630 Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) in spection at City Hall, 714 Approximately 900 feet up- California Main Street, Hammon, Okla- stream of Interstate High- homa. way 10 ...... *1,689 Elm Creek: AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Maps are available for in- Approximately 600 feet up- Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and spection at City Hall, 317 N. stream of Goat Creek Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Broadway, Cheyenne, Okla- Road ...... *1,649 homa. Commerce. Approximately 800 feet up- stream of Laurel Wood ACTION: Final rule. OREGON Drive ...... *1,764 Camp Meeting Creek: SUMMARY: Following completion of a Clackamas County (Unincor- Approximately 500 feet porated Areas) (FEMA downstream of Preston comprehensive status review of west Docket No. 7302) Trail ...... *1,592 coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Tickle Creek: Approximately 2,100 feet up- or O. mykiss) populations throughout Approximately 2,600 feet stream of Southway Drive *1,699 Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and downstream of Southeast Maps are available for in- California, NMFS published a proposed 362nd Avenue ...... *672 spection at the Upper Gua- rule to list 10 ESUs as threatened or Approximately 2,350 feet up- dalupe River Authority, 125 stream of Southeast 395th Lehmann Drive, Kerrville, endangered under the Endangered Avenue ...... *1,011 Texas. Species Act (ESA) on August 9, 1996. Maps are available for in- Maps are available for in- One of these steelhead ESUs, the spection at the Clackamas spection at the City of Northern California ESU, was proposed County Department of Trans- Kerrville, 800 Junction High- for listing as a threatened species. portation and Development, way, Kerrville, Texas. 902 Abernathy Road, Oregon Because of scientific disagreements, City, Oregon. NMFS deferred its final listing

VerDate 112000 14:30 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36075 determination for five of these steelhead California; Oregon Coast; Klamath (Memorandum to William Stelle and ESUs, including the Northern California Mountains Province; and northern William Hogarth from Michael Schiewe, ESU, on August 18, 1997. After California ESUs) that was published on January 13, 1998, Status Review Update soliciting and reviewing additional March 19, 1998 (63 FR 13347). The most for Deferred ESUs of West Coast information to resolve these comprehensive petition was submitted Steelhead: Hatchery Populations disagreements, NMFS published a final by Oregon Natural Resources Council (NMFS, 1998a)). determination in March 1998 that the and 15 co-petitioners on February 16, Based on a review of the updated Northern California ESU did not 1994. In response to this petition, NMFS scientific information for these ESUs, as warrant listing under the ESA because assessed the best available scientific and well as a review and evaluation of available scientific information and commercial data, including technical Federal, state, and local conservation conservation measures indicated the information from Pacific Salmon measures reducing the threats to these ESU was at a lower risk of extinction Biological Technical Committees ESUs, NMFS issued a final rule (63 FR than at the time of the proposed rule. (PSBTCs) and interested parties in 13347, March 19, 1998) listing two ESUs Because the State of California did not Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and as threatened (Lower Columbia River implement conservation measures that California, and convened a Biological and Central Valley California), and a NMFS considered critically important Review Team (BRT), composed of staff notice of determination that three ESUs in its decision to not list the Northern from NMFS’ Northwest and Southwest (Oregon Coast, Klamath Mountains California steelhead ESU, NMFS Fisheries Science Centers and Province, and Northern California) did completed an updated status review for Southwest Regional Office, as well as a not warrant listing. NMFS’ the ESU and reassessed the State and representative of the U.S. Geological determination that these three ESUs did Federal conservation measures that Survey Biological Resources Division not warrant listing was based on the were in place to protect the ESU. Based (formerly the National Biological best available scientific and commercial on this reconsideration, NMFS proposed Service) to conduct a coast-wide status data which indicated these ESUs were to list the Northern California steelhead review for west coast steelhead (Busby at a lower risk of extinction than at the ESU as a threatened species under the et al., 1996). time of the proposed listing ESA on February 11, 2000. Based on the results of the BRT’s determination. Even though the risks After considering public comments on status review, an analysis of Federal, confronting these ESUs had been the proposed determination, NMFS now State and local conservation measures, reduced to a point at which listing was issues a final rule to list the Northern and other information which NMFS not warranted, NMFS still expressed determined constituted the best California ESU of steelhead as a concerns about the status of these three scientific and commercial data threatened species. Within the Northern ESUs in the notice of determination, available, NMFS published a proposed California ESU, only naturally spawned and, therefore, identified them as listing determination (61 FR 41541, populations of steelhead (and their candidate species which the agency August 9, 1996) that identified 15 ESUs progeny) residing below naturally would continue to monitor. occurring and man-made impassable of steelhead in the states of Washington, NMFS’s March 19, 1998 (63 FR barriers (e.g., impassable waterfalls and Oregon, Idaho, and California. Ten of 13347), decision not to list the Northern dams) are listed. NMFS has examined these ESUs, including the northern California steelhead ESU was based the relationship between hatchery and California ESU, were proposed for largely on a determination that natural populations of steelhead in this listing as threatened or endangered sufficient Federal and state conservation ESU and concludes hatchery species, four were found not warranted measures were in place to reduce threats populations are not essential for for listing, and one was identified as a to the ESU such that the proposed recovery; therefore, no hatchery candidate for listing. threatened listing was unnecessary. The populations are listed. At this time, On August 18, 1997, NMFS published Federal and state conservation measures NMFS is listing only the anadromous a final rule listing five ESUs as upon which NMFS based this life forms of O. mykiss in this ESU. threatened and endangered under the determination included: (1) NMFS intends to designate critical ESA (62 FR 43937). In a separate notice implementation of a March 11, 1998, habitat and promulgate protective published on the same day, NMFS Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) regulations under section 4(d) of the determined substantial scientific between NMFS and the State of ESA for this ESU in separate disagreement remained for five California (NMFS/California MOA, rulemakings. proposed ESUs, including the northern California steelhead ESU (62 FR 43974, 1998), with particular importance given DATES: Effective August 7, 2000. August 18, 1997). In accordance with to implementation of those provisions ADDRESSES: Assistant Regional section 4(b)(6)(B)(i) of the ESA, NMFS in the MOA which were intended to Administrator, Protected Resources deferred its decision on these five improve non-Federal forest land Division, NMFS, Southwest Region, 401 steelhead ESUs for 6 months for the protections in the ESU (81 percent of West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long purpose of soliciting additional data. land ownership is non-Federal land); (2) Beach, CA 90802–4213. During this 6-month period of deferral, implementation of more restrictive in- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: NMFS received new scientific river harvest regulations by California Craig Wingert, 562–980-4021, or Chris information regarding the status of these which were intended to reduce Mobley, 301–713–1401. proposed steelhead ESUs. This new mortality and increase the viability of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information was evaluated by NMFS’ naturally reproducing steelhead BRT which prepared both an updated populations; and (3) improved Previous Federal ESA Actions Related status review for these five ESUs protections to habitat and naturally to West Coast Steelhead (Memorandum to William Stelle and reproducing steelhead from expanded The history of petitions NMFS has William Hogarth from M. Schiewe, habitat protection and restoration received regarding west coast steelhead December 18, 1997, Status of Deferred efforts, improvements in the is summarized in a final rule and notice and Candidate ESUs of West Coast management of hatchery steelhead of determination for five steelhead ESUs Steelhead (NMFS, 1997a)), and a review stocks, and expanded population (Lower Columbia River; Central Valley, of the associated hatchery populations monitoring.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36076 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

At the time of its decision not to list to list the ESU, NMFS determined that trouts from western North America the Northern California ESU, NMFS a formal reconsideration of the status of share a common lineage with Pacific considered the protection and this ESU was warranted (December 3, salmon. restoration of freshwater spawning, 1999, Memorandum from Rodney R. Steelhead typically migrate to marine rearing, and migratory habitat on non- McInnis and William Stelle, Jr. to waters after spending 2 years in fresh Federal lands to be essential for the Penelope D. Dalton (NMFS, 1999)). water. They then reside in marine long-term survival and recovery of this As part of this reconsideration, the waters for typically 2 or 3 years prior to ESU because non-Federal lands Southwest Fisheries Science Center returning to their natal stream to spawn represented such a large portion of the (SWFSC) completed an updated status as 4- or 5-year-olds. Unlike other Pacific available habitat (63 FR 13347, March review for the Northern California salmon, steelhead are iteroparous, 19, 1998). Because of NMFS’ concerns steelhead ESU in January, 2000 which meaning they are capable of spawning regarding the preponderance of private concluded that its biological status had more than once before they die. timber lands and timber harvest in the changed little since NMFS’ steelhead However, it is rare for steelhead to northern California ESU, the NMFS/ BRT determined in December 1997 that spawn more than twice before dying; California MOA contained several the ESU was likely to become most that do so are females. Steelhead provisions calling for the review and endangered in the foreseeable future. adults typically spawn between revision of California’s forest practice NMFS also conducted a re-evaluation of December and June (Bell, 1990; Busby et rules (FPRs), and a review of their Federal and state conservation measures al., 1996). Depending on water implementation and enforcement by that were in place to protect this ESU, temperature, steelhead eggs may January 1, 2000. NMFS considered full including the implementation and incubate in ‘‘redds’’ (nesting gravels) for implementation of these critical success of measures such as the NMFS/ 1.5 to 4 months before hatching as provisions within the specified time California MOA that were considered ‘‘alevins’’ (a larval life stage dependent frame to be essential for achieving important factors in the original on food stored in a yolk sac). Following properly functioning habitat conditions decision not to list the ESU. Based on yolk sac absorption, young juveniles or for steelhead in this ESU. the updated status review and re- ‘‘fry’’ emerge from the gravel and begin In accordance with the NMFS/ assessment of conservation measures, actively feeding. Juveniles rear in fresh California MOA, a scientific review NMFS concluded that the Northern water from 1 to 4 years, then migrate to panel was established by the State to California steelhead ESU was likely to the ocean as ‘‘smolts.’’ review the California FPRs, including become endangered in the foreseeable Biologically, steelhead can be divided their implementation and enforcement. future, and therefore, proposed to list into two reproductive ecotypes, based The scientific review panel completed the ESU as a threatened species under on their state of sexual maturity at the its review and provided the State’s the ESA on February 11, 2000 (65 FR time of river entry and the duration of Board of Forestry (BOF) with its 6960). their spawning migration. These two findings and recommendations in June Steelhead Life History and Background ecotypes are termed ‘‘stream maturing’’ 1999. In its findings, the review panel concluded that California’s FPRs, Biological information for west coast and ‘‘ocean maturing.’’ Stream maturing including their implementation through steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and steelhead enter fresh water in a sexually the existing timber harvest plan process, the northern California ESU in immature condition and require several do not ensure protection of anadromous particular can be found in steelhead months to mature and spawn. Ocean salmonid habitat and populations. To status assessments conducted by NMFS maturing steelhead enter fresh water address these shortcomings, and as (Busby et al., 1996; NMFS, 1997a; with well developed gonads and spawn specified in the NMFS/California MOA, NMFS, 2000) and in previous Federal shortly after river entry. These two the California Resources Agency and Register documents (61 FR 41541, reproductive ecotypes are more CalEPA jointly presented the BOF with August 9, 1996; 63 FR 13347, March 19, commonly referred to by their season of a proposed rule change package in July 1998; 65 FR 6960, February 11, 2000). freshwater entry (i.e., summer [stream 1999. Following several months of A summary of steelhead life history maturing] and winter steelhead [ocean public review, the Board of Forestry follows. maturing]). The Northern California took no action on the package in O. mykiss exhibits one of the most ESU contains populations of both October 1999, thereby precluding any complex suites of life history traits of winter and summer steelhead. possibility of implementing any salmonid species. Individuals may Two major genetic groups or improvements in California’s FPRs by exhibit anadromy (meaning they migrate ‘‘subspecies’’ of steelhead occur on the January 1, 2000, as the State committed as juveniles from fresh water to the west coast of the United States: a coastal to do in the NMFS/California MOA. ocean, and then return to spawn in fresh group and an inland group, separated in Although NMFS’ March 19, 1998, water) or freshwater residency (meaning the Fraser and Columbia River Basins decision not to list the northern they reside their entire life in fresh approximately by the Cascade crest California ESU concluded that water). Resident forms are usually (Huzyk & Tsuyuki, 1974; Allendorf, improvements in steelhead harvest and referred to as ‘‘rainbow’’ or ‘‘redband’’ 1975; Utter & Allendorf, 1977; Okazaki, hatchery management would provide trout, while anadromous life forms are 1984; Parkinson, 1984; Schreck et al., immediate conservation benefits to this termed ‘‘steelhead.’’ Few detailed 1986; Reisenbichler et al., 1992). ESU, an essential component of the studies have been conducted regarding Behnke (1992) proposed classifying the decision was based on NMFS’ the relationship between resident and coastal subspecies as O. m. irideus and expectation that changes in the State’s anadromous O. mykiss and as a result, the inland subspecies as O. m. gairdneri. FPRs would be implemented by January the relationship between these two life These genetic groupings apply to both 1, 2000. Because these critical forms is poorly understood. The anadromous and nonanadromous forms conservation measures were not being scientific name for the biological species of O. mykiss. Both coastal and inland implemented by the State of California, that includes both steelhead and steelhead occur in Washington and and therefore, were not reducing threats rainbow trout has been changed from Oregon. California is thought to have to this ESU that were anticipated at the Salmo gairdneri to O. mykiss. This only coastal steelhead while Idaho has time of its March 19, 1998, decision not change reflects the premise that all only inland steelhead. The northern

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36077

California steelhead ESU is part of the individuals presented testimony at this or local adaptation. Some commenters coastal grouping. public hearing, with the majority felt that information was lacking Historically, steelhead were expressing their opposition to the concerning a number of ‘‘key’’ criteria distributed throughout the North Pacific proposed listing. During the 60-day for defining the Northern California Ocean from the Kamchatka Peninsula in public comment period that followed steelhead ESU, such as phenotypic Asia to the northern Baja Peninsula. publication of the proposed rule, NMFS differences, evolutionary significance, Presently, the species distribution received 44 written comments from or ecological significance of various extends from the Kamchatka Peninsula, Federal, state, and local government summer and winter steelhead east and south along the Pacific coast of agencies, Indian tribes, non- populations. Commenters contended North America, to at least Malibu Creek governmental organizations, and other that NMFS did not find any life history, in southern California. There are individuals. In contrast to the public habitat, or phenotypic characteristics infrequent anecdotal reports of hearing, the majority of written that were unique to any of the steelhead steelhead occurring as far south as the comments were supportive of the populations discussed. Santa Margarita River in San Diego proposal. A number of comments Response: General issues relating to County (McEwan & Jackson, 1996). In addressed issues pertaining to the ESUs, Distinct Population Segments 1999, juvenile O. mykiss suspected of designation of critical habitat which was (DPSs), and the ESA have been being the progeny of steelhead were not proposed at the time of the listing discussed extensively in past Federal reported from San Mateo Creek which is proposal. Several commenters requested Register documents. Regarding in northernmost San Diego County, just NMFS promulgate an ESA 4(d) rule that application of its ESU policy, NMFS north of the Santa Margarita River. would allow continued catch and relies on its policy describing how it Historically, steelhead likely inhabited release angling opportunities in coastal will apply the ESA definition of most coastal streams in Washington, streams occurring within the Northern ‘‘species’’ to anadromous salmonid Oregon, and California as well as many California steelhead ESU. At least one species published in 1991 (56 FR 58612, inland streams in these states and Idaho. commenter resubmitted comments that November 20, 1991). More recently, However, during this century, over 23 had originally been submitted to NMFS NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife indigenous, naturally reproducing when this ESU was first proposed for Service published a joint policy, that is stocks of steelhead are believed to have listing in 1996. consistent with NMFS’ policy, regarding been extirpated, and many more are A summary of comments received in the definition of ‘‘distinct population thought to be in decline in numerous response to the proposed rule follows. segments’’ (61 FR 4722, February 7, coastal and inland streams in Issue 1: Sufficiency and Accuracy of 1996). The earlier policy is more Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Scientific Information and Analysis detailed and applies specifically to California. Forty-three stocks have been Comment 1: Some commenters Pacific salmonids, and therefore, was identified by Nehlsen et al. (1991) as questioned the sufficiency and accuracy used for this determination. This policy being at moderate or high risk of of data NMFS employed in the listing indicates that one or more naturally extinction. proposal. reproducing salmonid populations will Response: Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the be considered to be distinct and, hence, Summary of Comments Received in ESA requires that NMFS make its listing a species under the ESA, if they Response to the Proposed Rule determinations solely on the basis of the represent an ESU of the biological Following NMFS proposal to list 10 best available scientific and commercial species. To be considered an ESU, a steelhead ESUs in 1996, including the data, after reviewing the status of the population must satisfy two criteria: (1) Northern California ESU (61 FR 41541), species and taking into account any It must be reproductively isolated from a total of 16 public hearings were held efforts being made to protect such other population units of the same in California, Oregon, Idaho, and species. NMFS believes that information species; and (2) it must represent an Washington to solicit comments on the contained in the agency’s original status important component in the proposed rule. During the 90-day public review (Busby et al., 1996), together evolutionary legacy of the biological comment period, NMFS received nearly with more recent information (NMFS, species. The first criterion, reproductive 1,000 written comments on the 1997a; NMFS, 1998a; NMFS, 2000), isolation, does not have to be absolute proposed rule from Federal, state, and represents the best scientific and but must have been strong enough to local government agencies, Indian commercial information presently permit evolutionarily important tribes, non-governmental organizations, available for the Northern California differences to occur in different the scientific community, and other steelhead ESU addressed in this final population units. The second criterion individuals. A number of comments rule. NMFS has made every effort to is met if the population contributes addressed specific technical issues conduct an exhaustive review of all substantially to the ecological or genetic pertaining to a particular geographic available information and has solicited diversity of the species as a whole. region or O. mykiss population. These information and opinion from all Guidance on applying this policy is technical comments were considered by interested parties. contained in a NOAA Technical NMFS’ steelhead BRT in its re- Comment 2: Some comments Memorandum entitled ‘‘Definition of evaluation of ESU definitions and suggested that the ESA does not provide ‘Species’ Under the Endangered Species status, including the Northern California for the creation of ESUs and that ESUs Act: Application to Pacific Salmon’’ steelhead ESU, and were discussed in do not correspond to species, (Waples, 1991) and in a more recent the updated status review report subspecies, or distinct population scientific paper by Waples (1995). (NMFS, 1997a). segments (DPSs) that are specifically NMFS identified all west coast During the 60-day public comment identified in the ESA. Further, NMFS’ steelhead ESUs including the Northern period that followed publication of the use of genetic information (allozyme- or California ESU in the original steelhead proposal to list this ESU (65 FR 6960), DNA-derived information) to determine status review, using the best available NMFS received numerous written ESU boundaries was criticized. It was scientific and commercial information. comments and also held one public argued that allozyme-based As discussed in the original status hearing in Eureka, California to solicit electrophoretic data cannot be used to review, genetic data were used comments on the proposal. A total of 20 imply either evolutionary significance primarily to evaluate the criterion

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36078 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations regarding reproductive isolation, not some cases, such commenters also have contributed to the decline of west evolutionary significance. In some expressed opinions regarding whether coast steelhead. Many of the identified cases, there was a considerable degree of listing was warranted. risk factors were specifically cited in confidence in the ESU determinations. Response: Throughout the status NMFS’ original west coast steelhead The west coast steelhead status review review for west coast steelhead and all status review (Busby et al., 1996) and describes a variety of characteristics that subsequent updates, NMFS has solicited subsequent listing notices (61 FR 41541; support the ESU delineations for this and evaluated the best available 63 FR 13347; 65 FR 6960). In addition, species, including ecological and life scientific and commercial data for the NMFS has prepared a report that history parameters. species. NMFS believes that these summarizes the factors leading to the Comment 3: Some commenters reviews, coupled with considerable decline of steelhead on the west coast suggested that listing of the Klamath input from the public, co-managers, entitled: ‘‘Factors for Decline: A Mountains Province (KMP) steelhead peer reviewers, and other species supplement to the notice of ESU was also warranted based on the experts, clearly demonstrate that its determination for west coast steelhead’’ rationale NMFS provided for its listing determinations are not arbitrary, (NMFS, 1996). This report concludes decision to propose listing the Northern but instead are based on an open and that all of the factors identified in California steelhead ESU. rigorous scientific assessment. section 4(a)(1) of the ESA have played Response: NMFS’ decision not to NMFS has identified a number of a role in the decline of the species. The reconsider the KMP steelhead ESU for factors that should be considered in report identifies destruction and listing is based on the determination evaluating the level of risk faced by an modification of habitat, overutilization that there are sufficient Federal and ESU, including: (1) absolute numbers of for recreational purposes, and natural state conservation measures in place to fish and their spatial and temporal and human-made factors as being the reduce the threats to the ESU such that distribution; (2) current abundance in primary causes for the decline of listing is not warranted. The Federal relation to historical abundance and steelhead on the west coast. NMFS and state conservation measures which current carrying capacity of the habitat; recognizes that natural environmental NMFS bases this determination on (3) trends in abundance; (4) natural and fluctuations have likely played a role in include: (1) the large portion of Federal human-influenced factors that cause the species’ recent declines as well. land ownership in the ESU (64 percent variability in survival and abundance; However, NMFS believes other human- for the entire ESU and 80 percent in the (5) possible threats to genetic integrity induced impacts (e.g., harvest in certain California portion of the ESU) coupled (e.g., from strays or outplants from fisheries, artificial propagation, and with successful implementation of the hatchery programs); and (6) recent widespread habitat modification) have Northwest Forest Plan on Federal lands events (e.g., a drought or changes in played an equally significant role in the which reduced habitat risks; (2) harvest management) that have decline of steelhead. substantial changes to the management predictable short-term consequences for NMFS’ 1996 status review briefly of recreational fisheries and artificial abundance of the ESU. These factors addressed the impact of adverse marine propagation programs by the states of were considered by NMFS in the conditions and climate change, but Oregon and California which are original 1996 status review and all concluded that there is considerable reducing impacts to steelhead; and (3) subsequent updated reviews (NMFS, uncertainty regarding the role of these general improvements to habitat 1997a; NMFS, 2000) and served as the factors in steelhead abundance. At this conditions throughout the ESU resulting basis for agency determinations time, we do not know whether these from state-wide conservation strategies regarding the biological status of the climate conditions represent a long-term and monitoring efforts in both Oregon Northern California steelhead ESU. shift in conditions that will continue and California. In California, these Issue 3: Factors Contributing to the into the future or short-term efforts include implementation of the Decline of Northern California environmental fluctuations that can be California Department of Fish and Steelhead ESU expected to reverse soon (NMFS, 1996). Game’s (DFG) strategic management Comment 5: Some commenters A recent review by Hare et al. (1999) plan for KMP steelhead ESU, the State’s identified factors for decline that were suggests that these conditions could be Watershed Protection Program which either not identified in the original or part of an alternating 20- to 30-year includes an ongoing habitat restoration updated status reviews or which they regime pattern. These authors program, and the NMFS/California believed were not given sufficient concluded that although at-risk salmon MOA which assures implementation of weight in the risk analysis. Other stocks may benefit from a reversal in the steelhead angling regulation changes, commenters contended that recent current climate/ocean regime, fisheries changes in the management of hatchery declines in Northern California management should continue to focus steelhead programs, habitat protections steelhead abundance were related to on reducing impacts from harvest and on non-Federal land, and expanded natural factors such as predation and artificial propagation and improving steelhead monitoring. In Oregon, these changes in ocean productivity. freshwater and estuarine habitats. efforts include the implementation of Furthermore, these commenters contend NMFS believes there is ample conservation measures contained in the that NMFS did not show how the evidence to suggest that the elimination Oregon Plan for Salmon and present declines were significantly and degradation of freshwater habitats Watersheds. different from natural variability in have contributed to the decline of this Issue 2: Status Assessment for the abundance, nor that abundances were steelhead ESU (NMFS, 1996). Many of Northern California Steelhead ESU below the current carrying capacity of the identified risks and conclusions Comment 4: Some commenters the marine environment and freshwater apply specifically to Northern California suggested that risk assessments were habitat. steelhead populations. Examples of made in an arbitrary manner and that Response: The status review did not habitat alterations affecting steelhead NMFS did not rely on the best available attempt to exhaustively identify factors include: water withdrawal, conveyance, science. Several commenters questioned for decline, except insofar as they storage, and flood control (resulting in NMFS’ methodology for determining contributed directly to the risk analysis. insufficient flows, stranding, juvenile whether the Northern California Nevertheless, NMFS agrees that a entrainment, and increased stream steelhead ESU warranted listing. In multitude of factors, past and present, temperatures); and logging and

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36079 agriculture (resulting in loss of large management actions, road miles should sufficient Federal and state conservation woody debris, sedimentation, loss of be reduced, no new roads can be built measures were in place to reduce threats riparian vegetation, and habitat in roadless areas, and restoration to the ESU such that the proposed simplification) (NMFS, 1996; Spence et activities are prioritized). In addition, threatened listing was unnecessary. The al., 1996; Busby et al., 1996). These the most significant element of the NFP Federal and state conservation measures human-induced impacts in freshwater for anadromous fish is its Aquatic upon which NMFS based this ecosystems have likely reduced the Conservation Strategy (ACS), a regional- determination included the species’ resiliency to natural factors for scale aquatic ecosystem conservation implementation of a March 11, 1998, decline such as drought and poor ocean strategy that includes: (1) special land Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) conditions. A critical next step in allocations (such as key watersheds, between NMFS and the State of restoring listed steelhead will be riparian reserves, and late-successional California (NMFS/California MOA, identifying and ameliorating specific reserves) to provide aquatic habitat 1998), with particular importance given factors for decline at both the ESU and refugia; (2) special requirements for to implementation of those provisions population level. project planning and design in the form in the MOA which were intended to With respect to predation impacts on of standards and guidelines; and (3) new improve non-Federal forest land steelhead, NMFS has recently published watershed analysis, watershed protections in the ESU. At the time of reports describing the impacts of restoration, and monitoring processes. NMFS’ decision not to list the Northern California sea lions and Pacific harbor These ACS components collectively California ESU in 1998, NMFS seals upon salmonids and on the coastal ensure that Federal land management considered the protection and ecosystems of Washington, Oregon, and actions achieve a set of nine ACS restoration of freshwater spawning, California (NMFS, 1997 and 1999b). objectives that strive to maintain and rearing, and migratory habitat on non- These reports conclude that in certain restore ecosystem health at watershed Federal lands to be essential for the cases where pinniped populations co- and landscape scales, to protect habitat long-term survival and recovery of this occur with depressed salmonid for fish and other riparian-dependent ESU because non-Federal lands populations, salmonid populations may species and to restore currently represented such a large portion (81 experience severe impacts due to degraded habitats. NMFS will continue percent) of the available habitat (63 FR predation. An example of such a to support the NFP strategy and address 13347, March 19, 1998; 65 FR 6960, situation is at the Ballard Locks, Federal land management issues via February 11, 2000). Because of NMFS’ Washington, where sea lions are known ESA section 7 consultations. to consume significant numbers of adult Additional consideration was given to concerns regarding the preponderance winter steelhead. These reports further various conservation efforts in of private timber lands and timber conclude that data regarding pinniped California that have been implemented harvest in the northern California ESU, predation are quite limited and that or are expected to be initiated. See the NMFS/California MOA contained substantial additional research is ‘‘Efforts Being Made to Protect West several provisions calling for the review needed to fully address this issue. Coast steelhead’’ later in this document. and revision of California’s FPRs, and a Existing information on the seriously Comment 7: Several commenters review of their implementation and depressed status of many salmonid expressed their belief that current enforcement by January 1, 2000. NMFS stocks may be sufficient to warrant California Forest Practice Rules (FPR’s) considered full implementation of these actions to remove pinnipeds in areas of were adequate to protect the Northern critical provisions within the specified co-occurrence where pinnipeds prey on California steelhead ESU. Several time frame to be essential for achieving depressed salmonid populations comments expressed concern that properly functioning habitat conditions (NMFS, 1997 and 1999b). NMFS did not adequately review and for steelhead in this ESU. In accordance Issue 4: Consideration of Existing consider the interim FPR changes with the NMFS/California MOA, a Conservation Measures adopted by the California Board of scientific review panel was established Comment 6: Some commenters Forestry (BOF) for anadromous by the state to review the California expressed concerns about NMFS’ salmonids in March 2000. FPRs, including their implementation reliance and characterization of the Response: NMFS disagrees with the and enforcement. The scientific review efficacy of the Northwest Forest Plan assertion that the state’s FPRs as panel completed its review and (NFP), citing significant differences in currently implemented are adequate to provided the state’s Board of Forestry management practices between various protect anadromous salmonids in with its findings and recommendations Federal land management agencies. California. NMFS has reviewed the State in June 1999. In its findings, the review Numerous commenters noted that an FPRs, including those interim changes panel concluded that California’s FPRs, array of state and Federal conservation recently adopted by the Board of Foresty including their implementation through measures were underway for this and and concludes that they do not the existing timber harvest plan process, other species (particularly in northern adequately protect anadromous do not ensure protection of anadromous California) and asked that NMFS give salmonids, including steelhead, or salmonid habitat and populations. To them more consideration in its listing provide for properly functioning habitat address these shortcomings, and as determination. conditions. In fact, the deleterious specified in the NMFS/California MOA, Response: In the listing proposal, impacts of timber harvest and other the California Resources Agency and NMFS noted that the NFP requires activities have resulted in recent listings CalEPA jointly presented the Board of specific management actions on Federal by the Environmental Protection Agency Forestry with a proposed rule change lands, including actions in key of many north coast California streams package in July 1999. Following several watersheds in southern Oregon and as sediment and/or temperature months of public review, the Board of northern California that comply with impaired under Section 303(d) of the Forestry took no action on the package special standards and guidelines Clean Water Act. in October 1999, thereby precluding any designed to preserve their refugia NMFS’ March 19, 1998 (63 FR 13347), possibility of implementing functions for at-risk salmonids (i.e., decision not to list the Northern improvements in California’s FPRs by watershed analysis must be completed California steelhead ESU was based January 1, 2000, as the State committed prior to timber harvests and other largely on a determination that to do in the NMFS/California MOA.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36080 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

The California State Legislature, flexibility under ESA section 4(d) to NMFS believes resident fish can help purusant to Senate Bill 621, gave special tailor section 9 take regulations based buffer extinction risks to an anadromous authority to BOF to adopt new rules on the contents of available population by mitigating depensatory twice during the year 2000 for the conservation measures. NMFS fully effects in spawning populations, by specific purpose of revising the State’s intends to recognize local conservation providing offspring that migrate to the FPRs to meet ESA requirements for efforts to the fullest extent possible. ocean and enter the breeding population salmonids. Following its decision to Issue 5: Steelhead Biology and of steelhead, and by providing a take no action in October 1999, BOF Ecology ‘‘reserve’’ gene pool in freshwater that continued working on revisions to the Comment 9: Some commenters may persist through times of state’s FPRs through March 2000. believe that resident rainbow trout unfavorable conditions for anadromous During this period, NMFS and other should be included in the Northern fish. In spite of these potential benefits, groups strongly urged BOF to adopt the California steelhead ESU if it is listed. presence of resident populations is not entire FPR package as a necessary first Several commenters also stated that a substitute for conservation of step for protecting anadromous NMFS should address how the presence anadromous populations. A particular salmonid habitat. On March 14, 2000, of rainbow trout populations may concern is isolation of resident (the deadline for the Board of Forestry ameliorate risks facing anadromous populations by human-caused barriers to exercise its authority under SB 621), populations within listed ESUs. to migration. This interrupts normal the Board only adopted a subset of rule Response: In its August 9, 1996, population dynamics and population changes from the package. These rule listing proposal, NMFS stated that based genetic processes and can lead to loss of changes only apply to those harvest on available genetic information, it was a genetically based trait (anadromy). As plans approved between July 1, 2000, the consensus of NMFS scientists, as discussed in NMFS’ ‘‘species and December 31, 2000. NMFS has well as regional fishery biologists, that identification’’ paper (Waples, 1991), reviewed these recently adopted rule resident fish should generally be the potential loss of anadromy in changes and has determined that they considered part of the steelhead ESUs, distinct population segments may in are inadequate to protect anadromous but also concluded that available data and of itself warrant listing the species salmonids or provide for properly were inconclusive regarding the as a whole. functioning habitat conditions. This relationship of resident rainbow trout FWS and NMFS adopted a joint position is supported by the scientific and steelhead. NMFS requested policy to clarify their interpretation of review panel report of June 1999. For a additional data in the proposed rule to the phrase ‘‘distinct population segment more detailed discussion on the clarify this relationship and determine if (DPS) of any species of vertebrate fish or adequacy of California’s FPRs, including resident rainbow trout should be wildlife’’ for the purposes of listing, the recently proposed interim FPRs included in listed steelhead ESUs. delisting, and reclassifying species changes, see ‘‘Inadequacy of Existing In response to this request for under the ESA (61 FR 4722). DPSs are Regulatory Mechanisms, Land additional information, many groups ‘‘species’’ pursuant to section 3(15) of Management’’ later in this document. and individuals expressed opinions the ESA. Previously, NMFS had Comment 8: Several commenters regarding this issue. In most cases these developed a policy for stocks of Pacific argued that NMFS had not considered opinions were not supported by new salmon where an ESU of a biological existing conservation programs information that resolves existing species is considered ‘‘distinct’’ (and designed to enhance steelhead stocks uncertainty. Two state fishery hence a species) if (1) it is substantially within the northern California ESU. management agencies (CDFG and reproductively isolated from other Response: NMFS has reviewed WDFW) and one peer reviewer provided conspecific population units, and (2) it existing conservation efforts relevant to comments and information supporting represents an important component in the Northern California steelhead ESU the inclusion of resident rainbow trout the evolutionary legacy of the species and concludes that existing in listed steelhead ESUs. In general, (November 20, 1991, 56 FR 58612). conservation efforts in these areas are these parties also felt that rainbow trout NMFS believes available data suggest not sufficient to preclude listing of the may serve as an important reservoir of that resident rainbow trout are in many ESU at this time. Several of the plans genetic material for at-risk steelhead cases part of steelhead ESUs. However, addressed in comments show promise stocks. the FWS, which has ESA authority for for ameliorating the risks facing While conclusive evidence does not resident fish, maintains that behavioral steelhead. However, in most cases, yet exist regarding the relationship of forms can be regarded as separate DPSs measures described in comments have resident and anadromous O. mykiss, and that absent evidence suggesting not been implemented or are in their NMFS believes available evidence resident rainbow trout need ESA early stages of implementation and have suggests that resident rainbow trout protection, the FWS concludes that only not yet demonstrated success. Some of should be included in listed steelhead the anadromous forms of each ESU these measures are also geographically ESUs in certain cases. Such cases should be listed under the ESA (DOI, limited to individual river basins or include: (1) where resident O. mykiss 1997; FWS, 1997). political subdivisions, thereby have the opportunity to interbreed with Comment 10: Commenters and some improving conditions for only a small anadromous fish below natural or man- peer reviewers questioned NMFS’ portion of the entire ESU. made barriers; or (2) where resident fish inclusion of both summer- and winter- While existing conservation plans are of native lineage once had the ability to run steelhead in the same ESU. These unable to preclude the need for listing interbreed with anadromous fish but no commenters suggested that summer- at this time, they are nevertheless longer do because they are currently and winter-run steelhead be segregated valuable for improving watershed health above human-made barriers, and they into individual ESUs based on life and restoring fishery resources. In those are considered essential for recovery of history differences. cases where well-developed, reliable the ESU. Resident fish above long- Response: While NMFS considers conservation plans exist, NMFS may standing natural barriers, and those that both life history forms (summer- and choose to incorporate them into the are derived from the introduction of winter-run steelhead) to be important recovery planning process. In the case of non-native rainbow trout, would not be components of diversity within the threatened species, NMFS also has considered part of any ESU. species, new genetic data reinforce

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36081 previous conclusions that, within a Northern California Steelhead ESU pounder from the Eel River; however, geographic area, summer- and winter- Determination Cramer et al. (1995) suggested that run steelhead typically are more The Northern California steelhead adults with the half-pounder juvenile genetically similar to one another than ESU has been described in previous life history may not spawn south of the either is to populations with similar run Federal Register documents (61 FR Klamath River Basin. As with the Rogue timing in different geographic areas. 41541, August 9, 1996; 62 FR 43937, and Klamath Rivers which are located This indicates that an ESU that included August 18, 1997; 63 FR 13347, March in the Klamath Mountains Province summer-run populations from different 19, 1998; 65 FR 6960, February 11, ESU, some of the larger rivers in this geographic areas but excluded winter- 2000) based on analyses conducted by ESU have migrating steelhead year- round, and seasonal runs have been run populations (or vice-versa) would NMFS and summarized in the following named. River entry ranges from August be an inappropriate unit. The only documents: ‘‘Status Review for West Coast Steelhead from Washington, through June and spawning from biologically meaningful way to have December through April, with peak Idaho, Oregon, and California’’ (Busby summer- and winter-run steelhead spawning in January in the larger basins et al., 1996); and ‘‘Status Review Update populations in separate ESUs would be and late February and March in the for West Coast Steelhead from to have a very large number of ESUs, smaller coastal basins. most consisting of just one or a very few Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and Based on the review of steelhead populations. This would be inconsistent California’’ (NMFS, 1997a). The hatchery programs in this ESU (NMFS, with the approach NMFS has taken in relationship between hatchery steelhead 1998a), NMFS’ steelhead BRT defining ESUs in other anadromous populations and naturally spawned concluded that the following steelhead Pacific salmonids. Taking these factors steelhead within this ESU was also hatchery stocks are part of this ESU assessed in: ‘‘Status Review Update for into consideration, NMFS concludes because they were established from Deferred ESUs of West Coast Steelhead: that summer- and winter-run steelhead indigenous natural populations and Hatchery Populations’’ (NMFS, 1998a). there is limited impact from the should be considered part of the same Copies of these NMFS documents are ESU in geographic areas where they co- inclusion of out-of-basin fish in the available upon request (see ADDRESSES). occur. broodstock: Van Arsdale Fisheries NMFS received no new scientific or Station stock (Eel River), the Yager Issue 6: Consideration of ESA Section commercial information as a result of Creek stock (Eel River tributary), Ten 4(d) Regulation for Recreational Angling the February 11, 2000, proposal to list Mile River stock, and North Fork Comment 11: Numerous commenters this ESU, which indicates that a change Gualala River stock. The BRT concluded requested that if NMFS lists the in the Northern California ESU is that the Mad River hatchery summer Northern California steelhead ESU as a warranted. steelhead stock is not part of the ESU The ESU occupies river basins from threatened species the agency based on its origin from out-of-basin Redwood Creek in Humboldt County, promulgate an ESA 4(d) rule that steelhead populations combined with CA, to the Gualala River, inclusive, in the mixing of Eel River summer provides for recreational angling Mendocino County, CA. Dominant opportunities similar to what is steelhead in the broodstock. Rearing of vegetation along the coast is the this stock was terminated at the Mad contained in the ESA 4(d) rule NMFS redwood forest, whereas some interior recently proposed for other threatened River hatchery in 1996. The majority of basins, much drier than surrounding the BRT concluded that the Mad River steelhead ESUs in California (64 FR areas, are characterized by many hatchery winter steelhead stock is not 73479; December 30, 1999). endemic species. This area includes the part of this ESU although a minority of Response: The steelhead ESA 4(d) extreme southern end of the contiguous the BRT was uncertain regarding its rule that NMFS proposed on December portion of the Coast Range Ecoregion relationship to the naturally spawning 30, 1999, contains a limitation on the (Omernick, 1987). Elevated stream population. This stock was founded application of the section 9 take temperatures are a factor in some of the from South Fork Eel River steelhead ° prohibitions that would allow larger river basins (greater than 20 C), (within the ESU, but out of the Mad recreational angling for steelhead listed but not to the extent that they are in River basin) and some local Mad River as threatened to continue under certain river basins further south. Precipitation steelhead. conditions, provided that the State of is generally higher in this geographic area than in regions to the south, Status of Northern California Steelhead California prepares a Fishery ESU Management and Evaluation Plan averaging 100–200 cm of rainfall annually (Donley et al., 1979). With the Section 3 of the ESA defines the term (FMEP) meeting certain criteria and that exception of such major river basins as ‘‘endangered species’’ as ‘‘any species NMFS approves it. Because the pending the Eel, most rivers in this region have which is in danger of extinction steelhead 4(d) rule will be finalized by peak flows of short duration. Strong and throughout all or a significant portion of June 19, 2000, NMFS expects to begin consistent coastal upwelling begins at its range.’’ The term ‘‘threatened working soon with the State of about Cape Blanco and continues south species’’ is defined as ‘‘any species California and DFG in preparing one or into central California, resulting in a which is likely to become an more FMEPs so that recreational angling relatively productive nearshore marine endangered species within the can continue where it is consistent with environment. foreseeable future throughout all or a the conservation of steelhead listed as The northern California ESU includes significant portion of its range. In its threatened. It is NMFS’ intent to both winter and summer steelhead, previous status reviews for west coast promulgate an ESA 4(d) rule for the including what is presently considered salmon and steelhead, NMFS has Northern California steelhead ESU to be the southernmost population of identified a number of factors that which is consistent with the 4(d) rule summer steelhead, in the Middle Fork should be considered in evaluating the that will be published on June 19, 2000 Eel River. Half-pounder juveniles also level of risk faced by an ESU, including: so that recreational angling which meets occur in this geographic area, (1) absolute numbers of fish and their appropriate conservation criteria can specifically in the Mad and Eel Rivers. spatial and temporal distribution; (2) continue. Snyder (1925) first described the half- current abundance in relation to

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36082 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations historical abundance and current showing recent increases in abundance below estimates in the 1980s, and even carrying capacity of the habitat; (3) in the ESU were the relatively small further reduced from levels in the trends in abundance; (4) natural and populations of summer steelhead in the 1960s. Redwood Creek summer human-influenced factors that cause Mad River which has had high hatchery steelhead abundance remains very low. variability in survival and abundance; production, and winter steelhead in There are no new data suggesting (5) possible threats to genetic integrity Prairie Creek where the increase may be substantial increases or decreases in (e.g., from strays or outplants from due to increased monitoring or populations since the last updated hatchery programs); and (6) recent mitigation efforts. status review was completed. NMFS events (e.g., a drought or changes in As in its original assessment, the BRT received no new scientific or harvest management) that have continued to be concerned about the commercial data or information as a predictable short-term consequences for risks associated with interactions result of the February 11, 2000, listing abundance of the ESU. between naturally spawning proposal which changes the conclusions Based on these factors and the best populations and hatchery steelhead in reached by the SWFSC. available scientific information, NMFS’ this ESU. Of particular concern to the BRT first reviewed the status of the BRT was the potentially deleterious Summary of Factors Affecting the northern California ESU in its original impact to wild steelhead from past Species coast-wide status review for steelhead hatchery practices at the Mad River Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA and NMFS’ (Busby et al., 1996). The BRT concluded hatchery, primarily from transfers of implementing regulations (50 CFR part that the northern California steelhead non-indigenous Mad River hatchery fish 424) set forth procedures for listing ESU was likely to become endangered to other streams in the ESU and the species. The Secretary of Commerce in the foreseeable future. Population production of non-indigenous summer (Secretary) must determine, through the abundance was determined to be very steelhead. These potentially deleterious regulatory process, if a species is low relative to historical estimates hatchery practices for summer steelhead endangered or threatened based upon (1930’s dam counts), and recent trends ended in 1996. any one or a combination of the were downward in most stocks for Habitat degradation and other factors following factors: (1) The present or which data were. The BRT expressed were also of concern to the BRT in its threatened destruction, modification, or particular concern regarding reassessment of the long-term risks to curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) sedimentation resulting in part from this ESU. Specific factors which the overutilization for commercial, poor land management practices and BRT identified included dams on the recreational, scientific, or education channel restructuring due to floods. The upper Eel and Mad Rivers, the likely purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) abundance of the pikeminnow as a existence of minor blockages throughout inadequacy of existing regulatory predator in the Eel River was also the ESU, continuing impacts of mechanisms; or (5) other natural or identified as a significant concern. For catastrophic flooding on the 1960s, and human-made factors affecting its the Mad River, in particular, the BRT reductions in riparian and instream continued existence. was concerned about the influence of habitat and increased sedimentation NMFS has prepared a report that hatchery stocks both in terms of genetic from timber harvest activities. The BRT summarizes the factors leading to the introgression and the potential for also cited poaching of summer steelhead decline of steelhead on the west coast ecological interactions between and predation by pikeminnow in the Eel entitled: ‘‘Factors for Decline: A introduced stocks and native stocks. River as factors for concern. NMFS’ supplement to the notice of The status of the northern California supplemental review of factors affecting determination for west coast steelhead’’ ESU was reassessed by NMFS’ BRT in west coast steelhead also identified (NMFS, 1996). This report, available an updated status review following the water diversion and extraction, upon request (see ADDRESSES), 6-month period of deferral because of agriculture, and mining as factors concludes that all of the factors scientific disagreements (NMFS, 1997a). affecting habitat conditions for identified in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA Based on this updated status review, steelhead in this ESU (NMFS, 1996). have played a role in the decline of the NMFS’ BRT once again concluded that In conjunction with NMFS’ species. The report identifies northern California steelhead ESU was reconsideration of the Northern destruction and modification of habitat, likely to become endangered in the California steelhead ESU, the BRT overutilization for recreational foreseeable future. The BRT reported provided a status review update for this purposes, and natural and human-made that there was very limited abundance ESU [January 2000 Memorandum from factors as being the primary causes for data available for this ESU, particularly Pete Adams, Southwest Fisheries the decline of steelhead on the west for winter-run steelhead. The most Science Center [SWFSC] to Rodney R. coast. NMFS (1996) identified several complete data set available in this ESU McInnis, Regional Administrator, SWR factors that were considered to have is a time series of winter steelhead dam (NMFS, 2000)]. Based on a review of contributed to its decline of the counts on the Eel River at Cape Horn updated abundance and trend northern California steelhead ESU Dam. The updated abundance data information that was available for this including: impacts from historic (through 1997) showed moderately ESU, the SWFSC concluded that the flooding (principally in 1955 and 1964), declining long-term and short-term current status of the ESU has not predation, water diversions and trends in abundance, and the vast changed significantly since it was last extraction, minor habitat blockages, majority of these fish were believed to evaluated by NMFS’ BRT in December poaching, timber harvest, agriculture, be of hatchery origin. These data show 1997 (NMFS, 1997a). The Eel River and mining. NMFS’ steelhead BRT also a strong decline in abundance prior to winter and summer steelhead identified the potentially adverse 1970, but no significant trend thereafter. populations, which represent the best impacts of the release of non- Additional winter steelhead data are available data set for this ESU, are still indigenous, hatchery-produced available for Sweasy Dam on the Mad severely reduced from pre–1960’s steelhead in this ESU as an important River which show a significant decline, levels. Updated abundance and trend factor, and expressed concerns but that data set ends in 1963. For the data show small increases for winter regarding the lack of reliable abundance seven populations where recent trend and summer steelhead in the Eel River, and trend data for assessing the status data were available, the only runs but current abundance is still well of steelhead in this ESU (NMFS, 1997a).

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36083

Finally, NMFS was also concerned species in local areas, but could not be kidney disease (BKD), ceratomyxosis, about the impacts of recreational solely responsible for the large declines columnaris, furunculosis, infectious angling because of the depressed status in abundance observed along most of hematopoietic necrosis virus, redmouth of steelhead populations and the the Pacific coast over the past several and black spot disease, erythrocytic uncertainty regarding the status of this decades (NMFS, 1996). inclusion body syndrome, and whirling ESU (March 11, 1998, Memorandum Steelhead support an important disease, among others, are present and from William Hogarth to Rolland recreational fishery throughout most of are known to affect steelhead and Schmitten (NMFS, 1998e)). The their range. During periods of decreased salmon (Rucker et al., 1953; Wood, following discussion briefly summarizes habitat availability (e.g., drought 1979; Leek, 1987; Foott et al., 1994; findings regarding factors for decline conditions or summer low flows when Gould and Wedemeyer, undated). Very across the range of west coast steelhead, fish are concentrated), the impacts of little current or historical information including the northern California ESU. recreational fishing on native exists to quantify changes in infection anadromous stocks may be heightened. levels and mortality rates attributable to The Present or Threatened Destruction, Although harvest of steelhead in the these diseases for steelhead (NMFS, Modification, or Curtailment of Northern California ESU was not 1996). However, studies have shown Steelhead Habitat or Range originally identified as a major factor for that naturally spawned fish tend to be Steelhead on the west coast of the decline (NMFS, 1996), NMFS is less susceptible to pathogens than United States have experienced declines concerned about the impacts of hatchery-reared fish (Buchanon et al., in abundance in the past several recreational angling given currently 1983; Sanders et al., 1992). decades as a result of natural and depressed steelhead population levels Introductions of non-native species human factors. Forestry, agriculture, and the lack of reliable abundance and and habitat modifications have resulted mining, and urbanization have trend data for accurately assessing the in increased predator populations in degraded, simplified, and fragmented status of individual populations and the numerous river systems, thereby habitat. Water diversions for agriculture, ESU as a whole. Because of NMFS’ increasing the level of predation flood control, domestic, and concerns about recreational angling experienced by salmonids. In the hydropower purposes have greatly impacts to naturally reproduced Northern California steelhead ESU, reduced or eliminated historically steelhead populations in coastal predation from Sacramento pikeminnow accessible habitat. Among other factors, watersheds in California north of the that were released into the Eel River is NMFS (1996) specifically identified Russian River, the California a major problem. Predation from timber harvest, agriculture, mining, Department of Fish and Game (DFG) pikeminnow is discussed in more detail habitat blockages, and water diversions proposed and the California Fish and in NMFS (1996). The DFG is currently as important factors for the decline of Game Commission adopted new engaged in a program to control steelhead in the northern California steelhead angling regulations in 1998 for pikeminnow predation in the Eel River. ESU. NMFS (1998a) discussed these all watersheds in the northern California Predation by marine mammals is also factors in more detail. Studies estimate ESU. These new regulations prohibit of concern in some areas experiencing that during the last 200 years, the lower retention of naturally spawned adult dwindling steelhead run sizes. NMFS 48 states have lost approximately 53 steelhead; eliminate fishing for juvenile (1997b) reviewed the available literature percent of all wetlands and the majority steelhead in tributary streams; minimize concerning the impacts of California sea of the rest are severely degraded (Dahl, impacts on juvenile steelhead in lion and Pacific harbor seal predation 1990; Tiner, 1991). Washington and mainstem rearing and migratory areas on west coast anadromous salmonids, Oregon’s wetlands are estimated to have through a combination of gear and concluded that there was diminished by one-third, while restrictions and delayed seasonal insufficient data in all but one instance California has experienced a 91 percent openings; prohibit retention of summer (i.e., Ballard Locks in Puget Sound) to loss of its wetland habitat (Dahl, 1990; steelhead during their upstream conclude that pinnipeds were having a Jensen et al., 1990; Barbour et al., 1991; migration and prohibit fishing in their significant impact on wild salmon or Reynolds et al., 1993). Loss of habitat summer holding areas; and provide for steelhead populations. For this reason, complexity has also contributed to the directed harvest and retention of and because of the high likelihood that decline of steelhead. For example, in hatchery-produced steelhead which are impacts might be occurring, the study national forests in Washington, there fully marked state-wide. NMFS concluded that substantial additional has been a 58 percent reduction in large, (1998b,c,d) analyzed these new research was needed to address this deep pools due to sedimentation and regulations and concluded that they issue further. Based on this research loss of pool-forming structures such as would substantially reduce fishing effort recommendation, NMFS has initiated boulders and large woody debris and reduce mortality to that associated several field studies in coastal (FEMAT, 1993). Similarly, in Oregon, with catch-and-release of naturally watersheds on the west coast designed the abundance of large, deep pools on produced steelhead in the northern to assess the magnitude of pinniped private coastal lands has decreased by California ESU. These regulations predation on individual salmon or as much as 80 percent (FEMAT, 1993). remain in effect and are enforced by steelhead populations. In California, Sedimentation from land use activities DFG. these studies are being conducted in the is recognized as a primary cause of Disease or Predation lower Klamath River, Scott Creek, and habitat degradation in the range of west the San Lorenzo River. coast steelhead. Infectious disease is one of many factors that can influence adult and Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Overutilization for Commercial, juvenile steelhead survival. Steelhead Mechanisms Recreational, Scientific, or Education are exposed to numerous bacterial, 1. Federal Land and Water Purposes protozoan, viral, and parasitic Management Steelhead are not generally targeted in organisms in spawning and rearing The Northwest Forest Plan (NFP) is a commercial fisheries. High seas driftnet areas, hatcheries, migratory routes, and Federal land management policy with fisheries in the past may have the marine environment (NMFS, 1996). important benefits for west coast contributed slightly to a decline of this Specific diseases such as bacterial steelhead. While the NFP covers a very

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36084 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations large area, the overall effectiveness of for agriculture and urban uses. Pursuant and prescriptions necessary to the NFP in conserving steelhead is to a Federal Energy Regulatory minimize, mitigate and monitor the limited by the extent of Federal lands Commission (FERC) licensing impacts of take of the covered species and the fact that Federal land ownership requirement, PG&E implemented a 10- resulting from timber operations. The is not uniformly distributed in year monitoring program in the Eel Program incorporates specific watersheds that comprise individual River for the purpose of developing conservation plans for all terrestrial and ESUs. The extent and distribution of recommendations for a flow release aquatic species covered under the HCP Federal lands limits the ability of the schedule and other project facilities along with measures to conserve habitat NFP to achieve its aquatic habitat and/or operations necessary to protect diversity and structural components. restoration objectives at watershed and and maintain fishery resources, Monitoring for implementation, river basin scales, and highlights the including steelhead. This study was effectiveness and trends is a critical importance of complementary salmon completed in 1996, as was construction component of the Program. The habitat conservation measures on non- of a $14 million dollar fish screen monitoring component includes an federal lands within the subject ESUs. facility at the Van Arsdale Dam independent third party HCP monitor to Federal land ownership and diversion on the Eel River. Based on the determine if the provisions of the management in the Northern California results of the monitoring study, PG&E aquatics plan are effective and whether steelhead ESU is very limited; has developed a preferred alternative for the aquatic habitat is responding as representing only about 19 percent of project operations that, along with expected. There is also a provision for the total land area. Federal lands (i.e., several other alternatives, are the subject adaptive management if the results are Redwood National Park, portions of the of National Environmental Policy Act not as predicted. An Aquatics Six Rivers and Mendocino National (NEPA) review for ongoing FERC license Conservation Plan (ACP) is an integral Forests, and the Kings Range National amendment proceedings. NMFS is part of the overall Program. The goal of Conservation Area) that do occur in this currently consulting with FERC the ACP is to maintain or achieve over ESU are also highly fragmented, unlike pursuant to section 7 of the ESA on time properly functioning aquatic some other steelhead ESUs (e.g., PG&E’s proposed license amendment. habitat conditions, which are essential Klamath Mountains Province and Snake On March 1, 1999, the Pacific Lumber to the long-term survival of salmonids. River Basin). Although Federal lands are Company (PALCO), the State of The reduction in land management limited in extent and fragmented in this California, the Department of the impacts and habitat improvement that ESU, NMFS believes that Interior, and the Department of will be realized through implementation implementation of the NFP on the Six Commerce entered into a complex land of the ACP will also benefit other Rivers and Mendocino National Forests purchase, land exchange and Habitat species. lands (upper reaches of Eel and Mad Conservation Plan (HCP) transaction NMFS believes that the conservation Rivers) and implementation of other covering the Headwaters Forest, Elk measures contained in the HCP will habitat protections in Redwood National Head Springs Forest and the remainder protect and provide for long-term Park (lower reach of Redwood Creek) of Pacific Lumber Company’s land conservation of steelhead populations will provide some limited benefits to holdings in Humboldt County occurring on PALCO lands in the steelhead. Nevertheless, long-term California. The Federal and State northern California ESU. habitat protection and the key to governments acquired approximately 2. State Land Management achieving properly functioning habitat 10,000 acres of conifer and hardwood Timber Harvest. The California conditions in this ESU continues to be forest, over 3,000 acres of which is Department of Forestry and Fire improvement in non-Federal land ancient redwoods, with some trees over Protection (CDF) enforces California’s management, particularly those lands 1,000 years old. This land is now FPRs on non-Federal (private and State used for timber harvest. subject to Federal and state control managed forests) lands. These rules are Because threatened coho salmon under conservation easements. The promulgated through the State Board of populations occur on Federal lands PALCO HCP addresses non-Federal Forestry (BOF). Timber harvest located within the Northern California timber lands in several drainages that activities have been documented to steelhead ESU, NMFS routinely engages occur in the northern portion of result in adverse effects on streams and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Bureau Northern California steelhead ESU. stream side zones including the loss of of Land Management (BLM), and These include portions of several large woody debris, increased Redwood Creek National Park in section tributaries to Humboldt Bay (Elk River, sedimentation, loss of riparian 7 consultations to ensure that ongoing Jacoby Creek, Freshwater Creek, and vegetation, and the loss of habitat or proposed activities do not jeopardize Salmon Creek), and portions of the Van complexity and connectivity (NMFS, coho salmon or adversely modify its Duzen River (including Yager Creek), 1996). critical habitat. Through this section 7 Eel River, Bear River, Salt River, and The vast majority of freshwater consultation process, NMFS ensures Mattole River watersheds. The HCP habitat in the northern California that the NFP and other protective covers 211,000 acres, has a term of 50 steelhead ESU (approximately 81 measures are fully implemented on years and covers the following federally percent of total land) is on non-Federal Federal lands that occur in this ESU. listed and candidate anadromous lands, with the majority being privately The NFP and measures implemented as salmonid ESUs: (1) Southern Oregon/ owned. For the major river basins in this a result of the section 7 consultations for Northern California coho salmon ESU (i.e., Redwood Creek, Mad River, coho salmon also benefit steelhead. (threatened), (2) Northern California Eel River, Mattole River, Ten Mile River, The Pacific Gas and Electric steelhead (candidate), and (3) California Noyo River, Big River, Albion River, Company’s (PG&E) Potter Valley Coastal Chinook salmon (threatened). Navarro River, Garcia River, and Gualala hydroelectric project is a major diverter The HCP also covers numerous River), private forest lands average of water from the mainstem Eel River, terrestrial species listed under the ESA about 75 percent of the total acreage, which is located in the northern and California Endangered Species Act. with a range of 42 percent (Eel River) to California ESU. This water is diverted The HCP’s Operating Conservation 94 (Gualala River ) percent. into the Russian River basin to generate Program (Program) contains the NMFS reviewed the California FPRs hydroelectric power and provide water conservation and management measures in conjunction with its determination to

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36085 not list the Northern California implementation through the timber sediment load, no decrease in channel steelhead ESU in 1998 (63 FR 13347). harvest plan process, do not ensure or bank stability and no measurable That review concluded that although protection of anadromous salmonid blockage of aquatic migratory route; (5) the FPRs mandate protection of populations. Based in part on the define the watercourse transition line as sensitive resources such as anadromous scientific review panel report and 2 times the bankfull depth for confined salmonids, the FPRs and their findings in July 1999, the California channels and the outer edge of the implementation and enforcement do not Resources Agency and CalEPA jointly active channel boundary for unconfined accomplish this objective. Specific presented the BOF with a proposed rule channels; (6) identify a 150 foot problems with the FPRs include: (1) change package designed to address minimum water and lake protection protective provisions that are not shortcomings in the State’s existing zone for all fish-bearing streams, with supported by scientific literature; (2) FPRs. The BOF circulated the proposed 85 percent overstory shade canopy provisions that are scientifically rule package for public review, held retained post-harvest for the first 75 feet inadequate to protect salmonids several meetings and two public (22.9 meters (m)), and 65 percent shade including steelhead; (3) inadequate and hearings on the proposals from July retained for the outer 75 feet (22.9 m); ineffective cumulative effects analyses; until October 1999, but failed to take (7) require a no-cut buffer in channel (4) dependence upon registered action to adopt any of the proposed FPR zones out to the transition line and large professional foresters (RPFs) that may changes, thereby precluding any woody debris standards including no not possess the necessary level of multi- possibility of implementing salvage logging within the water and disciplinary technical expertise to improvements in California’s FPRs by lake protection zone without an develop THPs protective of salmonids; January 1, 2000, as the State committed approved plan; (8) request the registered (5) dependence by CDF on other State to do in the NMFS/California MOA. professional forester identify all active agencies to review and comment on The California State Legislature, erosion sites and provide remediation; THPs; (6) failure of CDF to incorporate under Senate Bill 621, gave special (9) prohibit construction of roads, recommendations from other agencies; authority to the BOF to adopt new rules landings and skid trails during the and (7) inadequate enforcement due to twice during the year 2000 for the winter months on slopes over 40 staffing limitations. NMFS further specific purpose of revising the State’s percent; (10) provide specific road concluded that until a comprehensive FPRs to meet ESA requirements for construction provisions on slopes over scientific peer review process was salmon. Public review and revisions of 50 percent; and (11) require that all implemented and appropriate changes the BOF’s FPR package continued from crossings over fish-bearing streams meet to the FPRs and the THP approval January 2000 to March 2000, during 100-year flood standard and allow for process were made, properly which time NMFS, California passage of all life stages of fish. functioning habitat conditions would Legislature, the California Department NMFS believes the interim rule not exist on non-Federal lands in the of Forestry, the California Department of changes adopted by the Board of northern California steelhead ESU. Fish and Game, the North Coast Water Forestry constitute a good first step in The NMFS/California MOA which Quality Control Board, environmental addressing many concerns raised during was entered into in March 1998 to groups and others strongly urged the the FPR review process; however, they ensure the conservation of steelhead Board to adopt the package in its’ are currently inadequate to protect populations in northern California (i.e., entirety as a necessary first step in anadromous salmonids, including Northern California and KMP steelhead protecting anadromous salmonid steelhead, and their habitat. ESUs) contained specific provisions to habitat. On March 14, 2000, the Specifically, the interim rule changes address NMFS’ concerns over the deadline for the BOF to exercise its are inadequate because they to not California FPRs. In the NMFS/California authority under SB 621, the BOF address: (1) site-specific variation and MOA, the State committed to: (1) adopted a subset of rule changes from long-term riparian functions; (2) non- conduct a scientific review of the State’s the package which will only apply for fishbearing perennial streams and FPRs, including their implementation those timber harvest plans approved ephemeral streams that carry water and enforcement; (2) make appropriate between July 1 and December 31, 2000. during the winter months; (3) rate of changes in implementation and During this period, the BOF has timber harvest in a watershed; (4) all enforcement of the FPRs based on this committed to work with interested other winter operations and wet weather review; and (3) make recommendations parties in the development of a road and skid trail planning; (5) road to the BOF for changes in the FPRs if watershed analysis approach to timber planning, construction, maintenance they were found to be necessary for the harvest planning. and decommissioning; (6) loss of conservation of northern California The interim FPRs changes adopted by riparian function and chronic sediment coastal anadromous salmonids. Full the BOF, which sunset December 31, inputs from streamside roads; (7) implementation of these provisions in 2000: (1) define watersheds with unstable areas except for inner gorges; the NMFS/California MOA, including threatened and impaired values, (8) timber harvest plan preparation, implementation of changes in the FPRs acknowledging they exist and need review, implementation, enforcement by January 1, 2000, was a critical factor special prescriptions; (2) direct analysis and technical validity; (9) harvest plan in NMFS’s decision previously to not on cumulative watershed effects to exemptions and (10) watershed analysis, list this ESU. ensure beneficial uses of water are cumulative effects, adaptive In accordance with these provisions, maintained if in good condition, management and monitoring. The a subcommittee of the State’s scientific protected where threatened, and adopted rules lack these, and other, review panel for its Watershed restored where impaired, and that critical elements recommended by the Protection Program was appointed to riparian zones be fully protected from scientific review panel as necessary to undertake an independent review of the site specific and cumulative impacts; (3) avoid, minimize and/or mitigate adverse FPRs. The subcommittee’s review and require protection and maintenance of cumulative watershed impacts on recommendations were completed and stream flow during low water periods, salmonid populations. presented to the BOF in June 1999. The large woody debris recruitment and Multi-County Planning Efforts. As a scientific review panel concluded that shade canopy for temperature control; result of the listing of coho salmon in California’s FPRs, including their (4) require no measurable increase in coastal watersheds in northern

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36086 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

California, the counties of Del Norte, streams in Del Norte, Humboldt and public agencies, landowners, Siskiyou, Trinity, Humboldt and Mendocino Counties have been community organizations, Mendocino developed and have inventoried, and habitat assessment and environmental groups, industry implemented a multi-county, regional treatment prioritization reports are representatives and others. The public approach to assessing and improving being drafted (Pers. Comm. Mark process is being implemented through county-controlled activities in a way Lancaster, Trinity County Planning public hearings, meetings, scoping that would enhance the quality and Dept. with Miles Croom, NMFS, April sessions, forums and other avenues. increase the quantity of salmonid 24, 2000). In the coastal streams within Agricultural Activities. Agricultural habitat that is potentially affected by Del Norte, Humboldt and Mendocino activity has had multiple and often those county activities. NMFS and the Counties, some 81 barriers have been severe impacts on salmonid habitat. State of California have contributed identified. When removed, an These include depletion of needed funding to this multi-county planning additional 77 miles of suitable salmonid flows due to irrigation withdrawals, effort. habitat will become available to listed blocking of fish passage by diversion or This county-level conservation species. The passage barrier inventory is other structures, destruction of riparian planning approach involves a thorough part of a comprehensive aquatic habitat vegetation and bank stability by grazing review of general plans, ordinances, conservation program being developed or cultivation practices, and procedures, practices and policies by the multi-county group to improve channelization resulting in loss of side developed and implemented at the county-level policies and procedures in channel and wetland-related habitat (NMFS, 1996). county level. Through the assessment an effort to reduce sedimentation and Impacts from agricultural and grazing and evaluation of these county- erosion, protect water quality, establish practices have not historically been controlled mechanisms, a process is priorities for repairing problem sites, and institutionalize the utilization of closely regulated in California. This is being developed that will enable the an important concern to NMFS because counties to exert control at the local improved practices at the county level with the goal of conserving aquatic a significant portion of the acreage in level over human activities that can the northern California ESU is adversely affect anadromous salmonid habitat for the survival and recovery of listed salmonids. comprised of farmland. For example, populations and habitat. This multi- This multi-county assessment is being farmland constitutes approximately 25– county planning effort was used to document the effectiveness of 30 percent of the total acreage of memorialized in a Memorandum of existing regulations. Where the Humboldt and Mendocino counties Agreement (Multi-County MOA) which assessment identifies areas for which in turn constitute much of the was signed by all five counties in late improvement, the planning effort will northern California ESU. Private lands, 1997. Under the terms of the Multi- develop alternative policies, ordinances and public lands not administered by County MOA, the counties agreed to and practices that are suitable for the Federal government, are now being embark on a cooperative planning and maintaining or enhancing anadromous addressed by the California Rangeland restoration effort; assess the adequacy of salmonid habitat. The assessment will Water Quality Management Program existing general plans, county policies address the need to focus public works (CRWQMP) which was adopted by the and practices, zoning and other land use projects on sites that improve fisheries State Water Resources Control Board ordinances; review county management habitat. A watershed-based approach and CDF in 1995. The CRWQMP is a procedures that affect anadromous will be used, even where watersheds water quality improvement program salmonid habitat in each county; cross county boundaries, to ensure that based on the voluntary participation of recommend changes to specific county enhancement efforts are complementary landowners for compliance with state ordinances and/or practices as to natural ecosystem processes. and Federal non-point source pollution necessary; develop a watershed-based The outcome of this county-level reduction requirements. The CRWQMP education and technical assistance/ effort is expected to be a comprehensive was initiated as a cooperative effort training program for local agencies and and coordinated analysis of local land among the livestock industry, decision-makers that will foster better use regulations. Where it is found that conservation organizations and state understanding of the linkages between development standards such as and Federal agencies to address the land use and county maintenance subdivision restrictions, zoning, and impacts of grazing and land use practices and salmonid habitat; and seek capital improvement programs may not practices on water quality in streams to establish some form of regulatory adequately maintain or restore salmonid that flow through private property. recognition at the state and/or federal habitat, model ordinances will be Through this Program, private level. As an example, within the range developed for consideration by each of landowners will be able to maintain of the northern California steelhead the participating counties. Conversely, rangeland productivity and enhance ESU, the northern five counties (Del innovative approaches for land use landowners’ abilities to manage these Norte, Humboldt, Trinity, Siskiyou, and (such as density modifications and lands in a manner that protects water Mendocino Counties) Conservation standards that preserve habitat quality standards necessary for the Planning Group has organized a functions) or other county activities that survival and recovery of listed program to survey approximately 4700 have been developed in some counties salmonids. miles of county roads to identify will be presented as options for the Between 1995–1998, rangeland plans existing and potential barriers to the other counties. This collaborative, were developed under the CRWQMP for passage of listed salmonids in northern regionally-based planning effort is based more than 250,000 acres on the north California streams. These barriers, on existing environmental, economic, coast ranging from San Francisco to the which include undersized or failed social and administrative concerns and Oregon border. The State plans to culverts and other types of road opportunities. At the same time, the review the implementation status of crossings over streams, presently block planning effort is designed to be these plans at intervals of 3, 5 and 10 significant amounts of stream habitat complementary with state and national years, provided resources are available. that could otherwise support spawning, salmonid recovery efforts. The planning NMFS is encouraged by these ongoing rearing and migration of listed salmon process encourages public participation efforts. Plans that are consistent with and steelhead. To date, all coastal through direct contact with interested this guidance are likely to meet state

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36087 water quality standards, but the program Corps of Engineers Section 404 State Streambed Alteration is voluntary and it is uncertain to what Program. The Army Corps of Engineers Agreements. Section 1603 of the Fish extent their implementation will (COE) regulates removal/fill activities and Game Code in California requires contribute to improved habitat under section 404 of the Clean Water that any person who proposes a project conditions and riparian function. Act (CWA), which requires that the COE that will substantially divert or obstruct The USDA Natural Resources not permit a discharge that would the natural flow or substantially change Conservation Service (NRCS), NMFS, ‘‘cause or contribute to significant the bed, channel or river bank of any FWS, the U.S. Environmental Protection degradation of the waters of the United river, stream or lake, or use materials Agency (EPA), the California States.’’ One of the factors that must be from a streambed, notify the DFG before Association of Resource Conservation considered in this determination is beginning any work. The authorization Districts (CARCD), and the State of cumulative effects. However, the COE for these activities under section 1603 is California (State) have recently guidelines do not specify a methodology called a Lake or Streambed Alteration developed a joint approach that is for assessing cumulative effects or how Agreement. Beginning May 1, 1999, the expected to encourage the voluntary use much weight to assign them in decision- 1603 process was significantly modified of improved conservation management making. Furthermore, the COE does not to require a higher level of review by practices for agriculture on private land. have in place any process to address the DFG that is in compliance with the Recognizing that recovery of listed and additive effects of the continued California Environmental Quality Act other at-risk salmonid populations development of waterfront, riverine, (CEQA). Any proposed project that DFG depends on the willing participation of coastal, and wetland properties. determines may substantially adversely private landowners, these agencies have The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, affect existing fish and wildlife the goal of providing an incentive to State, and local governments have resources will need to comply with the landowners to enhance the quality and developed and implemented procedures CEQA standard of mitigating project quantity of habitat needed by species of reviewing, approving and monitoring impacts to the level of insignificance. concern. To accomplish this goal, the gravel mining activities in Del Norte and The new standard for project review has agencies have agreed to support Humboldt counties which are resulted in increasing the time needed for project approval from two weeks to cooperative approaches and consensus- authorized under a Letter of Permission 60–120 days. building activities, foster (LOP) process. This process regulates Although the State has substantially communication among agencies and gravel mining in a substantial portion of private landowners, share resources and improved the level of project review the Northern California steelhead ESU under the 1603 process to comply with information, and establish strong, (including the Mad, Eel and Van Duzen effective working relationships that the new CEQA standard, the State has Rivers) where listed coho salmon and not submitted the program to NMFS for instill trust and promote sound chinook salmon populations also occur. review to determine whether it stewardship. These procedures are designed to adequately protects anadromous This agreement is the subject of a provide substantially improved salmonids. The State currently issues draft Memorandum of Understanding protection for anadromous salmonids 1603 streambed alteration agreements to (MOU) among the partner agencies. and their habitats, including steelhead. project applicants with the disclosure Through the procedures described in Important elements of the process that the applicant may need to obtain the MOU, landowners will have the include: a prohibition on gravel mining incidental take authorization from knowledge that practices contained in in the active channel and on trenching NMFS. In most cases, however, where a the NRCS Field Office Technical Guides except in limited instances, a restriction project proposes a stream or (FOTG) have undergone ESA section 7 on gravel operations to the dry season, watercourse modification and listed scrutiny by NMFS and FWS. For those monitoring of channel cross sections to species are present, a Clean Water Act, practices that NMFS and FWS detect changes in channel morphology section 404 permit from the Army Corps determine are not likely to adversely and habitat conditions, fisheries of Engineers is required. Within the affect listed species or critical habitat, monitoring, and gravel mining on a geographic area encompassing the the landowner should have confidence sustained yield basis. An additional northern California steelhead ESU, the that those practices, if implemented in element of the process in Humboldt presence of listed coho and chinook accordance with the FOTG standards County, which is located in the salmon populations requires the Corps and specifications, will not result in any Northern California ESU, is the to consult with NMFS under section 7 additional permitting requirement or participation of an independent of the ESA prior to the issuance of 404 penalties under the ESA. The objective scientific review committee which permits. of this MOU is to encourage the makes annual recommendations on 4. Water Quality Programs adoption of protective land use gravel quantities and site design features Under Clean Water Act section practices on private lands, to provide in order to minimize adverse impacts. 303(d), states, territories and authorized some regulatory assurance for Additionally, any channel crossings Tribes are required to establish lists of landowners, to improve habitat must be designed to allow for fish impaired water bodies, set priorities for conditions for sensitive species, to passage. NMFS participated in the addressing the pollutant source, and continue sustainable economic development of these procedures and write pollutant control plans to achieve production on private lands, to facilitate has concluded, through section 7 and maintain water quality standards. better coordination among the partner consultation with the COE, that these These plans, Total Maximum Daily agencies and to foster better awareness procedures will not jeopardize the Loads (TMDLs), provide an effective and support for conservation programs continued existence of coho salmon or mechanism for determining the causes throughout the State. The draft MOU is steelhead. NMFS recently reinitiated of water body impairment, quantifying under review by the State and upon formal consultation with the COE on the the various pollutant sources, and completion is expected to be formally LOP process to address the final critical setting targets for reducing pollutant signed by all parties. habitat designation for coho salmon and discharges. Generally, states are 3. Dredge, Fill, and In-water the recent listing of California Coastal responsible for developing TMDLs and Construction Programs chinook salmon as threatened. related implementation plans, which are

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36088 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations subject to EPA review and approval. If Twelve of these river basins are located and it will take many years to assess the EPA disapproves a TMDL or if a within the northern California steelhead their efficacy in protecting steelhead state fails to establish one, the EPA is ESU. The consent decree establishes a habitat. Furthermore, it is essential that required to step in and establish the schedule for developing TMDL criteria the EPA consults with NMFS on the TMDL. The TMDL is then implemented for listed rivers. Under this schedule, formulation of TMDLs in waters that through existing regulatory and non- seven river basins in the northern contain listed salmonids. Such regulatory programs to control, reduce California ESU would have TMDLs consultations will help ensure TMDLs or eliminate pollution from both point developed within the next two years, adequately address the needs of these and non-point sources. with the remaining rivers having species. The TMDL process provides a flexible TMDLs developed by 2002. This legally- 5. State Hatchery and Harvest assessment and planning framework for binding schedule is expected to result in Management identifying load reductions or other significant progress on improving the Hatchery Management. In an attempt actions needed to attain water quality beneficial uses of these watersheds, to mitigate the loss of habitat and standards such as protection of aquatic where the beneficial use has been enhance fishing opportunities, extensive life, provision of safe drinking water, identified as habitat for salmonids. hatchery programs have been etc. The TMDL should address all On May 28, 1998, the North Coast implemented throughout the range of significant stressors (e.g., chemicals, Regional Water Quality Control Board steelhead on the west coast. While some temperatures, sediment loads) that approved a TMDL for the Garcia River. of these programs have succeeded in cause or threaten to cause deleterious The TMDL contains the following providing fishing opportunities, the effects to water quality. The TMDL elements: (1) findings that the Garcia impacts of these programs on native, assessment is the sum of the individual River is impaired due to sediment and naturally-reproducing stocks are not waste load allocations from point temperature impacts resulting from land well understood. Competition, genetic sources, load allocations from non-point use practices, primarily timber introgression and disease transmission sources, allocation from natural sources, operations and related activities, (2) resulting from hatchery introductions and an appropriate margin of safety to adoption of the Water Quality may significantly reduce the production account for uncertainty. The TMDL may Attainment Strategy as part of the Water and survival of native, naturally- address single or multiple pollutants but Quality Control Plan for the North Coast reproducing steelhead (NMFS, 1996). must clearly identify the links between Region (Basin Plan) that would Collection of native steelhead for the water quality impairment (or threat) eliminate 90 percent of total hatchery broodstock purposes often of concern, the causes of the threat or controllable road-related sediment harms small or dwindling natural concern and the load reductions or sources within 20 years and 50 percent populations. Artificial propagation can conservation actions needed to remedy of controllable upslope sediment play an important role in steelhead or prevent the impairment. sources within 40 years, (3) numeric recovery through carefully controlled As TMDL assessments and targets including specified numerical supplementation programs. implementation plans are developed values for percent fine sediments, In the past, non-native steelhead and approved, the State of California, frequency of pools in stream habitat stocks have been introduced as through the State Water Resources profiles, and improving trends in large broodstock in hatcheries and widely Control Board and the nine Regional woody debris, (4) an implementation transplanted in many coastal rivers and Water Quality Control Boards, will plan which specifies that either default streams in California (Bryant, 1994; adopt and implement the TMDLs. The prescriptions be observed or a site- Busby et al., 1996; NMFS, 1997a). TMDL contains a problem statement, specific plan be implemented that Because of problems associated with numeric targets, source analysis, provides assurances that source this practice, DFG has developed and allocations of loads or controls and a reduction targets will be met, (5) implemented a Salmon and Steelhead monitoring plan. The implementation assurances that sediment reduction or Stock Management Policy. This policy component includes descriptions of control goals are capable of being met recognizes that mixing of non-native land management practices, remediation and that the concept of site-specific stocks with native stocks is detrimental, activities and restoration projects planning and implementation by and seeks to maintain the genetic necessary to attain the goals established landowners provides a flexible integrity of all identifiable stocks of in the TMDL assessment. It is through framework, (6) a monitoring plan to salmon and steelhead in California, as the implementation plan that necessary verify that conservation practices are well as to minimize interactions controls and restoration actions are implemented and to measure between hatchery and natural assigned to specific parties and effectiveness. populations. attainment schedules are promulgated. The TMDL process provides a NMFS’s BRT identified the In coastal watersheds of northern flexible, adaptive management approach potentially adverse impacts of California, 38 water body segments have that relies on substantial public input interactions between hatchery (Mad been identified as impaired and have and participation to set targets, identify River hatchery) and wild steelhead as an been scheduled for development of protection measures and implement and important concern with regard to the TMDLs. The schedule for development monitor corrective practices. The northern California ESU (NMFS, 1997a). of TMDLs in northern California completion of the Garcia River TMDL, As part of its strategic management plan extends to the year 2011 (Russian River and the initiation of TMDLs for the for this ESU, DFG has implemented and Lake Pillsbury). However, the other listed rivers, represents a several changes in its hatchery schedule in this area is driven in part by significant step forward in improving practices. In addition, DFG has a consent decree (Pacific Coast watershed health for steelhead and implemented several additional Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, other salmonids on the north coast of measures pursuant to the 1998 NMFS/ et al. v. Marcus, No. 95–4474 MHP, California. In the long-term, the California MOA. These hatchery March 11, 1997). Under this consent development and implementation of management measures include:(1) decree, EPA agreed to oversee the these TMDLs should be beneficial for marking of all hatchery steelhead development of TMDLs on eighteen steelhead; however, their development released from the Mad River hatchery rivers on the north coast of California. and implementation will be difficult and all cooperative rearing facilities in

VerDate 112000 14:24 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36089 the Northern California ESU; (2) implemented; and (3) the presence of entitled ‘‘Protecting California’s continuation of long-standing hatchery monitoring provisions that determine Anadromous Fisheries.’’ The Executive management practices aimed at effectiveness and that permit adaptive Order that established this program minimizing hatchery and wild steelhead management. In some cases, expired in January, 1999; however, interactions including prohibitions on conservation efforts may be relatively continued coordination of the program stocking of resident trout in anadromous new and may not have had time to is occurring under the auspices of the waters; (3) releasing hatchery steelhead demonstrate their biological benefit. In California Biodiversity Council (CBC). only at times, sizes and places that such cases, provisions for adequate NMFS is encouraged that the State minimize impacts on naturally monitoring and funding of conservation initiated a comprehensive, watershed- produced fish; (4) only releasing efforts are essential to ensure intended based approach to salmon management hatchery fish that are determined to be conservation benefits are realized. and restoration; however, the California healthy; (5) initiation of monitoring As part of its west coast steelhead Watershed Protection Program is still efforts intended to measure hatchery status review, NMFS reviewed an array under development and has not been fish stray rates; and (6) a joint NMFS/ of protective efforts for steelhead and implemented as originally envisioned. DFG review of the Mad River hatchery other salmonids, ranging in scope from To support the Governor’s WPRC and including its stocking history, analysis regional strategies to local watershed its efforts to develop a Watershed of current broodstock, and its initiatives. NMFS summarized some of Protection Program, DFG implemented a consistency with the strategic the major efforts in a document entitled $3 million Watershed Initiative in 1997– management plan for the northern ‘‘Steelhead Conservation Efforts: A 98 for coastal watershed projects north California ESU. Supplement to the Notice of of San Francisco, through its Fishery Fisheries Management. In conjunction Determination for West Coast Steelhead Restoration Grants Program. These with the improved hatchery under the Endangered Species Act’’ projects focused on watershed and management practices, in-river sport (NMFS, 1996c). NMFS also reviewed riparian habitat restoration, instream fisheries in the northern California ESU conservation measures being habitat restoration; watershed now focus on harvest of marked, implemented by the State of California evaluation, assessment, and planning; hatchery-produced steelhead, and sport for steelhead at the time of its final and restoration project maintenance and fishing regulations have been modified listing determination for the northern monitoring. Beginning in 1998–1999, to protect wild adult and juvenile California, Klamath Mountains DFG funded additional staff positions to steelhead. Province, and Central Valley steelhead assist in watershed planning efforts and ESUs (63 FR 13347, March 19, 1998). grant proposal development. Other Natural or Human-Made Factors The following sections update the A key element of the State’s Affecting Continued Existence of current status of the State of California’s Watershed Protection Program that is Steelhead conservation efforts for steelhead with also specified in the 1998 NMFS/ Natural climatic conditions have particular emphasis on the northern California MOA is DFG’s exacerbated the problems associated California steelhead ESU. implementation of an expanded habitat with degraded and altered riverine and The state of California’s conservation restoration program for coastal estuarine habitats. Persistent drought efforts that address steelhead in the salmonids, including steelhead. In 1997, conditions have reduced already limited northern California ESU include: (1) the California legislature enacted Senate spawning, rearing and migration habitat. development of the State’s Watershed Bill 271 which provided DFG with $43 Climatic conditions appear to have Protection Program, which includes million over six years for habitat resulted in decreased ocean funding and implementation of an restoration and watershed planning to productivity which, during more expanded watershed planning and benefit anadromous salmonids in productive periods, may help offset habitat restoration program; (2) coastal watersheds, including the degraded freshwater habitat conditions implementation of the DFG’s strategic geographic area which encompasses the (NMFS, 1996). management plan for the northern northern California steelhead ESU. The California ESU and (3) implementation program was initiated in 1997–98 and Efforts Being Made to Protect West of the 1998 NMFS/California MOA has expanded since that time. Based on Coast Steelhead which addresses management of coastal the SB 271 legislation, funding is Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires steelhead in northern California. The expected to continue through at least the Secretary of Commerce to make status of these conservation efforts is 2002. Substantial funding from this listing determinations solely on the discussed in more detail below. program has been committed to habitat basis of the best scientific and restoration, enhancement, and California Watershed Protection commercial data available after watershed planning efforts within the conducting a review of the status of the Program and Implementation of SB 271 northern California steelhead ESU since species and after taking into account In July 1997, California’s Governor 1997–98. Throughout Humboldt and efforts being made to protect the created the State’s Watershed Mendocino counties, which constitute species. Therefore, in making its listing Restoration and Protection Council much of the geographic area comprising determinations, NMFS first assesses the (WPRC) for the purpose of: (1) the northern California steelhead ESU, status of the species and identifies overseeing all state activities aimed at DFG has funded over 200 projects factors that have lead to the decline of watershed protection and enhancement, costing in excess of $7.5 million during the species. NMFS then assesses including the conservation and the past three years (1997–98 through conservation measures to determine if restoration of anadromous salmonids in 1999–2000). NMFS participates as an they ameliorate risks to the species. California; and (2) directing the ex-officio member of the Advisory In judging the efficacy of existing development of a California Watershed Committee that reviews the distribution conservation efforts, NMFS considers Protection Program that would provide of SB 271 grant funding to ensure that the following: (1) the substantive, for the conservation of anadromous available funds are spent on projects protective, and conservation elements of salmonids in the state of California. A that will contribute to the conservation such efforts; (2) the degree of certainty working group of the WPRC issued a of listed salmonids as well as north such efforts will be reliably detailed report in December, 1998 coast steelhead. In addition to the

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36090 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations expanded habitat restoration program changes and concluded that they would cooperative rearing programs that funded by SB 271, DFG has added substantially reduce impacts to adult produce steelhead in this ESU to mark additional staff positions to assist in and juvenile steelhead and also assist in all released fish. This marking program administering the program, provide the conservation of the ESU (NMFS, has continued since its implementation technical support in the development of 1998). These emergency regulations in 1997 and DFG is committed to watershed plans and habitat restoration were formally enacted by the continuing this program into the future. projects and implement a new steelhead Commission in June 1998 following The DFG and the NMFS have also monitoring and adaptive management public review and comment, and they initiated a comprehensive review of program throughout coastal northern currently remain in place. NMFS DFG’s hatchery programs in this ESU California. believes that these angling regulations (Mad River Hatchery and cooperative continue to provide the reduction in Northern California Steelhead ESU rearing programs), with the objective of impacts and conservation benefits that Strategic Plan ensuring that these programs are were expected at the time the decision compatible with the conservation of In February 1998, DFG completed its was made not to list this ESU in March naturally produced steelhead. This strategic management plan for steelhead 1998. stocks in the northern California ESU 2. Hatchery Measures review is expected to be completed in (DFG 1998). In March 1998, the State The strategic plan for the northern 2000. Comprehensive monitoring of and DFG formally committed to California ESU contains a wide range of stray rates for hatchery produced fish implement this plan as part of the existing and new hatchery management has not been implemented in this ESU, NMFS/California MOA. The plan measures that are intended to reduce the but DFG expects to begin a north coast describes existing and new management impacts of hatchery steelhead programs steelhead monitoring program in 2000. measures for recreational steelhead on wild steelhead populations in this 3. Steelhead Monitoring and Adaptive angling, steelhead hatchery programs, ESU. Measures incorporated into the Management and steelhead monitoring, assessment plan include: (1) release strategies that and adaptive management efforts in this require a minimum 6’’ size and release The strategic management plan for the ESU. In addition, the plan describes at the hatchery rather than off-site; (2) northern California ESU identifies DFG’s ongoing efforts to protect and marking of all hatchery-produced fish ongoing and expanded monitoring enhance steelhead habitat within this that are released and the programs to assess steelhead abundance. ESU. These management measures were implementation of spawner surveys to A commitment to implement these intended to provide immediate assess the extent to which hatchery fish programs is contained in the 1998 protection for steelhead populations in stray into natural spawning areas; (3) a NMFS/California MOA. A key element this ESU, while longer-term measures commitment to reduce hatchery releases of this monitoring program was a were implemented to protect or implement other changes in hatchery commitment to establish a joint anadromous fish habitat on non-federal practices if significant straying of scientific and technical team including lands through the Watershed Protection hatchery fish is found to occur; (4) a cap representatives from DFG and NMFS to Program and the SB 271 habitat on hatchery production to current design appropriate detailed monitoring restoration program. The main elements levels, regular health checks during programs for steelhead in this ESU. of the northern California steelhead each rearing cycle and the destruction of NMFS considered these monitoring strategic management plan are briefly diseased fish that cannot be effectively efforts critically important given the discussed here. treated; (5) a review of the existing uncertain status of steelhead 1. Harvest Measures operating procedures for all cooperative populations in these ESUs, and The strategic management plan rearing facilities permitted by the State; indicated that adequate State funding includes several harvest management and (6) adoption of a requirement that was critical to implementing the actions which are intended to reduce all cooperative facilities develop and program (63 FR 13347, March 19, 1998). impacts on adult and juvenile steelhead submit five-year management plans to As part of the NMFS/California MOA, in the Northern California ESU. These the State for approval. NMFS previously both DFG and NMFS committed to seek include: (1) no retention of unmarked reviewed these existing and new adequate funding for this program. The (i.e., naturally produced) adult and hatchery management measures and DFG has taken significant steps to juvenile steelhead in all rivers and concluded that they would substantially implement this expanded steelhead streams; (2) fishing closures in steelhead reduce potential impacts to wild monitoring program in the northern rearing tributaries to protect juveniles; steelhead (NMFS, 1998d). Because of California steelhead ESU, but the full (3) expanded closures in mainstem NMFS concerns regarding the program has not been yet fully rivers through May to protect operations of the the Mad River outmigrating juvenile steelhead; and (4) Hatchery which is located in this ESU, developed or implemented. The DFG various gear and bait restrictions DFG also committed in the 1998 NMFS/ has committed significant fiscal designed to reduce mortality associated California MOA to: (1) undertake a resources to hire and redirect existing with incidental hooking of steelhead. comprehensive review of the hatchery staff resources to create a north coast In February and March 1998, the program, including its stocking history steelhead monitoring team and program California Fish and Game Commission and genetic analysis of current that will address the northern California (Commission) adopted emergency broodstock; and (2) develop a plan to steelhead ESU as well as areas further changes to the State’s inland fishing eliminate any adverse impacts of north in California, and has established regulations which were intended to hatchery operations on northern a scientific and technical team to guide implement the harvest regulation California steelhead if necessary. development of this effort. A set of changes contained in the northern The DFG implemented a statewide comprehensive monitoring proposals California steelhead strategic mass-marking program for its hatchery have been developed which are under management plan. In conjunction with steelhead programs beginning in 1997 review by the scientific and technical the final listing determination for this which includes the hatchery steelhead team. NMFS expects the finalized ESU in March 1998 (63 FR 13347), programs in the northern California monitoring program for this ESU to be NMFS reviewed these regulatory steelhead ESU. DFG is also requiring all implemented in early 2000.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36091

NMFS/California Memorandum of considered this to be a critically coast steelhead, including this ESU, nor Agreement important provision in the MOA. has it initiated a monitoring program to NMFS evaluated a wide range of Many of the provisions in the NMFS/ measure stray rates of hatchery conservation efforts that California had California MOA relating to the northern produced steelhead. However, the DFG adopted or was in the process of California steelhead ESU have been or has established a North Coast Steelhead developing in conjunction with NMFS’ are being implemented by the State; Monitoring Program to develop and decision not to list the northern however, critically important provisions implement a monitoring program, California steelhead ESU (63 FR 13347, related to revision of the FPRs have not which will include the northern March 19, 1998). NMFS concluded that been implemented. The current status of California steelhead ESU, and a joint DFG’s harvest and hatchery programs the State’s effort to implement the MOA, scientific and technical team to provide with particular regard to the Northern for this ESU would increase adult guidance to the program. DFG has California steelhead ESU, is discussed escapement, increase juvenile survival, developed a preliminary monitoring here. and reduce adverse impacts of hatchery program and is consulting the joint 1. Compliance with existing State scientific and technical team to refine populations on wild fish. In the near- regulations term, NMFS expected these measures the program and explore options for In accordance with section 4 of the establishing recovery and strategic goals would contribute to improved survival NMFS/California MOA, the DFG made and population stability for steelhead. within this ESU. NMFS anticipates that recommendations to the Fish and Game this program will commence in 2000. In addition, DFG’s monitoring and Commission to implement detailed Although the monitoring program adaptive management programs were angling regulation changes contained in specified in the NMFS/California MOA expected to provide State and Federal the strategic management plan for has not been fully implemented, DFG managers with the ability to assess the northern California steelhead. The has continued to carry out several status of steelhead populations and their Commission adopted these monitoring and research programs on response to harvest and hatchery recommendations on an emergency the north coast, primarily in the management changes. However, NMFS basis in February 1998 and permanent Klamath Mountains Province ESU, was also concerned that California’s regulations became effective in August which have provided data useful for the habitat protection efforts, (e.g., 1998. Within this ESU, these regulations management of steelhead. Finally, development of a Watershed Protection specifically prohibit retention of NMFS and DFG have recently Program and implementation of the naturally spawned adult steelhead, undertaken a state-wide review of the expanded habitat restoration program prohibit fishing for naturally produced State’s hatchery programs, including the established by SB 271), were not juvenile steelhead in tributary streams, Mad River Hatchery which is located in adequate to secure properly functioning minimize the angling impacts on this ESU, as well as the State’s habitat conditions for this ESU over the juvenile steelhead in mainstem rearing cooperative rearing program which has long-term. To address these concerns, areas through gear/bait restrictions, a small number of projects within this NMFS entered into a MOA with the prohibit retention of summer steelhead ESU. This review is expected to be State (NMFS/California MOA, 1998). and prohibit fishing in their summer completed by June 2000. Under the terms of the NMFS/ holding areas and provide for the 3. Monitoring Evaluation and California MOA, the State committed to retention of marked, hatchery-produced Adaptive Management a broad range of measures including: (1) steelhead. In accordance with section 7 of the compliance with existing State 2. Harvest and Hatchery Management NMFS/California MOA, the DFG has regulations, with particular emphasis on In accordance with section 6 of the implemented, at least in part, two key the management measures contained in NMFS/California MOA, two provisions provisions. First, the DFG has the strategic management plans for have been implemented. First, the DFG established a joint scientific and north coast steelhead; (2) recommended and the Fish and Game technical team to assist it with the implementation of harvest and hatchery Commission adopted permanent development of a comprehensive management measures contained in the regulations that provide only for the monitoring program for steelhead on the strategic management plan for northern retention of non-listed, hatchery- north coast, including the northern California steelhead; (3) implementation produced steelhead. Second, the DFG California ESU. The NMFS/California of a monitoring evaluation and adaptive has implemented a state wide mass MOA called for this program to be management program for steelhead, marking program for hatchery produced developed by June 1998; however, as including those elements contained in steelhead. This program was initiated discussed in the preceding section, DFG the strategic management plan for with brood year 1997 steelhead released has not yet completed development of northern California steelhead; (4) in winter 1998, and the marking the study plan or initiated a continued implementation of a program has continued annually since comprehensive monitoring program. California Watershed Protection that time. This program has resulted in Second, the DFG has secured the Program, including the SB 271 complete marking of all steelhead necessary funding to establish a north watershed planning and habitat produced at the Mad River Hatchery, coast steelhead monitoring program, restoration program in coastal which is located in this ESU. In including the dedication of professional watersheds, and the joint review and addition, DFG is requiring that all staff and the acquisition of necessary revision of the State’s forest practice cooperative rearing programs that equipment and facilities. A preliminary rules (FPRs) in conjunction with a produce steelhead mark them prior to monitoring program plan has been scientific review panel to ensure that release. developed by the monitoring program the revised FPRs were adequate to Three additional provisions contained staff, and this plan is currently under conserve anadromous salmonids, in section 6 of the NMFS/California review by the joint scientific and including steelhead. As previously MOA have not yet been implemented, technical team. discussed, because of the but are either in progress or will be 4. California’s Watershed Protection preponderance of private timber lands initiated shortly. To date, DFG has not Program and timber harvest activity in the implemented a process for establishing Section 9 of the NMFS/California northern California ESU, NMFS recovery and strategic goals for north MOA commits the State to continue

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36092 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations development of its Watershed In December 1997, the NMFS’ recovery of this ESU. Because Federal Protection Program, with a specific steelhead BRT concluded that the land ownership is both fragmented and element addressing salmonid Northern California steelhead ESU was limited in this ESU (approximately 19 conservation, and to coordinate with likely to become endangered in the percent of ESU), the key to achieving NMFS in establishing a scientific review foreseeable future based on a review of habitat protection and properly panel that would advise the State in its the best available biological information functioning habitat conditions in this development of this program. In (NMFS, 1997). Based on a review of ESU is the improvement of land addition, Section 9 commits the State to updated abundance and trend management activities on non-Federal direct personnel and fiscal resources to information that was available for this lands (approximately 81 percent of implement an expanded habitat ESU, NMFS’s SWFSC (NMFS, 2000) ESU). To ensure improved protection of restoration program in coastal concluded that the current biological habitat on non-Federal lands in this watersheds using SB 271 funds. Details status of the ESU has changed little ESU, the NMFS/California MOA of the State’s Watershed Protection since it was last evaluated in 1997. contained several provisions for the Program and DFG’s efforts to implement Updated abundance and trend data review and modification of the State’s expanded watershed planning and show small increases for winter and FPRs. Full implementation of these habitat restoration in coastal watersheds summer steelhead in the Eel River, but provisions, including implementation of were described previously (see Efforts current abundance is well below changes in the FPRs by January 1, 2000, Being Made to Protect West Coast estimates in the 1980s and even further was a critical factor in NMFS’s previous Steelhead). reduced from levels in the 1960s. decision not to list this ESU. Because Section 9 of the NMFS/California Redwood Creek summer steelhead the State has not implemented changes MOA contains several measures relating abundance remains very low. There are in the FPRs necessary to protect to the review and revision of the State’s no new data suggesting substantial steelhead in this ESU, NMFS believes FPRs because of NMFS’s concerns increases or decreases in populations that critically important conservation regarding the effects of State-regulated since the last updated status review was measures are not being implemented to timber harvest freshwater habitat completed. The Eel River winter and reduce the threats to this ESU from conditions for anadromous salmonids, summer steelhead populations, which timber harvest activities on non-Federal including steelhead in the Northern represent the best available data set for lands. Consequently, NMFS concludes California ESU. Specifically, the NMFS/ this ESU, are still severely reduced from that existing State and Federal California MOA calls for: (1) a joint pre–1960s levels. conservation measures collectively fail As discussed elsewhere in this final review of the FPRs by NMFS and the to provide for the attainment of properly rule, California has implemented several functioning habitat conditions necessary State, including their implementation of the conservation measures that NMFS to provide for the long-term protection and enforcement, (2) the State to make relied upon in making its decision not and conservation of this ESU. appropriate changes in implementation to list the northern California ESU. Based on a review of the best and enforcement, if necessary, (3) the Specifically, the State has enacted available information, therefore, NMFS State, in consultation with NMFS, to substantial changes to the State’s in- concludes that the Northern California make recommendations to the BOF for river angling regulations in 1998 to steelhead ESU warrants listing as a changes in the FPRs necessary to protect coastal steelhead populations threatened species at this time. In conserve anadromous salmonids, and including steelhead in this ESU. These arriving at this determination, NMFS (4) the BOF to complete action on the regulations, with slight modification, carefully considered the December 1997 recommended changes in the FPRs by remain in effect, and NMFS believes scientific conclusions of the BRT January 2000. Full implementation of they continue to provide the substantial regarding this ESU, the results of an these NMFS/California MOA protection and conservation benefits updated status review for the ESU provisions, including implementation of that were expected to occur at the time (NMFS, 2000), the status of State and changes in the FPRs by January 1, 2000, of the decision not to list this ESU. The Federal conservation efforts directed at was a critical factor in NMFS’s decision State has also implemented, or begun to protecting steelhead in this ESU, to not list the northern California implement, several other conservation including implementation of provisions steelhead ESU. For details of the State’s measures for this ESU, including contained in the NMFS/California current FPRs, including the recently extensive watershed planning and/or MOA. adopted interim FPR changes, see habitat restoration through the SB 271 NMFS previously examined the Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory program, marking of hatchery produced relationship between hatchery and Mechanisms. steelhead and other improvements in natural populations of steelhead in this Listing Determination hatchery practices, and steelhead ESU, and also assessed whether any monitoring. Although implementation hatchery populations are essential for Section 3 of the ESA defines an of some of these measures has been their recovery. At this time, NMFS does endangered species as any species in delayed, as is the case for the steelhead not believe any specific hatchery danger of extinction throughout all or a monitoring program, NMFS continues to populations in this ESU are essential for significant portion of its range, and a believe that these efforts will recovery and therefore none are listed. threatened species as any species likely collectively benefit steelhead in this Accordingly, only naturally reproduced to become an endangered species within ESU and eventually contribute to an populations of steelhead and their the foreseeable future throughout all or improved understanding of its status. progeny in this ESU are listed as a result a significant portion of its range. Section Although these conservation efforts of this determination. 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires that the are expected to benefit steelhead in this However, the determination that a listing determination be based solely on ESU, NMFS continues to believe that hatchery stock is not essential for the best scientific and commercial data improved habitat protection and recovery at this time does not preclude available, after conducting a review of restoration of properly functioning it from playing a role in recovery in the the status of the species and after taking freshwater habitat conditions for future if such a conservation measure is into account those efforts, if any, being spawning, rearing, and migration are warranted. Any hatchery population made to protect such species. essential to the long-term survival and that is part of the ESU is potentially

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36093 available for use in recovery if The process for completing the ESA 4(d) to grant exceptions to the ESA’s ‘‘take’’ circumstances warrant it. In this rule will provide the opportunity for prohibitions. Section 10(a)(1)(A) context, an essential hatchery public comment on the proposed scientific research and enhancement population is one that is vital to protective regulations. permits may be issued to entities incorporate into recovery efforts. If in In the case of threatened species, (Federal and non-Federal) for scientific the future any hatchery population in NMFS has flexibility under ESA section purposes or to enhance the propagation this ESU is determined to be essential 4(d) to tailor the protective regulations or survival of a listed species. NMFS has for recovery and is integrated into to provide for the conservation of the issued section 10(a)(1)(A) research/ recovery efforts, NMFS will consider species. Even though existing enhancement permits for listed chinook taking the administrative action of conservation efforts and plans are not salmon and steelhead for a number of listing that hatchery population. sufficient to preclude the need for activities, including trapping and NMFS’ ‘‘Interim Policy on Artificial listing at this time, they are nevertheless tagging, electroshocking to determine Propagation of Pacific Salmon Under valuable for improving watershed health population presence and abundance, the Endangered Species Act’’ (58 FR and restoring fishery resources. In those removal of fish from irrigation ditches 17573, April 5, 1993) provides guidance cases where well-developed, reliable and collection of adult fish for artificial on the treatment of hatchery stocks in conservation plans exist, NMFS may propagation programs. the event of a listing. Under this policy, choose to incorporate them into the Section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take ‘‘progeny of fish from the listed species recovery planning process, starting with permits may be issued to non-Federal that are propagated artificially are the protective regulations. For example, entities performing activities which may considered part of the listed species and the interim ESA 4(d) rule for the incidentally take listed species so long are protected under the ESA.’’ Southern Oregon/Northern California as the taking is incidental to, and not For unlisted hatchery populations coho (62 FR 24588, May 7, 1997) does the purpose of, the carrying out of an that are part of the Northern California not prohibit habitat restoration activities otherwise lawful activity. The types of ESU, NMFS believes it may be desirable conducted in accordance with approved activities potentially requiring a section to incorporate naturally spawned, listed plans or fisheries under an approved 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit fish into the broodstock to ensure that state management plan. NMFS recently include the operation and release of its genetic and life history proposed ESA 4(d) regulations for 14 artificially propagated fish by state or characteristics do not diverge ESUs of steelhead and salmon (64 FR privately operated and funded significantly from natural populations. 73479). Any future ESA 4(d) protective hatcheries, state or academic research Therefore, NMFS may allow the regulation for the Northern California not receiving Federal authorization or collection of broodstock for this use if steelhead ESU is likely to be comparable funding, logging, road building, grazing, it is consistent with an acceptable to the 4(d) regulations proposed for and diverting water into private lands. conservation plan (e.g., Hatchery and steelhead, and therefore, contain Genetic Management Plan) for the ESU. limitations on the section 9 take Take Guidance If listed fish are used as broodstock prohibitions for activities such as NMFS and the FWS published in the consistent with an acceptable recreational angling, artificial Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR conservation plan, NMFS may propagation, habitat restoration, 34272), a policy that NMFS shall determine that it is not necessary to scientific research and other activities identify, to the maximum extent consider the progeny of intentional when they are conducted in accordance practicable at the time a species is hatchery x listed crosses as listed fish with approved conservation plans. (except in those cases where the Sections 7(a)(2) and 7(a)(4) of the ESA listed, those activities that would or hatchery population is listed as well). require Federal agencies to consult with would not constitute a violation of NMFS believes this is consistent with NMFS to ensure that activities they section 9 of the ESA. The intent of this NMFS’ interim policy and with the authorize, fund, or conduct are not policy is to increase public awareness of policy and purposes of the ESA. likely to jeopardize the continued the effect of this listing on proposed and At this time, NMFS is only listing the existence of a listed species or a species ongoing activities within the species’ anadromous life forms of O. mykiss. proposed for listing, or adversely range. NMFS believes that the following modify critical habitat or proposed actions are not likely to be prohibited in Prohibitions and Protective Measures critical habitat. Examples of Federal an ESA 4(d) rule and therefore will not Section 4(d) of the ESA requires actions likely to affect steelhead in the result in a violation of section 9: NMFS to issue protective regulations it Northern California ESU include 1. Possession of steelhead from any finds necessary and advisable to provide authorized land management activities steelhead ESU listed as threatened for the conservation of threatened of the USFS and BLM, operation of which are acquired lawfully by permit species. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits hydroelectric and storage projects issued by NMFS pursuant to section 10 violations of protective regulations for permitted by FERC, and activities of the ESA, or by the terms of an threatened species promulgated under permitted by the Corps of Engineers. incidental take statement pursuant to ESA section 4(d). The ESA 4(d) Such activities may include timber sales section 7 of the ESA. protective regulations may prohibit, and harvest, permitting livestock 2. Federally funded or approved with respect to the threatened species, grazing, hydroelectric power generation, projects that involve activities such as some or all of the acts which section 9 and flood control. Other Federal actions, silviculture, grazing, mining, road of the ESA prohibits with respect to including the Corps section 404 construction, dam construction and endangered species. These ESA section permitting activities under the CWA operation, discharge of fill material, 9 prohibitions and 4(d) regulations and section 10 permitting under the stream channelization or diversion for apply to all individuals, organizations, Rivers and Harbors Act, and FERC which section 7 consultation has been and agencies subject to U.S. jurisdiction. licenses for non-Federal development completed, and when activities are NMFS intends to develop and and operation of hydropower may also conducted in accordance with any terms promulgate an ESA 4(d) protective require consultation. and conditions provided by NMFS in an regulation for the northern California Sections 10(a)(1)(A) and 10(a)(1)(B) of incidental take statement accompanying steelhead ESU in a separate rulemaking. the ESA provide NMFS with authority a biological opinion.

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36094 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Activities that NMFS believes could biological status of steelhead in the discussions with various governmental potentially harm steelhead in the Northern California ESU, it has not agency representatives regarding the northern California ESU and, therefore, performed the full analysis necessary for status of this ESU, and have sought may be prohibited in a 4(d) rule designating critical habitat at this time. working relationships with agencies and applying section 9 take prohibitions, Since critical habitat is not now others in order to promote salmonid include, but are not limited to: determinable for the Northern California restoration efforts. In addition, NMFS’ 1. Land-use activities that adversely ESU, NMFS intends to develop a critical staff have given presentations to affect steelhead habitat in the proposed habitat proposal for designation within interagency forums and other interested ESU (e.g., logging, grazing, farming, the next year. groups considering conservation urban development, road construction measures. NMFS has engaged in References in riparian areas and areas susceptible informal and formal contacts with to mass wasting and surface erosion). A complete list of all cited references affected state, local or regional entities, 2. Destruction/alteration of the is available upon request (see giving careful consideration to all steelhead habitat in the proposed ESU, ADDRESSES). written or oral comments received. As such as removal of large woody debris Classification one part of that process, NMFS held and ‘‘sinker logs’’ or riparian shade public hearings on the proposed action. canopy, dredging, discharge of fill National Environmental Policy Act NMFS also consulted with appropriate material, draining, ditching, diverting, The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in elected officials in the establishment of blocking, or altering stream channels or section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the a final rule. surface or ground water flow. information that may be considered At this time NMFS is not 3. Discharges or dumping of toxic when assessing species for listing. Based promulgating protective regulations chemicals or other pollutants (e.g., on this limitation of criteria for a listing pursuant to ESA section 4(d) or sewage, oil, gasoline) into waters or decision and the opinion in Pacific proposing to designate critical habitat. riparian areas supporting steelhead in Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d Prior to finalizing ESA 4(d) regulations the proposed ESU. for this ESU, or proposing to designate 4. Violation of discharge permits. 825 (6th Cir. 1981), NMFS has critical habitat, NMFS will comply with 5. Pesticide applications. concluded that ESA listing actions are 6. Interstate and foreign commerce of not subject to the environmental all relevant NEPA and RFA steelhead from the listed ESU and assessment requirements of the National requirements. import/export of steelhead from any Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). See List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223 ESU without a threatened or endangered NOAA Administrative Order 216–6. species permit. Endangered and threatened species, Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Exports, Imports, Marine mammals, 7. Collecting or handling of steelhead Flexibility Act from the listed ESUs. Permits to conduct Transportation. these activities are available for As noted in the Conference Report on Dated: May 31, 2000. purposes of scientific research or to the 1982 amendments to the ESA, Penelope D. Dalton, economic impacts cannot be considered enhance the propagation or survival of Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, the species. when assessing the status of species. National Marine Fisheries Service. Therefore, the economic analysis 8. Introduction of non-native species For the reasons set forth in the likely to prey on steelhead in the listed requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) are not applicable preamble, 50 CFR part 223 is amended ESU or displace them from their habitat. as follows: These lists are not exhaustive. They to the listing process. In addition, this are intended to provide some examples final rule is exempt from review under PART 223ÐTHREATENED MARINE of the types of activities that might or Executive Order 12866. AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES might not be considered by NMFS as Executive Order 13132—Federalism constituting a take of steelhead in the 1. The authority citation for part 223 northern California ESU under the ESA In keeping with the intent of the continues to read as follows: and its regulations. Questions regarding Administration and Congress to provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543; subpart B, whether specific activities will Section 223.102 also issued under 16 U.S.C. constitute a violation of the section 9 issues of mutual State and Federal 1361 et seq. take prohibitions, and general inquiries interest, NMFS has conferred with State regarding prohibitions and permits, and local government agencies in the 2. In § 223.102, paragraph (a)(22) is should be directed to NMFS (see course of assessing the status of the added to read as follows: ADDRESSES). Northern California steelhead ESU, and § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened considered, among other things, state species. Critical Habitat and local conservation measures. State Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA requires and local governments have expressed * * * * * that, to the maximum extent prudent support both for the conservation of the (a) * * * and determinable, NMFS designate Northern California steelhead ESU and (22) Northern California steelhead critical habitat concurrently with a for activities that affect this ESU. The (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Includes all determination that a species is history and content of this dialogue, as naturally spawned populations of endangered or threatened. Pursuant to well as the basis for this action, is steelhead (and their progeny) in coastal 4(b)(6)(C)(ii), if critical habitat is not described in the proposed rule, and in river basins ranging from Redwood then determinable, however, NMFS may other Federal Register Documents Creek in Humboldt County, California to extend the designation for up to one preceding this action. (See 61 FR 41541, the Gualala River, inclusive, in year after the date of the final rule August 9, 1996; 62 FR 43974, August 18, Mendocino County, California. listing the species. While NMFS has 1997, and 63 FR 13347, March 19, [FR Doc. 00–14196 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] completed its initial analysis of the 1998). NMFS staff have had numerous BILLING CODE 3510±22±F

VerDate 112000 12:00 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNR1 36095

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110

Wednesday, June 7, 2000

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER 98124–2207. This information may be manufacturer has accomplished a contains notices to the public of the proposed examined at the FAA, Transport structural reassessment of the damage issuance of rules and regulations. The Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind tolerance capabilities of the Boeing purpose of these notices is to give interested Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. Model 757 series airplane powered by persons an opportunity to participate in the Pratt & Whitney engines. This rule making prior to the adoption of the final FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rules. Dennis Stremick, Aerospace Engineer, reassessment indicates that the actual Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, operational loads applied to the nacelle Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle strut and wing structure are higher than DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind the analytical loads that were used Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington during the initial design. Subsequent Federal Aviation Administration 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2776; analysis and service history, which fax (425) 227–1181. includes numerous reports of fatigue 14 CFR Part 39 cracking on certain strut and wing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: structure, indicate that fatigue cracking [Docket No. 99±NM±308±AD] Comments Invited can occur on the primary strut structure RIN 2120±AA64 Interested persons are invited to before an airplane reaches its design service objective of 20 years or 50,000 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such flight cycles. Analysis also indicates Model 757 Series Airplanes Powered that such cracking, if it were to occur, by Pratt & Whitney Engines written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Communications shall would grow at a much greater rate than AGENCY: Federal Aviation identify the Rules Docket number and originally expected. Fatigue cracking in primary strut structure would result in Administration, DOT. be submitted in triplicate to the address reduced structural integrity of the strut. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking specified above. All communications (NPRM). received on or before the closing date Explanation of Relevant Service for comments, specified above, will be Information SUMMARY: This document proposes the considered before taking action on the Boeing recently has developed a adoption of a new airworthiness proposed rule. The proposals contained directive (AD) that is applicable to modification of the strut-to-wing in this notice may be changed in light attachment structure installed on Model certain Boeing Model 757 series of the comments received. airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney 757 series airplanes powered by Pratt & Comments are specifically invited on Whitney engines. This modification engines. This proposal would require the overall regulatory, economic, modification of the nacelle strut and significantly improves the load-carrying environmental, and energy aspects of capability and durability of the strut-to- wing structure. This proposal is the proposed rule. All comments prompted by reports indicating that the wing attachments. Such improvement submitted will be available, both before also will substantially reduce the actual operational loads applied to the and after the closing date for comments, nacelle are higher than the analytical possibility of fatigue cracking and in the Rules Docket for examination by corrosion developing in the attachment loads that were used during the initial interested persons. A report design. Such an increase in loading can assembly. summarizing each FAA-public contact The FAA has reviewed and approved lead to fatigue cracking in primary strut concerned with the substance of this Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, structure prior to an airplane reaching proposal will be filed in the Rules dated May 14, 1998, which describes its design service objective. The actions Docket. procedures for modification of the specified by the proposed AD are Commenters wishing the FAA to nacelle strut and wing structure. The intended to prevent fatigue cracking in acknowledge receipt of their comments modification consists of replacing many primary strut structure and consequent submitted in response to this notice of the significant load-bearing reduced structural integrity of the strut. must submit a self-addressed, stamped components of the strut (e.g., the side DATES: Comments must be received by postcard on which the following link fittings assemblies, the midspar July 24, 2000. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to fittings, the side load fittings, certain ADDRESSES: Submit comments in Docket Number 99–NM–308–AD.’’ The fuse bolt assemblies, etc.) with triplicate to the Federal Aviation postcard will be date stamped and improved components. Administration (FAA), Transport returned to the commenter. The service bulletin contains a Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, formula for calculating an optional Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM– Availability of NPRMs compliance threshold for the specified 308–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Any person may obtain a copy of this modification. This formula is intended Renton, Washington 98055–4056. NPRM by submitting a request to the to be used as an alternative to the 20- Comments may be inspected at this FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, year calendar threshold specified in the location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. service bulletin. p.m., Monday through Friday, except 99–NM–308–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, In addition, Table I of the service Federal holidays. SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. bulletin also identifies two related The service information referenced in service bulletin modifications that must the proposed rule may be obtained from Discussion be accomplished before or at the same Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, The FAA has received reports time as the modification in Boeing P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington indicating that the airplane Service Bulletin 757–54–0034:

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36096 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

• Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– is estimated to be $13,344,000, or The Proposed Amendment 0027: The FAA has reviewed and $48,000 per airplane. Accordingly, pursuant to the approved Boeing Service Bulletin 757– It would take approximately 26 work authority delegated to me by the 54–0027, Revision 1, dated October 27, hours per airplane to accomplish the Administrator, the Federal Aviation 1994, which describes procedures for actions described in Boeing Service Administration proposes to amend part visual and eddy current inspections of Bulletin 757–54–0027, Revision 1, at an 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations the fuse pins of the diagonal brace and average labor rate of $60 per work hour. (14 CFR part 39) as follows: upper link, and installation of new 15– Required parts would be provided at no 5PH fuse pins and new shoulder bolts cost by the airplane manufacturer. PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS for the diagonal brace and upper link. Based on these figures, the cost impact DIRECTIVES • Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54– of these proposed actions on U.S. 0036: The FAA has reviewed and 1. The authority citation for part 39 operators is estimated to be $433,680, or continues to read as follows: approved Boeing Service Bulletin 757– $1,560 per airplane. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 54–0036, dated May 14, 1998, which It would take approximately 90 work describes procedures for replacement of hours per airplane to accomplish the § 39.13 [Amended] the upper link with a new, improved actions described in Boeing Service 2. Section 39.13 is amended by part that will increase the strength and Bulletin 757–54–0036, at an average durability of the upper link installation. adding the following new airworthiness labor rate of $60 per work hour. directive: That service bulletin also describes Required parts would be provided at no Boeing: Docket 99–NM–308–AD. procedures for modification of a wire cost by the airplane manufacturer. support bracket attached to the upper Based on these figures, the cost impact Applicability: Model 757 series airplanes powered by Pratt & Whitney engines, line link. of these proposed actions on U.S. Accomplishment of the actions numbers 1 through 735 inclusive, certificated operators is estimated to be $1,501,200, in any category. specified in the service bulletins is or $5,400 per airplane. intended to adequately address the Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane The cost impact figures discussed identified unsafe condition. identified in the preceding applicability above are based on assumptions that no provision, regardless of whether it has been Explanation of Requirements of operator has yet accomplished any of modified, altered, or repaired in the area Proposed Rule the proposed requirements of this AD subject to the requirements of this AD. For action, and that no operator would airplanes that have been modified, altered, or Since an unsafe condition has been accomplish those actions in the future if repaired so that the performance of the identified that is likely to exist or requirements of this AD is affected, the this AD were not adopted. develop on other products of this same owner/operator must request approval for an type design, the proposed AD would Regulatory Impact alternative method of compliance in require accomplishment of the actions accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. specified in the service bulletins The regulations proposed herein The request should include an assessment of described previously, except as would not have substantial direct effects the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by discussed below. on the States, on the relationship between the national government and this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not Differences Between Proposed Rule and the States, or on the distribution of been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it. Service Bulletin power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Operators should note that, although accomplished previously. Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034 in accordance with Executive Order To prevent fatigue cracking in primary specifies that the manufacturer may be 12612, it is determined that this strut structure and consequent reduced contacted for disposition of certain proposal would not have sufficient structural integrity of the strut, accomplish damage conditions that may detected federalism implications to warrant the the following: preparation of a Federalism Assessment. during accomplishment of the Modifications For the reasons discussed above, I modification, this proposal would (a) Modify the nacelle strut and wing require the repair of those conditions to certify that this proposed regulation (1) structure on both the left and right sides of be accomplished in accordance with a is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ the airplane, in accordance with Boeing method approved by the FAA. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, dated May 14, a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 1998, at the later of the times specified in Cost Impact Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD. There are approximately 317 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if (1) Prior to the accumulation of 37,500 airplanes of the affected design in the promulgated, will not have a significant total flight cycles, or within 20 years since worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that economic impact, positive or negative, the date of manufacture, whichever occurs on a substantial number of small entities first. Use of the optional threshold formula 278 airplanes of U.S. registry would be described in paragraph I.D. of the service affected by this proposed AD. under the criteria of the Regulatory bulletin is an acceptable alternative to the 20- It would take approximately 800 work Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft year threshold. hours per airplane to accomplish the regulatory evaluation prepared for this (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles after the proposed modification of the nacelle action is contained in the Rules Docket. effective date of this AD. strut and wing structure described in A copy of it may be obtained by (b) Prior to or concurrently with the Boeing Service Bulletin 757–54–0034, contacting the Rules Docket at the accomplishment of the modification of the dated May 14, 1998, at an average labor location provided under the caption nacelle strut and wing structure required by ADDRESSES. paragraph (a) of this AD; as specified in rate of $60 per work hour. Required paragraph I.D., Table I, ‘‘Strut Improvement parts would be provided at no cost by List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Bulletins,’’ on page 5 of Boeing Service the airplane manufacturer. Based on Bulletin 757–54–0034, dated May 14, 1998; these figures, the cost impact of this Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation accomplish the actions specified in Boeing proposed modification on U.S. operators safety, Safety. Service Bulletin 757–54–0027, Revision 1,

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36097 dated October 27, 1994, and Boeing Service permanent program regulations for I. Public Comment Procedures Bulletin 757–54–0036, dated May 14, 1998, surface coal mining operations under as applicable, in accordance with those Written comments submitted by mail, the Surface Mining Control and electronically, or in person, should be service bulletins. Reclamation Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. (c) If any damage to airplane structure is specific, confined to issues pertinent to found during the accomplishment of the 1201, et seq., as amended (SMCRA or this reopening, and explain the bases for modification required by paragraph (a) of this the Act). We are reopening the comment the comments. Please submit three AD; and the service bulletin specifies to period for the proposed rule in light of copies of your comments if possible. We contact Boeing for appropriate action: Prior a judicial decision in a case decided must stress that we will consider only to further flight, repair in accordance with a after the close of the comment period. comments which are germane to the method approved by the Manager, Seattle The comment period was originally effects of the NMA v. DOI II decision on Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, scheduled to close on February 19, Transport Airplane Directorate. For a repair our December 21, 1998 proposed rule: 1999, but was subsequently extended to conversely, we will not consider method to be approved by the Manager, March 25, 1999 (64 FR 8763; Feb. 23, Seattle ACO, as required by this paragraph, comments which do not pertain to the the Manager’s approval letter must 1999), then to April 15, 1999 (64 FR effects of the court decision and which specifically reference this AD. 15322; March 31, 1999), and ultimately could have been submitted during the to May 10, 1999 (64 FR 23811; May 4, Alternative Methods of Compliance previous comment periods. All of the 1999). Shortly thereafter, on May 28, comments we received thus far are part (d) An alternative method of compliance or 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the of the rulemaking record, and we will adjustment of the compliance time that District of Columbia Circuit handed provides an acceptable level of safety may be consider both those comments and down a decision in National Mining comments received under the new used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Ass’n v. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 177 ACO. Operators shall submit their requests comment period associated with this through an appropriate FAA Principal F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (NMA v. DOI II). notice before issuing a final rule. Maintenance Inspector, who may add Because we incorporated certain Therefore, commenters should not comments and then send it to the Manager, provisions and concepts into our resubmit earlier comments. Seattle ACO. December 21, 1998 proposed rule, We are specifying a 30 day deadline Note 2: Information concerning the which were later invalidated by the for comments, which we believe is existence of approved alternative methods of court, we feel it advisable to obtain appropriate because of the limited compliance with this AD, if any, may be input from the public on the effects of nature of this reopening; the fact that obtained from the Seattle ACO. the appeals court’s decision on our the pertinent appeals court’s rulings are, proposed rule. By this notice, we are Special Flight Permits for the most part, subject to reopening and extending the comment (e) Special flight permits may be issued in straightforward interpretation; the fact period for an additional 30 days to seek that we previously extended and accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 comments on the effects of the court of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR reopened the comment period serial 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to decision on our proposed rule so that times for the initial proposed rule; and a location where the requirements of this AD we can ensure that our final rule is our desire to expedite promulgation of can be accomplished. consistent with the NMA v. DOI II a final rule. In view of the above decision. Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 1, considerations, we will not extend the 2000. DATES: We will accept written comment period beyond 30 days. Donald L. Riggin, comments until 5 p.m., Eastern time on II. Summary of NMa v. DOI II as it Acting Manager, Transport Airplane July 7, 2000. We will consider only Affects our December 21, 1998 Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. those comments received within the Proposed Rule [FR Doc. 00–14315 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] allowed time period. In June 1997, NMA filed suit in the BILLING CODE 4910±13±P ADDRESSES: You may mail or hand- deliver comments to the Office of U.S. District Court for the District of Surface Mining, Administrative Record Columbia, challenging the validity of our April 21, 1997, interim final rule DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Room 101, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20240. You may (IFR) (62 FR 19450) on broad grounds. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation also submit comments to OSM via the On June 15, 1998, the district court and Enforcement Internet at: [email protected]. issued a decision upholding the IFR in Comments sent via the Internet should its entirety. National Mining Ass’n v. 30 CFR Parts 701, 724, 773, 774, 778, be in an ASCII, Word, or WordPerfect Babbitt, No. 97–1418 (AER) (D.D.C. June 842, 843, and 846 file, and you should avoid using special 15, 1998). On May 28, 1999, the U.S. Court of RIN 1029±AB94 characters and any form of encryption. Please also include ‘‘Attn: RIN 1029– Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its decision in NMA’s Application and Permit Information AB94’’ and your name and return address in your Internet message. If you appeal of the district court’s ruling. Requirements; Permit Eligibility; National Mining Ass’n. v. U.S. Dep’t of Definition of Ownership and Control; do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your the interior, 177 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1999) the Applicant/Violator System; (NMA v. DOI II). The court upheld Alternative Enforcement Actions Internet message, contact us directly at (202) 208–2847. several provisions of the IFR, but AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining invalidated others. Three of the court’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. holding invalidating provisions of the Stephen J. McEntegart, Office of Surface IFR are pertinent to this reopening ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and Mining, 1951 Constitution Avenue, extension of comment period. because we incorporated the invalidated NW., Washington, DC, 20240. provisions and/or underlying concepts SUMMARY: On December 21, 1998 (63 FR Telephone: (202) 208–2968; e-mail: into the proposed rule. Since our final 70580), we, the Office of Surface Mining [email protected]. rule must be consistent with NMA v. (OSM), proposed a rule to amend our SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI II, we invite your comments on

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36098 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules how these three holdings affect our affect his or her eligibility to receive a under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION proposed rule. These three holdings are permit. CONTACT. This holding affects sections described below. Dated: June 1, 2000. 773.15(b)(3) and 773.16(a) of our First, the court held that ‘‘[f]or Kathrine L. Henry, violations of an operation that the proposed rule; therefore, we invite your comments on the effect of the court’s Acting Director, Office of Surface Mining applicant ‘has controlled’ but no longer Reclamation and Enforcement. does, * * * the Congress authorized ruling on these provisions. permit-blocking only if there is ‘a Finally, with regard to the IFR’s [FR Doc. 00–14355 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] demonstrated pattern of willful suspension and rescission provisions BILLING CODE 4310±05±M violations’ ’’ under section 510(c) of relative to improvidently issued permits, the court agreed with OSM that SMCRA. Id. at 5. In other words, if an DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR applicant severs its ownership or section 201(c) of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. control relationship to an operation 1211(c), expressly authorizes OSM to suspend or rescind improvidently Office of Surface Mining Reclamation with a current violation, OSM, in and Enforcement general, may not consider that violation issued permits. In addition to that express authority, the court also found in making a permit eligibility decision 30 CFR Part 906 under section 510(c) of the Act. Stated that OSM retained ‘‘implied’’ authority to suspend or rescind improvidently differently, in addition to the violation [SPATS No. CO±032±FOR] being current and ongoing, the applicant issued permits ‘‘because of its express authority to deny permits in the first must also own or control the operation Colorado Regulatory Program with a violation at the time of instance.’’ Id. at 9. However, the court decided that OSM may only order application; if the ownership or control AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining cessation of State-permitted operations relationship has been terminated, OSM Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. pursuant to the procedures established may not deny a permit (absent a pattern ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment under section 521 of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C. of willful violations), even if the period and opportunity for public 1271. Specifically, OSM may order violation remains current and ongoing. hearing on proposed amendment. immediate cessation of State-permitted NMA v. DOI II, 177 F.3d at 5. OSM may operations if those operations pose an consider such past ownership or control SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining ‘‘imminent danger to the health or safety of operations with violations only in Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is of the public, or is causing, or can announcing receipt of a proposed determining whether there has been a reasonably be expected to cause ‘‘demonstrated pattern of willful amendment to the Colorado regulatory significant, imminent environmental program (hereinafter, the ‘‘Colorado violations’’ warranting permanent harm . . .’’ SMCRA § 521(a)(2), 30 permit ineligibility under section510(c). program’’) under the Surface Mining U.S.C. 1271(a)(2). Absent these Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 This holding affects 773.15(b)(3) and circumstances, and after OSM complies 773.16(a) of our proposed rule; (SMCRA). Colorado proposes revisions with the ten-day notice procedure to rules concerning definitions; permit therefore, we invite your comments on contained in 30 CFR 843.21(c), OSM the effect of the court’s ruling on these application requirements; comment may order cessation of a State-permitted period for revisions; requirements for provisions. operation only if it: (1) Provides a notice Second, the court found that the IFR’s permit approval or denial; and of violation to the permittee or his performance standards for provision requiring permit denials agent; (2) establishes an abatement based on indirect ownership or control sedimentation ponds, discharge period; (3) provides opportunity for a structures, impoundments, stream of operations with violations is public hearing and (4) makes a written impermissibly retroactive because our buffer zones, coal exploration, and coal finding that abatement of the violation processing plants and support facilities 1988 ownership and control rule has not occurred within the abatement imposed a ‘ ‘‘new disability,’ permit not located at or near the mine site or period. Id. at 9–10; SMCRA § 521(a)(3), not within the permit area for the mine. ineligibility, based on ‘transactions or 30 U.S.C. 1271(a)(3). This holding considerations already past. . . .’ ’’ Id. Colorado intends to revise its program affects section 843.21(d) of our proposed to be consistent with the corresponding at 8. As such, the court held that the IFR rule; therefore, we invite your is retroactive ‘‘insofar as it block [sic] Federal regulations, clarify ambiguities, comments on the effect of the court’s and improve operational efficiency. permits based on transactions ruling on these provisions. (violations and control) antedating The court’s holdings in the rest of the DATES: We will accept written November 2, 1988, the [1988] NMA v. DOI II litigation do not affect comments on this amendment until 4 Ownership and Control Rule’s effective our proposed rule because either; (1) p.m., m.d.t., July 7, 2000. If requested, date.’’ Id. OSM prevailed on the particular issued; we will hold a public hearing on the However, the court explained that the or (2) the issue has become moot in that amendment on July 3, 2000. We will IFR is not retroactive to the extent it our proposal does not contain a similar accept requests to speak until 4 p.m., allows permit denials when an provision. The court decision is m.d.t., on June 22, 2000. applicant acquires control of an available from two commercial legal ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand operation with an ongoing, pre-rule research services (Lexis and Westlaw), deliver written comments and requests violation on or after the effective date of as well as from the United States Court to speak at the hearing to James F. the 1988 ownership and control rule. Id. of Appeals for the District of Columbia Fulton at the address listed below. at n.12. This is so because one of the Circuit’s website (Internet address: You may review copies of the relevant transactions—assumption of http://www.cadc.uscourt.gov). For your Colorado program, this amendment, a control—will have occurred on or after convenience, we are posting a copy of listing of any scheduled public hearings, November 2, 1988; as such, as of the court’s decision on our website at: and all written comments received in November 2, 1988, the applicant would http//www.osmre.gov. We will also be response to this document at the be on notice that this type of happy to mail or fax you a hard copy of addresses listed below during normal transaction, which post-dates the the decision at your request; please business hours, Monday through Friday, effective date of the 1988 rule, could address requests to the person listed excluding holidays. You may receive

VerDate 112000 14:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36099 one free copy of the amendment by which there is actual mine development feet, and (2) incorporate by reference the contacting OSM’s Denver Field information available; applicable requirements of the State Division. (2) Revise, at Rule 1.04(71), the Engineer codified at C.R.S. 37–87–105; James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field definition of land use, to clarify that all (11) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a)(iv), Division, Office of Surface Mining of the land uses described may include concerning permit application Reclamation and Enforcement, 1999 land used for support facilities which requirements, to incorporate by Broadway, Suite 3320, Denver, CO are adjacent to, or are in integral part of reference (for sedimentation ponds or 80202. the land use; impoundments that meet or exceed the Michael B. Long, Director, Division of (3) Delete, at Rule 1.04(115a), the criteria of the Mine Safety and Health Minerals and Geology, Department of definition of ‘‘sediment treatment Administration (MSHA)), the MSHA Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman St., facilities and replace it with, at Rule requirements codified at 30 CFR Room 215, Denver, CO 80203, 1.04(81a), a definition of ‘other 77.216(a), 77–216–1 and 77.216–2; Telephone: (303) 866–8106. treatment facilities’ that means any (12) Add, at Rules 2.05.3(4)(a)(v), (vi) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: chemical treatments, such as and (vii), concerning permit application James F. Fulton, Telephone: (303) 844– flocculation or neutralization, or requirements, to require (1) submission 1400, extension 1424. Internet: mechanical structures, such as, but not of any plans that must be submitted to [email protected]. limited to, clarifiers or precipitators, and approved by with the State that have a point source discharge and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Engineer or MSHA, (2) that all I. Background on the Colorado Program. are utilized: (i) to prevent additional impoundments meeting the Class B or II. Description of the Proposed Amendment. contributions of dissolved or suspended Class C criteria for dams in the Soil III. Public Comment Procedures. solids to streamflow or runoff outside Conservation Service Technical Release IV. Procedural Determinations. the permit area; or (ii) to comply with No. 60 (TR60) comply with the all applicable State and Federal water- I. Background on the Colorado requirements for impoundments that qualify laws and regulations;’’ Program. meet or exceed the size or other criteria (4) Add, at Rule 1.04(86a), a definition of 30 CFR 77.216(a) (and to incorporate On December 15, 1980, the Secretary of ‘‘permit impoundment’’ that means a by reference TR60), and (3) require a of the Interior conditionally approved impoundment which is approved, and if stability analysis for each impoundment the Colorado program. You can find required, by other State and Federal that either meets the Class B or Class C background information on the agencies for retention as part of the post- criteria for dams in TR60 or meets the Colorado program, including the mining land use; size or other criteria of 30 CFR Secretary’s findings, the disposition of (5) Add, at Rule 1.04(93a), a definition 77.216(a); comments, and the conditions of of ‘‘point of compliance’’ that means (13) Make editorial revisions at Rule approval of the Colorado program in the any geographic location at which 2.05.3(4)(b), concerning design December 15, 1980, Federal Register (45 compliance with applicable ground requirements for sedimentation ponds; FR 82173). You can also find later water quality standards established by (14) Revise Rule 2.05.3(8)(a)(iii), actions concerning Colorado’s program the Water Quality Control Commission concerning permit application and program amendments at 30 CFR must be attained and where this requirements for plans for coal mine 906.11, 906.15, 906.16, and 906.30. compliance will be demonstrated by waste and non-coal processing waste, to compliance monitoring of the II. Description of the Proposed refer to impoundments with a capacity Amendment groundwater or by other valid means; (6) Revise, at Rule 1.04(115), the of 100 acre-feet rather than reservoirs By letter dated May 12, 2000, definition of ‘‘sedimentation pond’’ to with a capacity of more than 1000 acre- Colorado sent us a proposed clarify that it is an impoundment used feet; amendment to its program as a primary sediment control structure (15) Add Rules 2.05.3(8)(a)(v) and (vi), (administrative record No. CO–691) to remove solids from water to meet concerning plans for coal mine waste under SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). water-quality standards or effluent and non-coal processing waste, to Colorado sent the amendment in limitations before the water leaves the require (1) that all impoundments response to May 7, 1986, and June 19, permit area; meeting the Class B or Class C criteria 1997, letters (administrative record Nos. (7) Add, at Rule 1.04(137a), a for dams in the Soil Conservation CO–282 and CO–686) that we sent to definition of ‘‘temporary impoundment’’ Service TR60 comply with the Colorado in accordance with 30 CFR that means an impoundment used requirements for impoundments that 732.17(c); required program amendment during surface coal mining and meet or exceed the size or other criteria codified at 30 CFR 906.16(d) and (e); reclamation operations, but not of 30 CFR 77.216(a), and (2) require a and to include changes made at its own approved to remain as part of the stability analysis for each impoundment initiative. The full text of the program approved post-mining land use; that either meets the Class B or Class C amendment is available for you to read (8) Revise Rule 2.05.2(1) through (6), criteria for dams in TR60 or meets the at the locations listed above under concerning water quality standards and size or other criteria of 30 CFR ADDRESSES. effluent limitations, to add references to 77.216(a); Colorado proposes to: other treatment facilities; (16) Revise Rule 2.05.6(3)(b)(iv) and (1) Add, at Rule 1.04(31a), a definition (9) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a), (iv)(A), concerning the plan for surface of ‘‘cumulative impact area’’ that means concerning permit application and ground water monitoring, to require the area which includes, at a minimum, requirements, to require information (1) identification of points of the entire projected lives through bond concerning other treatment facilities; compliance and (2) monitoring of release of: the proposed operation; all (10) Revise Rule 2.05.3(4)(a)(iii), manganese; existing operation; any operation for concerning permit application (17) Make editorial revisions at Rule which a permit application has been requirements, to (1) refer to an 2.06.8(5)(b)(ii)(B), concerning submitted; all other operations required impoundment with a capacity of more underground mining activities; to meet diligent development than 100 acre-feet rather than a reservoir (18) Revise Rule 2.07.3(3)(b) to refer to requirements for leased federal coal, for with a capacity of more than 1000 acre- the National Resource Conservation

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36100 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Service rather than the Soil add requirements concerning support of your recommendations. In Conservation Service; monitoring points of compliance; the final rulemaking, we will not (19) Revise Rule 2.07.3(3)(c) to clarify (26) Revise Rule 4.05.18, concerning necessarily consider or include in the that written comments regarding stream buffer zones, to (1) require that administrative record any comments technical revisions may be submitted no land within 100 feet, or greater received after the time indicated under within 10 days of the initial newspaper distance if required, of a perennial DATES or at locations other than the publication; stream, an intermittent stream, or an Denver Field Division. ephemeral stream with a drainage area (20) Revise Rule 2.07.6(2)(c), Electronic Comments concerning the assessment (for permit greater than one square mile, by surface approval or denial) of probable and underground coal mining Please submit Internet comments as cumulative impacts of all anticipated operations, unless authorized, and (2) an ASCII file avoiding the use of special mining on the hydrologic balance, to require, upon a waiver of buffer zone, characters and any form of encryption. add references to cumulative impact Colorado to find that (a) surface coal Please also include ‘‘Attn: SPATS No. area and material damages; mining operations will not cause or CO–032–FOR’’ and your name and (21) Revise Rule 4.05.6, concerning contribute to the violation of applicable return address in your Internet message. sedimentation ponds, to (1) apply the water quality standards, (b) during and If you do not receive a confirmation that requirements to other treatment after mining, the water quantity and we have received your Internet message, facilities and (2) simplify by quality, and other environmental contact the Denver Field Division at reorganizing the section and removing resources of the stream shall not be (303) 844-1400, extension 1424. certain requirements that are applicable adversely affected, and, (c) if there will Availability of Comments be a temporary or permanent stream to impoundments in general and are not We will make comments, including specific to sedimentation ponds or other channel diversion, the diversion will comply with Rules 4.05.3 and 4.05.4; names and addresses of respondents, treatment facilities (these requirements available for public review during are set forth at Rule 4.05.9 which is (27) Revise Rule 4.21.4(10), concerning performance standards for normal business hours. We will not applicable to impoundments in general); consider anonymous comments. If (22) Revise Rule 5.05.7, concerning coal exploration, to add the requirements that coal exploration (1) individual respondents request discharge structures, to add a reference confidentiality, we will honor their to other treatment facilities; include sediment control measures such as those listed in 4.05.5 or request to the extent allowable by law. (23) Revise Rule 4.05.9, concerning sedimentation ponds which comply Individual respondents who wish to impoundments, to (1) clarify and with 4.05.6 and 4.05.9, and (2) if the withhold their name or address from simplify by reorganizing and removing operation has the potential to negatively public review, except for the city or redundant requirements and (2) add, at impact the quality of groundwater for town, must state this prominently at the Rules 4.05.9(2)(d), (e)(i), and (ii), (6), which quality standards have been beginning of their comments. We will (8)(a), (10), and (21) requirements, established by the Water Quality make all submissions from concerning spillways, embankments, Control Commission, be conducted so as organizations or businesses, and from freeboard, and inspections, for to ensure compliance with applicable individuals identifying themselves as impoundments meeting the Class B or ground water standards at points of representatives or officials of Class C criteria for dams in the Soil compliance which shall be established organizations or businesses, available Conservation Service TR60; according to the provisions of for public review in their entirety. (24) Revise Rule 4.05.9, concerning 4.05.13(1); and Public Hearing impoundments, to add a new Rule (28) Revise Rule 4.28.3, concerning 4.05.9(18) that (1) waives the coal processing plants and support If you wish to speak at the public requirement for quarterly inspections by facilities not located at or near the mine hearing, contact the person listed under a registered engineer, but requires site or not within the permit area for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by annual inspections by a qualified mine, by adding paragraph (16) that 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., on June 22, 2000. If person, for impoundments which are (a) requires establishment of points of you are disabled and need special not the primary sediment control for compliance, if the operation has the accommodations to attend a public area, (b) located in reclaimed terrain to potential to negatively impact the hearing, contact the person listed under enhance the postmining land use, and quality of groundwater for which FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We (c) either completely incised or do not quality standards have been established will arrange the location and time of the exceed 2 acre-feet in capacity and do by the Water Quality Control hearing with those persons requesting not have embankments larger than five Commission. the hearing. If no one requests an feet in height; and (2) requires that (a) opportunity to speak, we will not hold the above waiver be approved and (b) III. Public Comment Procedures the hearing. such a waiver cannot be approved Under the provisions of 30 CFR To assist the transcriber and ensure an unless a written safety demonstration is 732.17(h), OSM requests your comments accurate record, we request, if possible, submitted by a professional engineer on whether the amendment satisfies the that each person who speaks at a public which shows that the impoundments applicable program approval criteria of hearing provide us with a written copy will not present any threat to human 30 CFR 732.15. If we approve the of his or her comments. The public health and safety, or significant threat to amendment, it will become part of the hearing will continue on the specified the environment (all other Colorado program. date until everyone scheduled to speak impoundments-related rules are has been heard. If you are in the applicable and Colorado is required to Written Comments audience and have not been scheduled field verify the safety demonstration and Send your written comments to OSM to speak and wish to do so, you will be may rescind the waiver, for good cause at the address given above. Your written allowed to speak after those who have if conditions change over time); comments should be specific, pertain been scheduled. We will end the (25) Revise Rule 4.05.13(1), only to the issues proposed in this hearing after everyone scheduled to concerning ground water monitoring, to rulemaking, and include explanations in speak and others present in the

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36101 audience who wish to speak, have been effects of surface coal mining competition, employment, investment, heard. operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of productivity, innovation, or the ability SMCRA requires that State laws of U.S. based enterprises to compete Public Meeting regulating surface coal mining and with foreign-based enterprises. This If only one person requests an reclamation operations be ‘‘in determination is based upon the fact opportunity to speak, we may hold a accordance with’’ the requirements of that the State submittal which is the public meeting rather than a public SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that subject of this rule is based upon hearing. If you wish to meet with us to State programs contain rules and counterpart Federal regulations for discuss the amendment, please request regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ which an analysis was prepared and a a meeting by contacting the person regulations issued by the Secretary determination made that the Federal listed under FOR INFORMATION CONTACT. pursuant to SMCRA. regulation was not considered a major All such meetings are open to the public rule. and, if possible, we will post notices of National Environmental Policy Act meetings at the locations listed under Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. Unfunded Mandates ADDRESSES. We will make a written 1292(d)) provides that a decision on a This rule will not impose a cost of summary of each meeting a part of the proposed State regulatory program $100 million or more in any given year administrative record. provision does not constitute a major on any governmental entity or the IV. Procedural Determinations. Federal action within the meaning of private sector. section 102(2)(C) of the National Executive Order 12630—Takings Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 906 This rule does not have takings 4332(2)(C)). A determination has been Intergovernmental relations, Surface implications. This determination is made that such decisions are mining, Underground mining. based on the analysis performed for the categorically excluded from the NEPA Dated: June 30, 2000. counterpart Federal regulations. process (516 DM 8.4.A). Brent T. Wahlquist, Executive Order 12866—Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act Regional Director, Western Regional Planning and Review This rule does not contain Coordinating Center. This rule is exempted from review by information collection requirements that [FR Doc. 00–14356 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the Office of Management and Budget require approval by OMB under the BILLING CODE 4310±05±M (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.). Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Reform Regulatory Flexibility Act Office of Surface Mining Reclamation The Department of the Interior has The Department of the Interior has and Enforcement conducted the reviews required by determined that this rule will not have section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and a significant economic impact on a 30 CFR Part 931 has determined that, to the extent substantial number of small entities allowable by law, this rule meets the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 [SPATS NO NM±039±FOR] applicable standards of subsections (a) U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal and (b) of that section. However, these that is the subject of this rule is based New Mexico Regulatory Program standards are not applicable to the upon counterpart Federal regulations for AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining actual language of State regulatory which an economic analysis was Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. programs and program amendments prepared and certification made that since each such program is drafted and such regulations would not have a ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and promulgated by a specific State, not by significant economic effect upon a extension of public comment period on OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of substantial number of small entities. proposed amendment. SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and Accordingly, this rule will ensure that SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining the Federal regulations at 30 CFR existing requirements previously Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), promulgated by OSM will be announcing receipt of revisions decisions on proposed State regulatory implemented by the State. In making the pertaining to a previously proposed programs and program amendments determination as to whether this rule amendment to the New Mexico submitted by the States must be based would have a significant economic regulatory program (hereinafter, the solely on a determination of whether the impact, the Department relied upon the ‘‘New Mexico program’’) under the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and data and assumptions for the Surface Mining Control and its implementing Federal regulations counterpart Federal regulations. Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The and whether the other requirements of Small Business Regulatory Enforcement revisions to New Mexico’s proposed 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have Fairness Act rules pertain to the definitions of been met. This rule is not a major rule under 5 ‘‘material damage’’ and‘‘occupied Executive Order 13132—Federalism U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business residential dwelling and associated This rule does not have Federalism Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. structures’’ and subsidence control implications. SMCRA delineates the This rule: (a) Does not have an annual during underground mining. The roles of the Federal and State effect on the economy of $100 million; amendment is intended to revise the governments with regard to the (b) Will not cause a major increase in New Mexico program to be consistent regulation of surface coal mining and costs or prices for consumers, with the corresponding Federal reclamation operations. One of the individual industries, geographic regulations. purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a regions, or Federal, State or local DATES: Written comments must be nationwide program to protect society governmental agencies; and (c) Does not received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. June 22, and the environment from the adverse have significant adverse effects on 2000.

VerDate 112000 14:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNP1 36102 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand held. The public comment periods disruption of the aquifer and deliver written comments to Willis L. ended on January 4, 1999. consequent exchange of ground water Gainer at the address listed below. During our review of the November between the aquifer and other strata, You may review copies of the New 13, 1998 amendment, OSM identified and (2) to provide that the Director of Mexico program, the amendment, a concerns and notified New Mexico of the New Mexico program will prohibit listing of any scheduled public hearings, the concerns by letter dated January 7, mining in the vicinity of the aquifer or and all written comments received in 1999 (administrative record No. NM– may limit the percentage of coal response to this document at the 815). New Mexico responded in a letter extraction to protect the aquifer and addresses listed below during normal dated December 1, 1999, by submitting other water supplies unless a finding business hours, Monday through Friday, a revised amendment (administrative can be made, base on detailed excluding holidays. You may receive record No. NM–816). documentation, that subsidence will not one free copy of the amendment by We announced receipt of the cause material damage to, or reduce the contacting OSM’s Albuquerque Field proposed amendment in the December reasonable foreseeable use of, these Office. 22, 1999, Federal Register (63 FR features; Willis L. Gainer, Director, 71698), and invited public comment on its adequacy (administrative record No. (4) Subsidence control at 19 NMAC Albuquerque Field Office, Office of 8.2 2071.C, to prohibit underground Surface Mining Reclamation and NM–818). The public comment period ended on January 21, 2000. mining activities from being conducted Enforcement, 505 Marquette Avenue, beneath or in close proximity to any NW., Suite 1200, Albuquerque, New During our review of the December 1, 1999, revisions, OSM identified public buildings, including but not Mexico 87102. limited to churches, schools, hospitals, Mining and Minerals Division, New concerns and notified New Mexico of the concerns by letter dated March 28, courthouses and government offices, Mexico Energy & Minerals Department, unless the Director of the New Mexico 2040 South Pacheco Street, Santa Fe, 2000 (administrative record no. NM– 827). New Mexico responded in a letter program, on the basis of detailed New Mexico 87505, Telephone: (505) subsurface information, determines that 827–5970. dated April 26, 2000, by submitting a revised amendment (administrative subsidence from those activities will not FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: record No. NM–829). cause material damage, or reduce a Willis L. Gainer, Telephone: (505) 248– New Mexico proposes further reasonably foreseeable use, to these 5096, Internet address: revisions to 19 NMAC 8.2 107.M(1) and structures and specifically authorizes [email protected]. 0(2), definitions of ‘‘material damage’’ the mining activities; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and ‘‘occupied residential dwelling and (5) Subsidence control at 19 NMAC I. Background on the New Mexico associated structures’’; 19 NMAC 8.2 8.2 2071.D, to correct a typographical Program 2071, subsidence control; and 19 NMAC error by replacing the term ‘‘permanent’’ 8.2 918.D, detailed plans of with ‘‘perennial’’; and On December 31, 1980, the Secretary underground mine workings. (6) Requirements for detailed plans of of the Interior conditionally approved Specifically, New Mexico prposes to underground mine workings at 19 the New Mexico program. General revise; NMAC 8.2 918.D, by adding a paragraph background information on the New (1) The definitions of ‘‘material that (1) requires that an permittee shall Mexico program, including the damage’’ and ‘‘occupied residential submit, consistent with a schedule Secretary’s findings, the disposition of dwelling and associated structures’’ at approved by the Director of the New comments, and the conditions of 19 NMAC 8.2 107.M(1) and O(2) to be Mexico program, a detailed plan of approval of the New Mexico program applicable to the rules at 19 NMAC 8.2 actual underground workings that can be found in the December 31, 1980, 2067; Federal Register (45 FR 86459). (2) Subsidence control at 19 NMAC includes maps and descriptions, as Subsequent actions concerning New 8.2 2071.A, by providing that the appropriate, of significant features of the Mexico’s program and program Director of the New Mexico program underground mine, including the size, amendments can be found at 30 CFR may (a) allow underground mining configuration, and approximate location 931.11, 931.15, 931.16, and 931.30. activities beneath or adjacent to beneath of pillars and entries, extraction ratios, or adjacent to any perennial stream or measures taken to prevent or minimize II. Proposed Amendment impoundment having a storage volume subsidence and related damage, areas of By letter dated November 13, 1998, of 20 acre-feet or more, if the Director, full extraction, and other information New Mexico submitted a proposed on the basis of detailed subsurface required by the regulatory authority, amendment (administrative record No. information, determines that subsidence and (2) provides, upon request of the NM–804) to its program pursuant to will not cause material damage, or a operator, that the information submitted SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). New reduction in a reasonably forseeable use, with the detailed plan may be held as Mexico submitted the proposed to streams, water bodies and associated confidential, in accordance with the amendment in response to the required structures, and (b) if material damage requirements of 19 NMAC 8.2 1104. program amendments at 30 CFR occurs, suspend underground mining In addition, New Mexico explained 931.16(o), (w), (x), (y) and (aa), and at until the subsidence control plan is that the State contains few bodies of its own initiative. modified to ensure prevention of further water 20-acre feet or more that are not OSM announced receipt of the material damage to such features or man-made impoundments and that proposed amendment in the December facilities; there are no naturally occurring bodies 3, 1998 Federal Register (63 FR 66772), (3) Subsidence control at 19 NMAC of water 20-acre feet or more in the coal provided an opportunity for a public 8.2 2071.B, to (1) require that fields in New Mexico. Therefore, New hearing or meeting on its substantive underground mining activities beneath Mexico’s proposed revisions at 19 adequacy, and invited public comment any aquifer, perennial stream or water NMAC 8.2 2071 refer to on its adequacy (administrative record body that serves as a significant source ‘‘impoundments’’ rather than ‘‘naturally No. NM–808). Because no one requested of water supply to a public water system occurring bodies of water 20-acre feet or a public hearing or meeting, none were must be conducted so as to avoid more.’’

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36103

III. Public Comment Procedures has determined that, to the extent a significant economic impact on a allowable by law, this rule meets the substantial number of small entities Written Comments applicable standards of subsections (a) under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Send your written comments to OSM and (b) of that section. However, these U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal at the address given above. Your written standards are not applicable to the that is the subject of this rule is based comments should be specific, pertain actual language of State regulatory upon counterpart Federal regulations for only to the issues proposed in this programs and program amendments which an economic analysis was rulemaking, and include explanations in since each such program is drafted and prepared and certification made that support of your recommendations. In promulgated by a specific State, not by such regulations would not have a the final rulemaking, we will not OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of significant economic effect upon a necessarily consider or include in the SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and substantial number of small entities. administrative record any comments the Federal regulations at 30 CFR Accordingly, this rule will ensure that received after the time indicated under 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), existing requirements previously DATES or at locations other than the decisions on proposed State regulatory promulgated by OSM will be Albuquerque Field Office. programs and program amendments implemented by the State. In making the Electronic Comments submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of whether the determination as to whether this rule Please submit Internet comments as submittal is consistent with SMCRA and would have a significant economic an ASCII file avoiding the use of special its implementing Federal regulations impact, the Department relied upon the characters and any form of encryption. and whether the other requirements of data and assumptions for the Please also include ‘‘Attn: SPATS No. 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have counterpart Federal regulations. NM–039–FOR’’ and your name and been met. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation that Executive Order 13132—Federalism Fairness Act we have received your Internet message, This rule does not have Federalism This rule is not a major rule under 5 contact the Albuquerque Field Office at implications. SMCRA delineates the U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business (505) 248–5096. roles of the Federal and State Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. Availability of Comments governments with regard to the This rule: (a) Does not have an annual regulation of surface coal mining and We will make comments, including effect on the economy of $100 million; reclamation operations. One of the (b) will not cause a major increase in names and addresses of respondents, purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a available for public review during costs or prices for consumers, nationwide program to protect society individual industries, geographic normal business hours. We will not and the environment from the adverse regions, or Federal, State or local consider anonymous comments. If effects of surface coal mining governmental agencies; and (c) does not individual respondents request operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of have significant adverse effects on confidentiality, we will honor their SMCRA requires that State laws request to the extent allowable by law. regulating surface coal mining and competition, employment, investment, Individual respondents who wish to reclamation operations be ‘‘in productivity, innovation, or the ability withhold their name or address from accordance with’’ the requirements of of U.S. based enterprises to compete public review, except for the city or SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that with foreign-based enterprises. This town, must state this prominently at the State programs contain rules and determination is based upon the fact beginning of their comments. We will regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ that the State submittal which is the make all submissions from regulations issued by the Secretary subject of this rule is based upon organizations or businesses, and from pursuant to SMCRA. counterpart Federal regulations for individuals identifying themselves as which an analysis was prepared and a National Environmental Policy Act representatives or officials of determination made that the Federal organizations or businesses, available Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. regulation was not considered a major for public review in their entirety. 1292(d)) provides that a decision on a rule. IV. Procedural Determinations proposed State regulatory program provision does not constitute a major Unfunded Mandates Executive Order 12630—Takings Federal action within the meaning of This rule will not impose a cost of section 102 (2)(C) of the National This rule does not have takings $100 million or more in any given year Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. implications. This determination is on any governmental entity or the 4332(2)(C)). A determination has been based on the analysis performed for the private sector. counterpart Federal regulations. made that such decisions are categorically excluded from the NEPA List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 931 Executive Order 12866—Regulatory process (516 DM 8.4.A). Planning and Review Intergovernmental relations, Surface Paperwork Reduction Act This rule is exempted from review by mining, Underground mining. the Office of Management and Budget This rule does not contain Dated: May 24, 2000. (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. information requirements that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Brent T. Wahlquist, Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.). Regional Director, Western Regional Reform Coordinating Center. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Department of the Interior has [FR Doc. 00–14357 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] conducted the reviews required by The Department of the Interior has BILLING CODE 4310±05±M section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and determined that this rule will not have

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36104 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR New Mexico 87505, Telephone: (505) definitions of ‘‘augmented seeding’’ and 827–5970. ‘‘interseeding’’ at 19 NMAC 8.2 Office of Surface Mining Reclamation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 107.A(20) and 107.I(8). and Enforcement Willis L. Gainer, Telephone: (505) 248– New Mexico proposes new revisions 5096, Internet address: to (1) the requirements for annual 30 CFR Part 931 [email protected]. reports at 19 NMAC 8.2 507.A(1); and (2) the requirements for demonstrating [SPATS NO NM±040±FOR] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (a) that the land has the capability of New Mexico Regulatory Program I. Background on the New Mexico supporting livestock grazing at 19 Program NMAC 8.2 2064; (b) the success of AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining ground cover and productivity at 19 Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. On December 31, 1980, the Secretary NMAC 8.2 1065.B(2) and (3); and (c) the of the Interior conditionally approved ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening and success of crop production at 19 NMAC the New Mexico program. General extension of public comment period and 2065.B(5)(iii). background information on the New opportunity for public hearing on Specifically, New Mexico proposes to Mexico program, including the proposed amendment. revise: Secretary’s findings, the disposition of (1) Section I.D, Establishment and SUMMARY: Office of Surface Mining comments, and the conditions of Monitoring of Revegetation Success Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) is approval of the New Mexico program Standards, of New Mexico’s proposed announcing receipt of revisions can be found in the December 31, 1980, Coal Mine Reclamation Program pertaining to a previously proposed Federal Register (45 FR 86459). Vegetation Standards to clarify that the amendment to the New Mexico Subsequent actions concerning New success of revegetation on reclaimed regulatory program (hereinafter, the Mexico’s program and program lands will be measured against the ‘‘New Mexico program’’) under the amendments can be found at 30 CFR general revegetation requirements at 19 Surface Mining Control and 931.11, 931.15, 931.16, and 931.30. NMAC 8.2 2060 in addition to standards Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The II. Proposed Amendment derived from an unmined reference area revisions to New Mexico’s proposed or technical standards; rules pertain to the Coal Mine By letter dated December 1, 1999 (2) Section II.B.1, Sampling Reclamation Program Vegetation (administrative record No. NM–816), Techniques, of New Mexico’s proposed Standards (including success standards, New Mexico submitted a proposed Coal Mine Reclamation Program sampling techniques, and normal amendment to its program pursuant to Vegetation Standards to require an husbandry practices), time frames SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). New operator to implement techniques to within the liability period for Mexico submitted the proposed improve the reliability of the ocular demonstrating success of revegetation, amendment in response to the required estimation method; and annual report requirements. The program amendments at 30 CFR (3) Section IV, Normal Husbandry amendment is intended to revise the 931.16(o), (w), (x), (y) and (aa), and at Practices, of New Mexico’s proposed New Mexico program to be consistent its own initiative. Coal Mine Reclamation Program with the corresponding Federal OSM announced receipt of the Vegetation Standards to (a) specify the regulations. proposed amendment in the December land uses, time frames, and size 22, 1999 Federal Register (64 FR limitations, if any, applicable to each DATE: Written comments must be 71700), provided an opportunity for a approved normal husbandry practice, received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., July 7, public hearing or meeting on its and (b) to clarify that in order for repair 2000. If requested, we will hold a public substantive adequacy, and invited of erosional features to be considered a hearing on the amendment on July 3, public comment on its adequacy normal husbandry practice, the 2000. We will accept requests to speak (administrative record No. NM–819). erosional features must be characteristic until 4:00 p.m., m.d.t., on June 22, 2000. Because no one requested a public of unmined lands in the regions and the ADDRESSES: You should mail or hand hearing or meeting, none were held. The damage must not be caused by a lack of deliver written comments to Willis L. public comment periods ended on planning, design, or implementation of Gainer at the address listed below. January 21, 2000. the mining and reclamation plan. You may review copies of the New During our review of the December 1, (4) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(1) to provide Mexico program, the amendment, a 1999, amendment, OSM identified that ground cover and productivity may listing of any scheduled public hearings, concerns and notified New Mexico of be equal to the technical standards and all written comments received in the concerns by letter dated February developed in accordance with New response to this document at the 17, 2000 (administration record no. Mexico’s proposed Coal Mine addresses listed below during normal NM–825). New Mexico responded in Reclamation Program Vegetation business hours, Monday through Friday, two letters dated April 26, 2000, by Standards, as an alternative to an excluding holidays. You may receive submitting (1) revisions to the December approved reference area; one free copy of the amendment by 1, 1999, amendment (administrative (5)(a) 19 NMAC 8.2 107.A(20), the contacting OSM’s Albuquerque Field record No. NM–830) and (2) additional definition of ‘‘augmented seeding’’ to Office. rule revisions never before submitted mean ‘‘seeding in excess of the normal Willis L. Gainer, Director, (administrative record No. NM–828). husbandry practices approved in the Albuquerque Field Office, Office of New Mexico proposes further Director’s Coal Mine Reclamation Surface Mining Reclamation and revisions to (1) sections I.D., II.B.1, and Program Vegetation Standards, or Enforcement, 505 Marquette Avenue, IV of New Mexico’s proposed Coal Mine reseeding with fertilization or irrigation, NW., Suite 1200, Albuquerque, New Reclamation Program Vegetation or reseeding in response to unsuccessful Mexico 87102. Standards; (2) requirements for revegetation in terms of adequate Mining and Minerals Division, New demonstrating success of ground cover germination or establishment or Mexico Energy & Minerals Department, and productivity of revegetation at 19 permanence,’’ and (b) 107.I(8), by 2040 South Pacheco Street, Santa Fe, NMAC 8.2 2065.B(1); and (3) the adding the definition ‘‘interseeding’’ to

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36105 mean ‘‘a secondary seeding practice into support of your recommendations. In audience who wish to speak, have been established vegetation cover in order to the final rulemaking, we will not heard. take advantage of climatic conditions necessarily consider or include in the Public Meeting that favor species requiring special administrative record any comments conditions for germination and received after the time indicated under If only one person requests an establishment, or to improve or alter the DATES or at locations other than the opportunity to speak, we may hold a composition between forage species and Albuquerque Field Office. public meeting rather than a public hearing. If you wish to meet with us to shrubs, or between warm and cool Electronic Comments season grasses;’’ discuss the amendment, please request (6) 19 NMAC 8.2 507.A(1), to require Please submit Internet comments as a meeting by contacting the person in an annual report, a current an ASCII file avoiding the use of special listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION topographic or orthophotographic map characters and any form of encryption. CONTACT. All such meetings are open to with five foot contour intervals of the Please also include ‘‘Attn: SPATS No. the public and, if possible, we will post same scale as the mining and NM–040–FOR’’ and your name and notices of meetings at the locations reclamation sequence maps found in the return address in your Internet message. listed under ADDRESSES. We will make approved permit with five foot contour If you do not receive a confirmation that a written summary of each meeting a intervals, on a single sheet, or series of we have received your Internet message, part of the administrative record. sheets, each sheet of the map being no contact the Albuquerque Field Office at IV. Procedural Determinations larger than four feet by four feet, with (505) 248–5096. Executive Order 12630—Takings the scale and all lines and symbols Availability of Comments clearly described in the legend; This rule does not have takings (7) 19 NMAC 8.2 2064 to require that We will make comments, including implications. This determination is an operator demonstrate, for at least two names and addresses of respondents, based on the analysis performed for the of the last four years rather than the last available for public review during counterpart Federal regulations. two years, that the reclaimed land has normal business hours. We will not Executive Order 12866—Regulatory the capability of supporting livestock consider anonymous comments. If Planning and Review grazing at rates approximately equal to individual respondents request that for similar non-mined lands when confidentiality, we will honor their This rule is exempted from review by the approved postmining land use is request to the extent allowable by law. the Office of Management and Budget range or pasture land; Individual respondents who wish to (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. (8) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(2), withhold their name or address from public review, except for the city or Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice concerning the liability period in areas Reform of more than 26.0 inches average annual town, must state this prominently at the precipitation, to require that ground beginning of their comments. We will The Department of the Interior has cover and productivity shall equal or make all submissions from conducted the reviews required by exceed the approved standard for two of organizations or businesses, and from section 3 of Executive Order 12988 and the last four years, rather than the last individuals identifying themselves as has determined that, to the extent two years, of the responsibility period; representatives or officials of allowable by law, this rule meets the (9) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(3), organizations or businesses, available applicable standards of subsections (a) concerning the liability periods in areas for public review in their entirety. and (b) of that section. However, these of less than or equal to 26.0 inches standards are not applicable to the Public Hearing actual language of State regulatory average annual precipitation, to require If you wish to speak at the public programs and program amendments that ground cover and productivity shall hearing, contact the person listed under since each such program is drafted and equal the approved standard for at least FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by promulgated by a specific State, not by two of the last four years, starting no 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. on June 22, 2000. If you OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of sooner than year eight, rather than the are disabled and need special SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and last two years, of the responsibility accommodations to attend a public the Federal regulations at 30 CFR period; and hearing, contact the person listed under (10) 19 NMAC 8.2 2065.B(5)(iii), 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We concerning the demonstration of success decisions on proposed State regulatory will arrange the location and time of the of areas to be used for cropland, to programs and program amendments hearing with those persons requesting require that crop production from the submitted by the States must be based the hearing. If no one requests an mined area shall be equal to or greater solely on a determination of whether the opportunity to speak, we will not hold than that of the approved standard for submittal is consistent with SMCRA and the hearing. two of the last four growing seasons, its implementing Federal regulations To assist the transcriber and ensure an and whether the other requirements of rather than the last two consecutive accurate record, we request, if possible, growing seasons, of the five or ten year 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have that each person who speaks at a public been met. liability period, starting no sooner than hearing provide us with a written copy year eight of the ten year liability of his or her comments. The public Executive Order 13132—Federalism period. hearing will continue on the specified This rule does not have Federalism III. Public Comment Procedures date until everyone scheduled to speak implication. SMCRA delineates the has been heard. If you are in the roles of the Federal and State Written Comments audience and have not been scheduled governments with regard to the Send your written comments to OSM to speak and wish to do so, you will be regulation of surface coal mining and at the address given above. Your written allowed to speak after those who have reclamation operations. One of the comments should be specific, pertain been scheduled. We will end the purposes of SMCRA is to ‘‘establish a only to the issues proposed in this hearing after everyone scheduled to nationwide program to protect society rulemaking, and include explanations in speak and others present in the and the environment from the adverse

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36106 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules effects of surface coal mining competition, employment, investment, comments and submit your comments operations.’’ Section 503(a)(1) of productivity, innovation, or the ability in writing to: Docket Management, SMCRA requires that State laws of U.S. based enterprises to compete Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, regulating surface coal mining and with foreign-based enterprises. This Washington, DC 20590. Alternatively, reclamation operations be ‘‘in determination is based upon the fact you may submit your comments accordance with’’ the requirements of that the State submittal which is the electronically by e-mail at http:// SMCRA. Section 503(a)(7) requires that subject of this rule is based upon dms.dot.gov. State programs contain rules and counterpart Federal regulations for You may call the Docket at 202–366– regulations ‘‘consistent with’’ which an analysis was prepared and a 9324, and visit it from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 regulations issued by the Secretary determination made that the Federal p.m., Monday through Friday. pursuant to SMCRA. regulation was not considered a major FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For rule. National Environmental Policy Act non-legal issues, you may call Dr. Unfunded Mandates William Fan, Office of Crashworthiness Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. Standards, at (202) 366–4922, facsimile 1292(d)) provides that a decision on a This rule will not impose a cost of (202) 366–4329, electronic mail proposed State regulatory program $100 million or more in any given year ‘‘[email protected]’’. For legal issues, provision does not constitute a major on any governmental entity or the you may call Otto Matheke, Office of the Federal action within the meaning of private sector. Chief Counsel, at 202–366–5263. section 102(2)(C) of the National SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 931 5, 2000, NHTSA published a notice of 4332(2)(C)). A determination has been Intergovernmental relations, Surface proposed rulemaking proposing to made that such decisions are mining, Underground mining. amend the upper interior impact categorically excluded from the NEPA Dated: May 24, 2000. requirements of Standard No. 201, process (516 DM 8.4.A). Brent T. Wahlquist, Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, Paperwork Reduction Act Regional Director, Western Regional in several respects. One proposal This rule does not contain Coordinating Center. addressed the minimum distance information collection requirements that [FR Doc. 00–14358 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] between certain target points on vertical require approval by OMB under the BILLING CODE 4310±05±M surfaces inside a vehicle. Compliance Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. with the upper interior impact 3507 et seq.). requirements is determined, in part, by DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION measuring the forces experienced by a Regulatory Flexibility Act test device known as the Free Motion The Department of the Interior has National Highway Traffic Safety Headform (FMH) when it impacts determined that this rule will not have Administration certain target points in the vehicle a significant economic impact on a interior. To ensure that the damage substantial number of small entities 49 CFR Part 571 caused by the testing of one target point does not overlap the testing of nearby under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 [Docket No. 00±7145] U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal target points, the standard specifies that that is the subject of this rule is based [RIN No. 2127±AH61] tested targets be at least a certain upon counterpart Federal regulations for distance apart; currently 150 mm (6 which an economic analysis was Federal Motor Vehicle Safety inches). We proposed expanding this prepared and certification made that Standards; Head Impact Protection minimum distance to 200 mm (8 inches) for tests performed on certain vertical such regulations would not have a AGENCY: National Highway Traffic significant economic effect upon a Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. surfaces in order to alleviate concerns substantial number of small entities. that the current distance is not large ACTION: Extension of comment period. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that enough to prevent the FMH impact area existing requirements previously SUMMARY: This document grants a for one target point from overlapping promulgated by OSM will be request to extend the comment period the FMH impact areas for nearby target implemented by the State. In making the on an agency proposal to amend the points in the same vehicle. We also determination as to whether this rule upper interior impact requirements of proposed adding target points for pillar- would have a significant economic its standard on occupant protection in like structures that do not meet the impact, the Department relied upon the interior impact by modifying the definition of ‘‘pillar,’’ i.e., certain door data and assumptions for the minimum distance between certain frames and vertical seat belt mounting counterpart Federal regulations. target points on vertical surfaces inside structures and are therefore not a vehicle and by adding target points for currently subject to Standard No. 201. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement We tentatively concluded that these Fairness Act pillar-like structures that do not meet the definition of ‘‘pillar,’’ i.e., certain structures are the equivalent of ‘‘pillars’’ This rule is not a major rule under 5 door frames and vertical seat belt now covered by the Standard. U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business mounting structures. The NPRM specified a comment Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. closing date of June 5, 2000 (60 days This rule: (a) Does not have an annual DATES: Extended comment closing date: after date of publication). However, on effect on the economy of $100 million; Comments on the April 5, 2000 May 16, 2000, we received a request for (b) Will not cause a major increase in proposal, 65 FR 17842, Docket No. 00– an extension of the comment closing costs or prices for consumers, 7145, must be received by the agency on date from Advocates for Highway and individual industries, geographic or before close of business on July 5, Auto Safety (Advocates). Advocates regions, or Federal, State or local 2000. stated that it wished to provide governmental agencies; and (c) Does not ADDRESSES: You should mention the comments on our proposal, but was have significant adverse effects on docket number of this document in your unable to do so in a timely fashion due

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Proposed Rules 36107 to the organization’s limited resources and opportunity to express their views comment period for an additional 60 and a competing need to comment on a on the proposed amendments to days is denied, but the comment period number of other pending regulatory Standard No. 201, NHTSA believes that is extended for a period of 30 days to proposals affecting highway and there is good cause for the extension of July 5, 2000. highway safety. Therefore, Advocates the comment period. However, the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, requested an additional 60 days for agency does not believe that an 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority is submission of its comments. extension of 60 days is warranted or at 49 CR 1.50. Particularly because Advocates is a would be in the public interest. NHTSA prominent public interest organization Issued on June 2, 2000. has determined that it is appropriate to dedicated to the consideration of issues Stephen R. Kratzke, extend the comment period for 30 days related to highway and vehicle safety, Associate Administrator for Safety the agency is interested in its comments. and that such extension is consistent Performance Standards. Thus, in order to provide the Advocates with the public interest. Accordingly, [FR Doc. 00–14277 Filed 6–2–00; 12:34 pm] and other interested parties ample time the Advocates request to extend the BILLING CODE 4910±59±P

VerDate 112000 13:12 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07JNP1 36108

Notices Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110

Wednesday, June 7, 2000

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER symbol and slogan, authorized the long the individual, corporation, or contains documents other than rules or Forest Service to manage the use of the organization has been in business; the proposed rules that are applicable to the slogan and symbol, authorized the products the individual, corporation or public. Notices of hearings and investigations, licensing of the symbol for commercial organization sells or plans to sell; the committee meetings, agency decisions and use, and provided for continued geographical location from which the rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency protection of the symbol by stating that products will be sold; the projected statements of organization and functions are Woodsy Owl may only be used by sales volume; and how the individual, examples of documents appearing in this permission of the Forest Service. Part corporation, or organization plans to section. 272 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal market the products. Regulations authorizes the Chief of the If Forest Service personnel determine Forest Service to approve commercial that granting a license to the individual, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE use of the Woodsy Owl symbol and to corporation, or organization for the collect of royalty fees for such use. purpose of using the Woodsy Owl Forest Service Woodsy Owl may be replicated as a symbol for commercial use would be in plush toy and the Woodsy Owl symbol the best interest of the agency and Information Collection; Request for or logo may be replicated on items such would promote the Woodsy Owl Comments; Woodsy Owl Official as tee shirts, mugs, pins, figurines, messages, a license contract would be Licensee Royalty Statement ornaments, storybooks, stickers, and mailed to the individual, corporation or AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. toys. organization. The contract would have The message to the public inherent ACTION: Notice. to be completed and returned to the with the Woodsy Owl symbol is about Forest Service. Once the contract has SUMMARY: In accordance with the caring for the environment (Thus the been by signed by an authorized Forest Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the slogans ‘‘Give a Hoot, Don’t Pollute’’ Service employee and by the individual Forest Service announces its intention and ‘‘Lend a Hand, Care for the Land’’). or the corporate or organizational to reinstate an information collection. The goal of Woodsy Owl is to inspire representative, the newly licensed entity The information will enable the Forest children to observe the natural world will have to submit to the Forest Service Service to collect royalty fees for the around them, teach children ecological the agreed upon advanced guaranteed commercial use of the Woodsy Owl principles, and motivate children to join royalty payment. The individual, symbol and to assess the effectiveness of in specific actions to help care for the corporation, or organization also will licensing the Woodsy Owl symbol for environment. submit a quarterly report to the agency, commercial use. Information will be Description of Information Collection using the Woodsy Owl Licensee Royalty Statement Form, along with any royalty collected from individuals and from for- The following describes the fees garnered from sales that have profit businesses and non-profit information collection to be reinstated: organizations. Title: Woodsy Owl Official Licensee exceeded the advanced guaranteed royalty payment. DATES: Comments must be received in Royalty Statement. When making the quarterly reports, writing on or before August 7, 2000. OMB Number: 0596–0087. Expiration Date of Approval: October individuals, corporations, or ADDRESSES: All comments should be 31, 1999. organizations will be asked to provide addressed to the Office of Education Type of Request: Reinstatement of an information that includes the following: Conservation, National Symbols information collection previously a list of each item that will be sold with Coordinator, Forest Service, USDA, P.O. approved by the Office of Management the Woodsy Owl symbol; the projected Box 96090, Washington, D.C. 20090– and Budget. sales of each item; the price at which 6090. Abstract: The Forest Service National each item will be sold; the total sales Comments also may be submitted via Symbols Coordinator will evaluate the amount subject to the agency royalty facsimile to (202) 690–5658 or by email fee; the royalty fee due based on sales _ data to determine if an individual, to: Education Conservation/ corporation, or organization, requesting quantity and price; a description and [email protected]. a license to use the Woodsy Owl symbol itemization of any deductions, such as The public may inspect comments commercially, should be granted a fees waived or previously paid as part received at the Office of Education license or, if currently licensed, to of the advance royalty payment which Conservation, Room 1SE, Forest Service, determine the royalty fee the licensed is their sales quantity guarantee; the USDA, 201 14th Street SW., entity must pay to the agency based on new total royalty fee the business or Washington, D.C. Visitors are urged to a percentage of the licensee’s total sales organization must pay after deductions; call ahead to (202) 205–5681 to facilitate and whether the licensed entity has met the running total amount of royalties entrance into the building. its stated objectives. accrued in that fiscal year; and the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An individual or corporation may typed name and signature of the Roberta Hilbruner, Conservation apply for a Woodsy Owl license by business or organizational employee Education, at (202) 205–5681. contacting Forest Service personnel by certifying the truth of the report. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: telephone, fax, e-mail, or by writing to Data gathered in this information the address listed in the address section collection are not available from other Background of this notice. In the course of sources. The Woodsy Owl-Smoky Bear Act of communicating with the potential Estimate of Annual Burden: 30 1974 established the Woodsy Owl applicant, the agency will learn how minutes.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36109

Type of Respondents: For-profit Resources Conservation Service DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE businesses and non-profit organizations Regulations (7 CFR Part 650); the currently holding a Woodsy Owl license Natural Resources Conservation Service, Submission for OMB Review; or applying for such license. U.S. Department of Agriculture, gives Comment Request Estimated Annual Number of notice than an environmental impact DOC has submitted to the Office of Respondents: 10. statement is not being prepared for the Management and Budget (OMB) for Estimated Annual Number of Upper Deckers Creek Watershed Project, clearance the following proposal for Responses per Respondent: 4. Preston and Monongalia Counties, West collection of information under the Estimated Total Annual Burden on Virginia. provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Respondents: 20 hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Comment Is Invited William J. Hartman, State Agency: U.S. Census Bureau. Title: 2001 Residential Finance The agency invites comments on the Conservationist, Natural Resources Survey. following: (a) Whether the proposed Conservation Service, 75 High Street, collection of information is necessary Form Number(s): D–2900, D–2900(L), Room 301, Morgantown, West Virginia, D–2901, D–2901(L), D-2901(FE)(L), D– for the stated purposes and the proper 26505, telephone 304–284–7545. performance of the functions of the 2902, D–2902(L), D–2904, D–2905(L). agency, including whether the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency Approval Number: None. information will have practical or environmental assessment of this Type of Request: New collection. Burden: 77,500 hours. scientific utility; (b) the accuracy of the federally assisted action indicates that Number of Respondents: 330,000. agency’s estimate of the burden of the the project will not cause significant Avg Hours Per Response: 14 minutes. proposed collection of information, local, regional, or national impacts on Needs and Uses: The Residential including the validity of the the environment. As a result of these Finance Survey (RFS) provides data methodology and assumptions used; (c) findings, William J. Hartman, State about the financing of nonfarm, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Conservationist, has determined that the privately-owned residential properties clarity of the information to be preparation and review of an in the United States. RFS data, in collected; and (d) ways to minimize the environmental impact statement are not conjunction with statistics from other burden of the collection of information needed for this project. sources, are used in assessing public on respondents, including the use of The project purpose is water quality policies affecting real estate, mortgage automated, electronic, mechanical, or improvement through acid mine banking, economic policy, social other technological collection drainage remediation. Planned actions welfare, and related areas of concern, techniques or other forms of information and in developing and evaluating technology. include mine spoil regrading, highwall elimination, revegetation, limestone proposals about them. The data are Use of Comments channels, passive treatment systems, particularly useful to economists and All comments received in response to grouting, and addition of limestone financial analysts who guide and this notice, including names and fines to streams. counsel home and apartment builders, addresses when provided, will become financial institutions and institutional The Finding Of No Significant Impact investors, producers of building a matter of public record. Comments (FONSI) has been forwarded to the will be summarized and included in the materials, real estate companies, Environmental Protection Agency and community planners, and government request for Office of Management and to various Federal, State, and local Budget approval. planners at the Federal, state, and local agencies and interested parties. A levels. Dated: June 1, 2000. limited number of copies of the FONSI The RFS has been conducted as part Robin L. Thompson, are available to fill single copy requests of the decennial census since 1950. A Acting Deputy Chief, State and Private at the above address. Basic data continuation of the RFS is necessary Forestry. developed during the environmental because the dramatic changes in the real [FR Doc. 00–14218 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] assessment are on file and may be estate finance market which have taken BILLING CODE 3410±11±P reviewed by contacting William J. place in the 1990’s give no indication of Hartman. abating in the next decade. The changes in the next 5 to 10 years may be even DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE No administrative action on implementation of the proposal will be more dramatic than those of the past taken until 30 days after the date of this decade. It is essential for policy Natural Resources Conservation planning and formulation within the publication in the Federal Register. Service government and for accurate market (This activity is listed in the Catalog of Upper Deckers Creek Watershed, analysis in the private sector that Federal Domestic Assistance under NO. timely, accurate, and comprehensive Preston and Monongalia Counties, 10.904, Watershed Protection and Flood West Virginia benchmark data be available on the Prevention, and is subject to the provisions financing of residential properties. AGENCY: Natural Resources of Executive Order 12372, which requires Affected Public: Individuals or Conservation Service, Agriculture. intergovernmental consultation with State households, Businesses or other for- and local officials.) ACTION: Notice of a Finding of No profit organizations, Federal Significant Impact. William J. Hartman, Government. State Conservationist. Frequency: One-time only. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) [FR Doc. 00–14266 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. of the National Environmental Policy Legal Authority: Title 13 USC, Section BILLING CODE 3410±16±M Act of 1969; the Council of 141. Environmental Quality Regulations (40 OMB Desk Officer: Susan Schechter, CFR Part 1500); and the Natural (202) 395–5103.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36110 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Copies of the above information academia on the domestic manufacturer/exporter of the subject collection proposal can be obtained by manufacturing sector. merchandise to the United States, and calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, In this request, the total annual the period May 1, 1998 through April DOC Forms Clearance Officer, (202) burden hours are revised upward to 30, 1999. We find that Yieh Hsing 482–3272, Department of Commerce, reflect an increase in the survey panel. Enterprise Co. Ltd., (Yieh Hsing) made room 5033, 14th and Constitution The conversion of the survey from the sales of subject merchandise below Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) normal value; if these preliminary via the Internet at [email protected]). system to the North American Industry results are adopted in our final results Written comments and Classification System (NAICS) will of administrative review, we will recommendations for the proposed result in new and reconfigured industry instruct the Customs Service to assess information collection should be sent categories, which will require a larger antidumping duties based on the within 30 days of publication of this survey panel to ensure sufficient difference between the export price and notice to Susan Schechter, OMB Desk coverage in all industries. the normal value. Regarding six other Officer, room 10201, New Executive Affected Public: Businesses, large and companies, we rescind the review. Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. small, or other for profit organizations. Interested parties are invited to Frequency: Monthly. comment on these preliminary results. Dated: June 1, 2000. Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary. Madeleine Clayton, Parties who submit argument in this Legal Authority: Title 13, U.S.C., proceeding are requested to submit with Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Sections 131 and 182. Information Officer. the argument (1) A statement of the OMB Desk Officer: Susan Schechter, issue and (2) a brief summary of the [FR Doc. 00–14221 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] (202) 395–5103. argument (no longer than five pages, BILLING CODE 3510±07±P Copies of the above information including footnotes). collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, EFFECTIVE DATE: June 7, 2000. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DOC Forms Clearance Officer, (202) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 482–3272, Department of Commerce, Thomas Killiam or Robert James, Import Submission for OMB Review; room 5033, 14th and Constitution Administration, International Trade Comment Request Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or Administration, U.S. Department of DOC has submitted to the Office of via the Internet at [email protected]). Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Management and Budget (OMB) for Written comments and Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; clearance the following proposal for recommendations for the proposed telephone (202) 482–5222 or (202) 482– collection of information under the information collection should be sent 0649, respectively. provisions of the Paperwork Reduction within 30 days of publication of this Applicable Statute Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). notice to Susan Schechter, OMB Desk Unless otherwise indicated, all Agency: U.S. Census Bureau. Officer, room 10201, New Executive Title: Manufacturers’ Shipments, Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as Inventories, and Orders Survey. amended (the Act) are references to the Dated: June 1, 2000. provisions effective January 1, 1995, the Form Number(s): M–3(SD), M3–SD(I), Madeleine Clayton, M3–1–L1. effective date of the amendments made Management Analyst, Office of the Chief to the Act by the Uruguay Round Agency Approval Number: 0607– Information Officer. 0008. Agreements Act. In addition, unless [FR Doc. 00–14222 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Type of Request: Revision of a otherwise indicated, all citations to the currently approved collection. BILLING CODE 3510±07±P Department’s regulations are to the Burden: 24,000 hours. regulations codified at 19 CFR Part 351 Number of Respondents: 6,000 (1998). DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE monthly. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Avg. Hours Per Response: 20 minutes. International Trade Administration Needs and Uses: The Census Bureau Background conducts the M3 survey, one of the [A±583±008] On May 28, 1999, the petitioners, principal Federal economic indicators, Allied Tube & Conduit Corp., to collect monthly manufacturing data Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Wheatland Tube Company, and the from a sample of firms in the Pipes and Tubes From Taiwan: Sawhill Tubular Division of Armco Inc., manufacturing sector of the economy. Preliminary Results of Antidumping requested reviews of seven Taiwanese Data requested are shipments, new Duty Administrative Review and Partial companies: An Mau Steel Co. (now orders, unfilled orders, total inventory, Rescission of Review renamed Sheng Yu Steel Co. Ltd., and materials and supplies, work-in-process AGENCY: Import Administration, hereafter referred to as Sheng Yu), Far and finished goods. The data are used International Trade Administration, East Machinery Co., Ltd. (FEMCO), Kao to analyze short- and long-term trends Department of Commerce. Hsing Chang Iron & Steel Corporation in the manufacturing sector and as ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of (KHC), Tai Feng Industries Ltd. (TFI), related to other sectors of the economy. antidumping duty administrative review Yieh Hsing, Yu Din Steel Co. Ltd. (Yu The shipments and inventory data are and rescission in part. Din), and Yieh Loong Co., Ltd. (Yieh essential inputs into the gross domestic Loong). product accounts, while the orders data SUMMARY: In response to a request from We initiated the reviews on June 30, are direct inputs into the leading the petitioners, the Department of 1999 (64 FR 35124). In response to our economic indicator series. The survey Commerce (the Department) is requests for information, FEMCO, also provides valuable and timely data conducting an administrative review of ShengYu, and Yieh Loong reported that for economic planning and analysis to the antidumping duty order on certain they made no U.S. sales or shipments of business firms, trade associations, circular welded steel pipes and tubes subject merchandise during the period research and consulting agencies, and from Taiwan. The review covers one of review (POR). On inquiry by the

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36111

Department, Customs did not report any Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the differences in the physical shipments by these companies during United States (HTSUS) item numbers characteristics of the merchandise, the POR. On September 2, 1999, 7306.30.5025, 7306.30.5032, pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of petitioners withdrew their request as to 7306.30.5040, and 7306.30.5055. the Act. Yu Din, KHC and Yieh Loong. Although the HTSUS subheadings are Sales Below Cost Investigation Concerning TFI, that company ceased provided for convenience and customs operations in November 1983. See purposes, the written description of the In accordance with section 773(b)(1) Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and merchandise under review is of the Act, in determining whether to Tubes from Taiwan; Final Results of dispositive. disregard home market sales made at Administrative Review of Antidumping prices below COP, we examined Fair Value Comparisons Duty Order, 51 FR 43946 (December 5, whether such sales were made within 1986). For these reasons we rescind the To determine whether sales of subject an extended period of time in review with respect to FEMCO, KHC, merchandise in the United States were substantial quantities, and whether such Sheng Yu, TFI, Yieh Loong and Yu Din, made at less than fair value, we sales were made at prices which would in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d). compared export price (EP) to the permit recovery of all costs within a In the most recently completed review normal value (NV), as described in the reasonable period of time. of Yieh Hsing, the Department ‘‘Export Price’’ and ‘‘Normal Value’’ Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the disregarded below-cost home market sections of this notice. In accordance Act, where less than 20 percent of a sales which failed the cost test. See with section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we respondent’s sales of a given model Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel calculated monthly weighted-average were at prices less than COP, we did not Pipes and Tubes From Taiwan: Final prices for NV and compared these to disregard any below-cost sales of that Results of Antidumping Duty individual U.S. transactions. model because these below-cost sales were not made in substantial quantities. Administrative Review, 64 FR 69488 Export Price (December 13, 1999). Therefore, We found that, for certain models, 20 pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of The Department treated Yieh Hsing’s percent or more of the home market the Act, the Department has a sales to the United States as EP sales, as sales were sold at below-cost prices. reasonable basis to believe or suspect defined in section 772(a) of the Act, Where 20 percent or more of a that Yieh Hsing made sales in the home because the merchandise was sold to respondent’s home market sales of a market below the cost of production in unaffiliated U.S. purchasers prior to the given model were at prices less than the the current review period. Accordingly, date of importation and the constructed COP, we disregarded the below-cost in accordance with section 773(b) of the export price methodology was not sales because such sales were found to Act, on January 24, 2000, the warranted by the facts of the record. We be made (1) In substantial quantities Department initiated an investigation of based EP on the delivered, packed within an extended period of time and sales below cost. prices to unrelated purchasers in the (2) at prices which would not permit Under section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, United States. We made adjustments, recovery of all costs within a reasonable the Department may extend the where applicable, for foreign inland period of time, in accordance with deadline for completion of an freight, foreign brokerage charges, and section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act (i.e., the administrative review if it determines ocean freight in accordance with section sales were made at prices below the that it is not practicable to complete the 772(c) of the Act. weighted-average per unit COP for the review within the statutory time limit of Normal Value POR). We used the remaining above-cost 365 days. On January 28, 2000, the sales as the basis of determining NV if Department extended the time limit for In order to determine whether there such sales existed, in accordance with the preliminary results to May 30, 2000. were sufficient sales of certain circular section 773(b)(1). See Extension of Time Limits for welded carbon steel pipes and tubes in Constructed Value Antidumping Duty Administrative the home market (HM) to serve as a Review, 65 FR 6359 (February 9, 2000). viable basis for calculating NV, we In accordance with section 773(e)(1) compared the volume of home market of the Act, we calculated constructed Period of Review sales of foreign like product to the value (CV) based on the sum of the The review covers the period May 1, volume of subject merchandise sold in respondent’s cost of materials, 1998 through April 30, 1999. The the United States, in accordance with fabrication, and general expenses. In Department is conducting this review in section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. Yieh accordance with section 773(e)(2)(A) of accordance with section 751 of the Act. Hsing’s aggregate volume of HM sales of the Act, we based selling, general, and the foreign like product were greater administrative (SG&A) expenses and Scope of the Review than five percent of its aggregate volume profit on the amounts incurred and Imports covered by this review are of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise. realized by Yieh Hsing in connection shipments of certain circular welded Therefore, we have based NV on HM with the production and sale of the carbon steel pipes and tubes. The sales. In accordance with section foreign like product in the ordinary Department defines such merchandise 773(a)(6) of the Act, we adjusted NV, course of trade for consumption in the as welded carbon steel pipes and tubes where appropriate, by deducting home home market. For selling expenses, we of circular cross section, with walls not market packing expenses and adding used the weighted-average HM selling thinner than 0.065 inch and 0.375 inch U.S. packing expenses. We also made expenses. Pursuant to section 773(e)(3) or more but not over 41⁄2 inches in deductions from NV for HM inland of the Act, we included U.S. packing in outside diameter. These products are freight, early payment discounts, and CV. commonly referred to in the industry as other discounts. We made an ‘‘standard pipe’’ and are produced to adjustment to NV for differences in Product Comparisons various American Society for Testing credit expenses, pursuant to section Where there were no Materials specifications, most notably 773(a)(6)(C) of the Act. We made contemporaneous sales of identical or A–53, A–120, or A–135. Standard pipe adjustments to NV, where appropriate, similar foreign like product in the is currently classified under for differences in costs attributable to comparison market to compare to U.S.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36112 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices sales, we compared U.S. sales to most publication of this notice. Interested the merchandise; and (4) for all other similar home market merchandise or to parties may also submit written producers and/or exporters of this CV. arguments in case briefs on these merchandise, the cash deposit rate shall preliminary results within 30 days of be 9.7%, the ‘‘all others’’ rate Level of Trade the date of publication of this notice. established in the LTFV investigation. In accordance with section Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised These deposit requirements, when 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the extent in case briefs, may be filed no later than imposed, shall remain in effect until practicable, we determine NV based on five days after the time limit for filing publication of the final results of the sales in the comparison market at the case briefs. Parties who submit next administrative review. same level of trade (LOT). See, e.g., arguments are requested to submit with This notice also serves as a Certain Carbon Steel Plate from South each argument a statement of the issue preliminary reminder to importers of Africa, Final Determination of Sales at and a brief summary of the argument. their responsibility under 19 CFR Less Than Fair Value, 62 FR 61731 , All memoranda to which we refer in 351.401(f)(2) to file a certificate 61732–33 (November 19, 1998). Yieh this notice can be found in the public regarding the reimbursement of Hsing provided information with reading room, located in the Central antidumping duties prior to liquidation respect to its selling activities in both Records Unit, room B–009 of the main of the relevant entries during this period markets. Yieh Hsing offers each of its Department of Commerce building. Any of review. Failure to comply with this three categories of home market hearing, if requested, will be held two requirement could result in the customers the same degree of sales days after the scheduled date for Secretary’s presumption that support, including general technical submission of rebuttal briefs. reimbursement of antidumping duties advice and sale-specific warranty The Department will publish the final occurred and the subsequent assessment service. We therefore determine that results of this administrative review, of double antidumping duties. Yieh Hsing sells to one level of trade in including a discussion of its analysis of This administrative review and notice the home market. For its U.S. customers, issues raised in any case or rebuttal brief are issued and published in accordance Yieh Hsing provided freight and or at a hearing. The Department will with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of delivery arrangements, but no other issue final results of this review within the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). services; otherwise, the levels of 120 days of publication of these Dated: May 30, 2000. customer assistance and sales support preliminary results. Troy H. Cribb, which Yieh Hsing provided its home Upon completion of the final results market and U.S. customers were not in this review, the Department shall Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. significantly different. For these reasons determine, and the Customs Service we determine that Yieh Hsing’s sales in shall assess, antidumping duties on all [FR Doc. 00–14351 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the two markets were at the same LOT, appropriate entries. In accordance with BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P and no LOT adjustment is warranted. 19 CFR 351.212 (b), we have calculated an importer/customer-specific Sales Comparisons DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE assessment rate based on the ratio of the To determine whether sales of certain total amount of antidumping duties International Trade Administration circular welded carbon steel pipes and calculated for the examined sales to the tubes in the United States were made at quantity of those same sales. This [A±588±836] less than NV, we compared EP to the Department will issue appraisement Polyvinyl Alcohol from Japan: NV, as described in the ‘‘Export Price’’ instructions on each exporter directly to Preliminary Results of Antidumping and ‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of this the Customs Service. notice. In accordance with section Furthermore, the following deposit Duty Administrative Review 777(A)(d)(d) of the Act, we calculated requirements will be effective upon AGENCY: Import Administration, monthly weighted-average prices for NV completion of the final results of this International Trade Administration, and compared these to individual U.S. administrative review for all shipments Department of Commerce. transactions. of certain circular welded carbon steel ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of Where there were no above-cost sales pipes and tubes from Taiwan entered, or antidumping duty administrative of identical merchandise in the home withdrawn from warehouse, for review. market made in the ordinary course of consumption on or after the publication trade to compare to U.S. sales, we date of the final results of this SUMMARY: In response to a request by compared U.S. sales to most similar administrative review, as provided for Kuraray Co., Ltd., a producer and home market merchandise, based on the by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The exporter of polyvinyl alcohol from information provided by Yieh Hsing in cash deposit rates for Yieh Hsing will be Japan, the Department of Commerce is response to our antidumping the rate established in the final results conducting an administrative review of questionnaire. of this administrative review, except the antidumping duty order on Preliminary Results of Review that no cash deposit will be required if polyvinyl alcohol from Japan. The the rate is de minimis, i.e., less than period of review is May 1, 1998, through We preliminarily determine that the 0.50 percent; (2) for previously reviewed April 30, 1999. following margins exist for the period or investigated companies not listed We preliminarily find that sales of May 1, 1998 through April 31, 1999: above, the cash deposit rate will subject merchandise have been made continue to be the company-specific rate below normal value. If these Manufactuer/ Margin Exporter Period (percent) published for the most recent period; (3) preliminary results are adopted in our if the exporter is not a firm covered in final results of administrative review, Yieh Hsing ...... 5/1/98±4/30/ 1.63 this review, a prior review, or the we will instruct the Customs Service to 99 original LTFV investigation, but the assess antidumping duties on all manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate appropriate entries. Interested parties Interested parties may request a will be the rate established for the most are invited to comment on these hearing not later than 30 days after recent period for the manufacturer of preliminary results.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36113

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 7, 2000. On January 21, 2000, the Department average price of sales of the foreign like FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: published a notice postponing the product made in the ordinary course of Barbara Wojcik-Betancourt, at (202) preliminary results of this review until trade (see section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the 482–0629, or Brian Smith, at (202) 482– May 30, 2000 (65 FR 3418). The Act). 1766, Import Administration, Department conducted verification of Product Comparisons International Trade Administration, the company’s response from February U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 21 through March 17, 2000, pursuant to In accordance with section 771(16) of Street and Constitution Avenue, section 782(i)(2) of the Act. In April the Act, we considered all products produced by Kuraray covered by the Washington, D.C. 20230. 2000, the Department issued its verification report. description in the ‘‘Scope of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Review’’ section, above, to be foreign The Applicable Statute and Regulations Scope of Review like products for purposes of The product covered by this review is determining appropriate product Unless otherwise indicated, all PVA. PVA is a dry, white to cream- comparisons to U.S. sales. We compared citations to the statute are references to colored, water-soluble synthetic U.S. sales to sales made in the home the provisions effective January 1, 1995, polymer. This product consists of market within the contemporaneous the effective date of the amendments polyvinyl alcohols hydrolyzed in excess window period, which extends from made to the Tariff Act of 1930, as of 85 percent, whether or not mixed or three months prior to the U.S. sale until amended (‘‘the Act’’), by the Uruguay diluted with defoamer or boric acid. two months after the sale. Where there Round Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’). In Excluded from this review are PVAs were no sales of identical merchandise addition, unless otherwise indicated, all covalently bonded with acetoacetylate, made in the home market in the references are made to the Department carboxylic acid, or sulfonic acid ordinary course of trade, we compared of Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) final uniformly present on all polymer chains U.S. sales to sales of the most similar regulations at 19 C.F.R. Part 351 (April in a concentration equal to or greater foreign like product made in the 1999). than two mole percent, and PVAs ordinary course of trade. In making the Case History covalently bonded with silane product comparisons, we matched foreign like products based on the On May 14, 1996, the Department of uniformly present on all polymer chains in a concentration equal to or greater physical characteristics reported by the Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) respondent in the following order: published in the Federal Register an than one-tenth of one mole percent. PVA in fiber form is not included in the viscosity, hydrolysis, particle size, antidumping duty order on polyvinyl tackifier, defoamer, ash, color, volatiles, alcohol (‘‘PVA’’) from Japan (61 FR scope of this review. The merchandise under review is and visual impurities. 24286). On May 19, 1999, the currently classifiable under subheading Department published a notice Export Price and Constructed Export 3905.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff providing an opportunity to request an Price Schedule of the United States administrative review of this order for (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS During the POR, Kuraray sold subject the period May 1, 1998, through April subheading is provided for convenience merchandise to the U.S. market (1) 30, 1999 (64 FR 27235). On May 28, and customs purposes, our written directly through its wholly-owned U.S. 1999, we received a request for an description of the scope is dispositive. affiliate (Kuraray America Inc.) administrative review from Kuraray Co., (hereafter referred to as Kuraray Ltd. (‘‘Kuraray’’). On June 30, 1999, we Period of Review America); (2) through Kuraray America published a notice of initiation of this The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is May via its wholly-owned home market review for Kuraray (64 FR 35124). 1, 1998, through April 30, 1999. affiliate (Kuraray Trading Co., Ltd.) On July 9, 1999, we issued an (hereafter referred to as Kuraray antidumping questionnaire to Kuraray. Verification Trading); or (3) directly through The Department received a response As provided in section 782(i)(2) of the unaffiliated Japanese trading companies. from the company in September 1999. Act, we verified information provided With respect to one Japanese trading On October 4, 1999, the petitioner by Kuraray. We used standard company through which Kuraray sells submitted a timely allegation, pursuant verification procedures, including on- the subject merchandise, the petitioner to section 773(b) of the Act, that Kuraray site inspection of the manufacturer’s requested that the Department examine had made sales in the home market at facilities and examination of relevant whether Kuraray and that company are less than the cost of production sales and financial records. Our affiliates. Based on the verified data on (‘‘COP’’). Our analysis of the allegation verification results are outlined in the the record, we preliminarily find that indicated that there were reasonable verification reports placed in the case Kuraray and that Japanese trading grounds to believe or suspect that file. company are not affiliates under the Kuraray had sold PVA in the home criteria outlined in section 771(33) of market at prices at less than the COP. Fair Value Comparisons the Act and 19 C.F.R. 351.102(b) (see Accordingly, we initiated a COP To determine whether the Memorandum Regarding Affiliation investigation with respect to Kuraray, respondent’s sales of the subject from Team to Louis Apple, Office pursuant to section 773(b) of the Act merchandise to the United States were Director, dated May 30, 2000). We are (see Memorandum from Team to Louis made at below normal value, we also treating the sales made by Kuraray Apple, Office Director, dated November compared, where appropriate, the to the Japanese trading company during 10, 1999). export price and constructed export the POR as export price transactions, in We issued supplemental price (‘‘CEP’’) to the normal value, as accordance with section 772(a) of the questionnaires to Kuraray in November described below. In accordance with Act. 1999 and January 2000. Responses to section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we However, we carefully examined the these questionnaires were received in compared, where appropriate, the totality of circumstances surrounding December 1999 and February 2000, export prices and CEPs of individual the U.S. sales process for those U.S. respectively. transactions to the monthly weighted- sales which Kuraray made through its

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36114 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

U.S. affiliate. Based on the evidence on Kuraray had knowledge that the sale the quantity of foreign like product sold the record, we found that Kuraray either was destined for the U.S. market (see in the exporting country was sufficient sells the subject merchandise directly to verification exhibit K–58 of the April to permit a proper comparison with the its U.S. affiliate, or through Kuraray 19, 2000, Verification Report). We made sales of the subject merchandise to the Trading, which in turn sells the subject deductions, as appropriate, from the United States because Kuraray made merchandise to the U.S. affiliate. For starting price for foreign inland freight sales in its home market which were U.S. sales made only through its U.S. from the plant to the port of exportation, greater than five percent of its sales in affiliate, the U.S. customer contacts foreign warehousing expenses, foreign the U.S. market. Therefore, in Kuraray’s U.S. affiliate, who then places inland insurance, and foreign brokerage accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) the order with Kuraray. Kuraray and handling expenses, in accordance of the Act, we based normal value on arranges for delivery of the goods from with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. home market sales in Japan. Japan to the unaffiliated U.S. customer For Kuraray’s U.S. sales made through Based on our verification findings, we and issues its invoice to its U.S. affiliate its U.S. affiliate, we based CEP on made the following adjustments to for payment of the goods. Even though packed CIF or delivered prices to Kuraray’s home market expense data: (1) Kuraray’s U.S. affiliate does not have a unaffiliated purchasers in the United we denied an adjustment for the rebate warehouse, it takes title to the goods States. We made deductions, where claimed by Kuraray Trading because the once it pays Kuraray for the goods. The appropriate, for foreign inland freight company was unable to demonstrate U.S. affiliate then issues its sales invoice from the plant to the port of exportation, that the claimed amounts were actually to the unaffiliated U.S. customer and foreign inland insurance, foreign paid to, or deducted from, the amounts collects payment for the goods (see brokerage and handling expenses, owed by certain customers; (2) we verification exhibits K–49 and K–50, international freight, palletization corrected the reported amounts for one and exhibits KA–15 through KA–17 of charges, foreign warehousing expenses, type of rebate offered by Kuraray, inland the April 19, 2000, Verification Report). U.S. brokerage and handling expenses, freight expenses from the plant to the For U.S. sales made through Kuraray U.S. Customs duties (which include warehouse, warehousing expenses, Trading and the U.S. affiliate, the U.S. harbor maintenance and merchandise indirect selling expenses incurred by affiliate still transmits the U.S. processing fees), and U.S. inland freight Kuraray Trading, and packing expenses; customer’s order to Kuraray. However, expenses (freight from port to the and (3) we corrected invoice-specific Kuraray sells the goods to Kuraray customer), in accordance with section information with respect to payment Trading in Japan. Kuraray Trading then 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act. dates (see pages 22–33 of the April 19, issues the U.S. affiliate its sales invoice. We made the following adjustments to 2000, Verification Report for further Kuraray Trading arranges for delivery of Kuraray’s U.S. expense data based on discussion). the goods from Japan to the unaffiliated our verification findings: (1) we Level of Trade/CEP Offset U.S. customer, and the U.S. affiliate corrected the reported amounts for takes title to the goods once it pays foreign warehousing expenses, credit In accordance with section Kuraray Trading for the goods. The U.S. expenses, U.S. indirect selling expenses, 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the extent affiliate also issues its sales invoice to U.S. indirect selling expenses incurred practicable, we determined normal the unaffiliated U.S. customer and in the home market, and packing value based on sales in the comparison collects payment for the goods (see expenses; and (2) we corrected invoice- market at the same level of trade verification exhibits KT–8 through KT– specific information with respect to (‘‘LOT’’) as the export price or CEP 10, and KA–10 through KA–12 of the gross unit price, entered value, foreign transaction. The normal value LOT is April 19, 2000, Verification Report). brokerage and handling expenses, that of the starting-price sales in the Given the facts on the record, the international freight, and U.S. Customs comparison market from which we Department preliminarily determines duties (see pages 14–21 and 29–33 of derive selling, general and that, because the U.S. affiliate the April 19, 2000, Verification Report administrative (‘‘SG&A’’) expenses and purchased the merchandise from for further discussion). profit. For export price, the LOT is also Kuraray and/or Kuraray Trading and In accordance with section 772(d)(1) the level of the starting-price sale, sold the merchandise to the unaffiliated of the Act, we deducted from CEP direct which is usually from the exporter to purchaser, these sales were made in the and indirect selling expenses that were the importer. For CEP, it is the level of United States and, thus, should be associated with Kuraray’s economic the constructed export sale from the treated as CEP transactions (see Cold- activities occurring in the United States exporter to the affiliated importer. Rolled and Corrosion-Resistant Carbon and associated with the sale to the U.S. To determine whether normal value Steel Flat Products from Korea, Final customer. We also deducted from CEP sales are at a different LOT than export Results of Administrative Review, 65 FR an amount for profit, in accordance with price or CEP, we examine stages in the 13359 (March 13, 2000) and section 772(d)(3) of the Act. marketing process and selling functions accompanying Decision Memorandum along the chain of distribution between at Comment 12; and Porcelain-on-Steel Normal Value the producer and the customer. If the Cookware from Mexico, Final Results of In order to determine whether there comparison-market sales are at a Administrative Review, 65 FR 30068 was a sufficient volume of sales in the different LOT, and the difference affects (May 10, 2000) and accompanying home market to serve as a viable basis price comparability, as manifested in a Decision Memorandum at Comment 2) for calculating normal value (i.e., the pattern of consistent price differences (Porcelain-on-Steel Cookware from aggregate volume of home market sales between the sales on which normal Mexico). of the foreign like product is five value is based and comparison-market For Kuraray’s U.S. sales not made percent or more of the aggregate volume sales at the LOT of the export through its U.S. affiliate (i.e., made of U.S. sales), we compared the transaction, we make a LOT adjustment through an unaffiliated trading company respondent’s volume of home market under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. in Japan), we calculated export price sales of the foreign like product to the Finally, for CEP sales, if the normal based on the reported packed FOB price volume of U.S. sales of the subject value level is more remote from the between Kuraray and the unaffiliated merchandise, in accordance with 19 factory than the CEP level and there is trading company in Japan because C.F.R. 351.404(b). We determined that no basis for determining whether the

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36115 difference in the levels between normal through two channels of distribution sales made by Kuraray in the home value and CEP affects price (i.e., sales through its U.S. affiliate via market. comparability, we adjust normal value its home market affiliate and sales under section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act through its U.S. affiliate only), which A. Calculation of COP (the CEP offset provision). See Notice of we have treated as one LOT because In accordance with section 773(b)(3) Final Determination of Sales at Less there is no apparent difference in the of the Act, we calculated the weighted- Than Fair Value: Certain Cut-to-Length selling functions performed by Kuraray. average COP, by grade, based on the Carbon Steel Plate from South Africa, In analyzing Kuraray’s selling activities sum of the cost of materials and 62 FR 61731 (November 19, 1997). for its export price sales, we found that fabrication, G&A expenses, and packing We note that the U.S. Court of the export price sales involved basically costs. We relied on the submitted COPs International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) has held the same selling functions associated except that we have adjusted Kuraray’s that the Department’s practice of with the home market LOT described reported per-unit costs to account for determining LOT for CEP transactions above (i.e., inventory maintenance, the overstatement of acetic acid after CEP deductions is an freight and delivery, and handling of amounts. We also revised Kuraray’s impermissible interpretation of section rejected merchandise). Therefore, based G&A and interest expenses based on our 772(d) of the Act. See Borden, Inc. v. upon this information, we preliminarily verification findings (see Preliminary United States, 4 F. Supp. 2d 1221, determine that the LOT for all export Results Calculation Memorandum from 1241–42 (CIT 1998) (Borden). The price sales is the same as that in the team to the File, dated May 30, 2000). Department believes, however, that its home market. practice is in full compliance with the For sales which we re-categorized as B. Test of Home Market Prices statute. On June 4, 1999, the CIT entered CEP sales, after making the appropriate final judgement in Borden on the LOT deductions under section 772(d) of the We compared the adjusted weighted- issue. See Borden, Inc. v. United States, Act, we found that there are no average COP to the comparison-market Court No. 96–08–01970, Slip Op. 99–50 remaining expenses associated with sales of the foreign like product, as (CIT June 4, 1999). The government has selling activities performed by Kuraray required under section 773(b) of the Act, filed an appeal of Borden which is that are reflected in the CEP price. In in order to determine whether these pending before the U.S. Court of contrast, the normal value prices sales had been made at prices below the Appeals for the Federal Circuit. include selling expenses attributable to COP within an extended period of time Consequently, the Department has selling activities performed by Kuraray in substantial quantities, and whether continued to follow its normal practice for the home market, such as sales such prices were sufficient to permit the of adjusting CEP under section 772(d) support and freight and delivery recovery of all costs within a reasonable prior to starting a LOT analysis, as functions (see exhibit A.3.k. of the period of time. On a grade-specific articulated by the Department’s December 1, 1999, submission). basis, we compared the revised COP to regulations at section 351.412. Accordingly, we have concluded that the comparison market prices, less any In this case, Kuraray reported two CEP is at a different LOT from the applicable movement charges, customer categories (i.e., distributors normal value LOT. discounts, rebates and direct and and end users) and three channels of We then examined whether a LOT indirect selling expenses. distribution (sales through unaffiliated adjustment or CEP offset may be distributors to end users, direct sales to appropriate. In this case, Kuraray only C. Results of the COP Test end users, and sales through its affiliate sold at one LOT in the home market; Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C), to end users) for its home market sales. therefore, there is no information where less than 20 percent of the In its response, Kuraray claims that its available to determine a pattern of respondent’s sales of a given product sales to unaffiliated home market consistent price differences between the were made at prices below the COP, we customers (i.e., end users and sales on which normal value is based did not disregard any below-cost sales distributors) are at the same LOT as its and the comparison market sales at the of that product because we determined sales made through affiliated customers LOT of the export transaction, in that the below-cost sales were not made because Kuraray provides the same accordance with the Department’s in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ Where 20 selling services to its unaffiliated and normal methodology as described above percent or more of the respondent’s affiliated customers. Specifically, (see Porcelain-on-Steel Cookware from sales of a given product were made at Kuraray identified the following selling Mexico and accompanying Decision prices below the COP, we disregarded services to both types of customer: (1) Memorandum at Comment 6). Further, the below-cost sales because such sales salespeople visits; (2) inventory we do not have information which were found to be made within an maintenance; (3) after-sale service and would allow us to examine pricing extended period of time in ‘‘substantial technical advice; (4) advertising; (5) patterns based on respondent’s sales of quantities,’’ in accordance with sections freight and delivery; and (6) handling of other products, and there are no other 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the Act, and rejected merchandise. Based on our respondents or other record information because the below-cost sales of the review of the record evidence, we agree on which such an analysis could be product were at prices which would not with the respondent’s claim that all based. Accordingly, because the data permit recovery of all costs within a home market sales are at the same LOT available do not provide an appropriate reasonable period of time, in accordance (see exhibit A.3.k. of the December 1, basis for making a LOT adjustment, but with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act. 1999, submission). the LOT in the home market is at a more Kuraray had both export price and advanced stage of distribution than the Based on this test, we excluded from CEP sales in the U.S. market. Kuraray LOT of the CEP, we made a CEP offset our analysis certain comparison-market reported that its export price sales were adjustment in accordance with section sales of PVA products that were made made through one channel of 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act. at below-COP prices within the POR distribution (i.e., sales through and the contemporaneous months of the unaffiliated Japanese trading companies Cost of Production Analysis (‘‘COP’’) POR (see Preliminary Results to U.S. end users). Kuraray also reported Pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the Calculation Memorandum from team to that its CEP sales were also made Act, we initiated a COP investigation of the File, dated May 30, 2000).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36116 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Price-to-Price Comparisons 37 days, respectively, from the date of final results; (2) if the exporter is not a We calculated normal value based on publication of these preliminary results. firm covered in this review, a prior both packed, FOB or delivered prices Parties who submit case briefs or review, or the original less-than-fair- Kuraray charged to its unaffiliated rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are value (‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, but the purchasers in Japan and packed, FOB or requested to submit with each argument manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate delivered prices Kuraray Trading (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a will be the rate established for the most charged to its unaffiliated purchasers in brief summary of the argument. Parties recent period for the manufacturer of Japan. We made adjustments to the are also encouraged to provide a the merchandise; and (3) the cash starting price for discounts and rebates, summary of the arguments not to exceed deposit rate for all other manufacturers where appropriate. We also made five pages and a table of statutes, or exporters will continue to be 77.49 deductions, where appropriate, for regulations and cases cited. percent, the ‘‘All Others’’ rate made The Department will issue the final inland freight (i.e., plant to warehouse effective by the LTFV investigation. results of this administrative review, and warehouse to customer), inland These requirements, when imposed, including the results of its analysis of insurance and warehousing expenses, shall remain in effect until publication issues raised in any such written briefs pursuant to section 773(a)(6)(B) of the of the final results of the next or at the hearing, if held, not later than administrative review. Act. 120 days after the date of publication of For all comparisons, we made a This notice serves as a preliminary this notice. reminder to importers of their circumstance-of-sale adjustment, where Interested parties who wish to request appropriate, for differences in credit responsibility under 19 CFR a hearing or to participate if one is 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate expenses, pursuant to section 773 requested, must submit a written (a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 C.F.R. regarding the reimbursement of request to the Assistant Secretary for antidumping duties prior to liquidation 351.410(c). Import Administration, Room B–099, For comparisons to CEP sales, we also of the relevant entries during this within 30 days of the date of publication deducted from normal value the lesser review period. Failure to comply with of this notice. The request should of comparison-market indirect selling this requirement could result in the contain: (1) the party’s name, address Secretary’s presumption that expenses and indirect selling expenses and telephone number; (2) the number deducted from CEP (the CEP offset), reimbursement of antidumping duties of participants; and (3) a list of issues to occurred and the subsequent assessment pursuant to section 773(a)(7)(B) of the be discussed. Act and 19 C.F.R. 351.412(f). of double antidumping duties. For comparisons to both export price Cash Deposit and Assessment This administrative review and notice and CEP sales, we made adjustments to Requirements are in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 normal value for differences in packing The final results of this review shall CFR 351.213. expenses, in accordance with section be the basis for the assessment of 773(a)(6) of the Act. We also made antidumping duties on entries of Dated: May 30, 2000. adjustments to normal value, where merchandise covered by this review and Troy H. Cribb, appropriate, for differences in costs for future deposits of estimated duties. Acting Assistant Secretary for Import attributable to differences in the The Department shall determine and Administration. physical characteristics of the the Customs Service shall assess [FR Doc. 00–14352 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] merchandise, pursuant to section antidumping duties on all appropriate BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 C.F.R. entries. The Department will issue 351.411. appropriate appraisement instructions Preliminary Results of Review directly to the Customs Service upon DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE completion of this review. For Kuraray, As a result of this review, we for duty assessment purposes, we intend International Trade Administration preliminarily determine that the to calculate importer-specific Purdue University; Notice of Decision following margin exists for the period assessment rates by aggregating the on Application for Duty-Free Entry of May 1, 1998, through April 30, 1999: dumping margins calculated for all U.S. Electron Microscope sales to each importer and dividing this (per- Margin Manufacturer/exporter cent) amount by the total entered value of This is a decision pursuant to Section subject merchandise of the same sales 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Kuraray Co., Ltd...... 2.07 for each importer. In accordance with 19 Cultural Materials Importation Act of CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct the 1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. 351.224(b), the Customs Service to assess antidumping CFR part 301). Related records can be Department will conduct disclosure duties on all appropriate entries covered viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in within five days after the date of by this review if any importer-specific Room 4211, U.S. Department of publication of this notice. Any assessment rate calculated in the final Commerce, 14th and Constitution interested party may request a hearing results of this review is above de Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. within 30 days of publication. Any minimis (i.e., at or above 0.50 percent). Docket Number: 00–009. Applicant: hearing, if requested, will be held 44 Furthermore, the following deposit Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN days after the date of publication or the requirements will be effective upon 47907–1392. Instrument: Electron first business day thereafter. publication of the final results of this Microscope, Model CM300. Issues raised in hearings will be antidumping duty review for all Manufacturer: Philips, The Netherlands. limited to those raised in the respective shipments of PVA from Japan, entered, Intended Use: See notice at 65 FR case briefs and rebuttal briefs. Case or withdrawn from warehouse, for 25708. Order Date: February 23, 1999. briefs from interested parties and consumption on or after the publication Comments: None received. Decision: rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues date, as provided by section 751(a) of Approved. No instrument of equivalent raised in the respective case briefs, may the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for scientific value to the foreign be submitted not later than 30 days and Kuraray will be rate established in the instrument, for such purposes as the

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36117 instrument is intended to be used, was program, interns must return to the NIS. practical training in American methods being manufactured in the United States If there is any evidence of a conflict of of innovation and management in such at the time the instrument was ordered. interest between an intern and the areas as strategic planning, financing, Reasons: The foreign instrument is a company, the intern is disqualified. production, distribution, marketing, conventional transmission electron DATES: The closing date for applications accounting, wholesaling, and labor microscope (CTEM) and is intended for is July 31, 2000. An original and two relations. This first-hand experience in research or scientific educational uses copies of the application (Standard the U.S. economy enables interns to requiring a CTEM. We know of no Form 424 (Rev. 4–92) and supplemental become leaders in establishing and CTEM, or any other instrument suited to material) are to be sent to the address operating a market economy in the NIS, these purposes, which was being designated in the Application Kit and and creates a unique opportunity for manufactured in the United States at the postmarked no later than the closing U.S. firms to familiarize key executives time of order of the instrument. date. Applications will be considered on from the NIS with their products and a ‘‘rolling’’ basis as they are received, services. Sponsoring U.S. firms will Frank W. Creel, subject to the availability of funds. If benefit by establishing relationships Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff. available funds are depleted prior to the with key managers in similar industries [FR Doc. 00–14353 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] closing date, a notice to that effect will who are uniquely positioned to assist BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P be published in the Federal Register. their U.S. sponsors do business in the Processing of complete applications Independent States. takes approximately three to five Scientists: SABIT provides DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE months. All awards are expected to be opportunities for gifted scientists to made by September 30, 2000. apply their skills to peaceful research International Trade Administration ADDRESSES: Request for Applications: and development in the civilian sector, [Docket No. 000515143±0143±01] Competitive Application kits will be in areas such as defense conversion, available from ITA starting on the day medical research, and the environment, Special American Business Internship this notice is published. To obtain a and exposes them to the role of Training Program (SABIT) copy of the Application Kit please scientific research in a market economy AGENCY: International Trade contact SABIT by: (1) Email at where applicability of research relates to Administration, Commerce. [email protected], providing business success. Sponsoring firms in your name, company name and address; the U.S. scientific community also ACTION: Notice. (2) Telephone (202) 482–0073; (3) benefit from exchanging information SUMMARY: This Notice announces Facsimile (202) 482–2443; (4) Send a and ideas, and different approaches to availability of funds for the Special written request with two self-addressed new technologies. American Business Internship Training mailing labels to Application Request, The Special American Business Internship Program (SABIT), for training business The SABIT Program, HCHB Room 3319, Training program’s Catalog of Federal executives and scientists (also referred U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Domestic Assistance (CFA) number is 11.114. to as ‘‘interns’’) from the New Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Funding Availability: Pursuant to Independent States (NIS). The Washington, DC 20230. The telephone section 632(a) of the Foreign Assistance Department of Commerce, International numbers are not toll free numbers. Only Act of 1961, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’) Trade Administration (ITA) established one copy of the Application Kit will be funding for the program will be the SABIT program in September 1990 provided to each organization provided by the United States Agency to assist the former Soviet Union’s requesting it, but it may be reproduced for International Development (A.I.D). transition to a market economy. Since by the requesters. ITA will award financial assistance and that time, SABIT has been matching FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: administer the program pursuant to the business executives and scientists from Liesel C. Duhon, Director, SABIT authority contained in section 635(b) of the NIS with U.S. firms which provide Program, U.S. Department of Commerce, the Act and other applicable Grant them with three to six months of hands- phone—(202) 482–0073, facsimile— rules. The estimated amount of financial on training in a U.S. market economy. (202) 482–2443. These are not toll free assistance available for the program is Under the SABIT program, qualified numbers. $810,000. At least $400,000 of that U.S. firms will receive funds through a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SABIT amount is reserved for U.S. cooperative agreement with ITA to help exposes NIS business managers and organizations which will host interns defray the cost of hosting interns. The scientists to a completely new way of from the Russian Far East. Additional training must take place in the United thinking in which demand, consumer funding may become available at a States. ITA will interview and satisfaction, and profits drive future date. recommend eligible interns to production. Senior-level interns visiting Funding Instrument and Project participating companies. Interns may be the U.S. for internship programs with Duration: Federal assistance will be from any of the following Independent public or private sector companies will awarded pursuant to a cooperative States: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, be exposed to an environment which agreement between ITA and the Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, will provide them with practical recipient firm. All internships are three Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, knowledge for transforming their to six months; however, ITA reserves Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. countries’ enterprises and economies to the right to allow an intern to stay for However, restrictions may apply based the free market. The program provides a shorter period of time (no less than on congressional sanctions. The U.S. first-hand, eye-opening experience to one month) if the U.S. company agrees firms will be expected to provide the managers and scientists which cannot and the intern demonstrates a need for interns with a hands-on, non-academic, be duplicated by American managers a shorter internship based on his or her executive training program designed to traveling to their territories. management responsibilities. ITA will maximize their exposure to management Managers: SABIT assists economic reimburse companies for the round trip or commercially-oriented scientific restructuring in the NIS by providing international travel (coach class tickets) operations. At the end of the training top-level business managers with of each intern from the intern’s home

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36118 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices city in the NIS to the U.S. internship to those operating in the following that each intern must be provided with site, upon submission to ITA of the paid sectors: (a). Agribusiness (including a private room; (h). A statement that the travel invoice, payment receipt, or other food processing and distribution, and host firm is solidly committed to evidence of payment and the form SF– agricultural equipment), (b). Defense interns’ return to their own countries 270, ‘‘Request for Advance or conversion, (c). Energy, (d). upon completion of the internships. Reimbursement.’’ Travel under the Environment (including environmental (4). Provide a general description of program is subject to the Fly America clean-up), (e). Financial services the profile of the intern(s) the Applicant Act. Recipient firms provide directly to (including banking and accounting), (f). would like to host, including: interns a stipend of $30 a day; ITA will Housing, construction and educational background; occupational/ reimburse recipient firms for this infrastructure, (g). Medical equipment, professional background (including stipend, up to a maximum of six supplies, pharmaceuticals, and health number of years and areas of months, upon submission by the care management, (h). Product experience); size and nature of company of an end-of-internship report standards and quality control, (i). organization at which the intern(s) is/ and Form SF–270. Recipient firms will Telecommunications, (j). Transportation are presently employed; preference for provide housing for the interns and ITA and (k) Biotechnology. the region of the NIS where the intern(s) will reimburse recipient firms for up to Evaluation Criteria: Consideration for is/are employed; and whether Applicant $500 per month for housing costs (not financial assistance will be given to is open to sponsoring interns from a including utilities or telephone service those SABIT proposals which: variety of NIS countries. charges), upon submission by the (1). Demonstrate a commitment to the intent and goals of the program to Evaluation criteria 1–4 will be weighted company of the end-of-internship report equally. and Form SF–270. In general, each provide practical, on-the-job, non- award will have a cap of $11,400 per academic, non-classroom, training: in ITA does not guarantee that it will intern for total cost of airline travel, the case of manager interns, an match Applicant with the profile stipend and housing costs. ITA reserves appropriate management training provided to SABIT. the right to allow an award to exceed experience, or, in the case of scientist Selection Procedures: Each this cap in cases of unusually high interns, a practical, commercially- application will receive an independent, costs, specifically airfare from remote oriented scientific training experience. objective review by one or more three or regions of the NIS such as Central Asia Include a brief objectives section four-member independent review and the Caucasus. However, the total indicating why the Applicant wishes to panels qualified to evaluate applications reimbursement cannot exceed the award provide an internship to a manager(s) or submitted under the program. amount. There are no specific matching scientist(s) from the NIS, and how the Applications will be evaluated on a requirements for the awards. Host firms, proposed internship would further the competitive, ‘‘rolling’’ basis as they are however, are expected to bear the costs purpose of the SABIT program as received in accordance with the beyond those covered by the award, described above. Also, the Applicant selection evaluation set forth above. including: visa fees, insurance, any food should note how the internship to be Awards will be made to those and incidentals costs beyond the $30 provided will respond to the priority applications which successfully meet per day stipend, training manuals, any needs of senior business managers and the selection criteria. If funds are not training-related travel within the U.S., scientists in the NIS, as determined by available for all those applications and provision of the hands-on training ITA. which successfully meet the criteria, for the interns. (2). Present a realistic work plan awards will be made to the first U.S. firms wishing to utilize SABIT in describing in detail the training program applications received which order to be matched with an intern to be provided to the SABIT intern(s). successfully do so. ITA reserves the without applying for financial Work plans must include the proposed right to reject any application; to limit assistance may do so. Such firms will be internship training activities. The the number of interns per applicant; and responsible for all costs, including components of the training activities to waive informalities and minor travel expenses, related to sponsoring must be described in as much detail as irregularities in applications received. the intern. However, prior to acceptance possible, preferably on a week-by-week The final selecting official reserves the as a SABIT intern, work plans and basis. The description of the training right to make awards based on U.S. candidates must be approved by the activities should include an account of geographic and organization size SABIT Program. Furthermore, program what the intern’s(s’) duties and diversity among applicants, as well as to training will be monitored by SABIT responsibilities will be during the consider priority business sectors (listed staff and evaluated upon completion of training. in Project Funding Priorities, above) training. (3). The application should also have when making awards. Recipients may Eligibility: Eligible applicants for the a section noting: (a). Whether Applicant be eligible, pursuant to approval of an SABIT program will include all for is applying to host managers or amendment of an active award, to host profit or non-profit U.S. corporations, scientists, or both (and the number of additional interns under the program. associations, organizations or other each); (b). The duration of the ITA reserves the right to evaluate public or private entities located in the internship; (c). The location(s) of the applicants based on past performance. United States. Agencies or divisions of internship; (d). The name, address, and The Director of the SABIT Program is the federal government are not eligible. telephone number of the designated the final selecting official for each Although, state and local governments internship coordinator; (e). Name(s) of award. are eligible. division(s) in which the intern(s) will be Additional Information: Applicants Project Funding Priorities: Applicant placed; (f). The individual(s) in the U.S. must submit: (1). Evidence of adequate proposal must provide an explanation, company under whose supervision the financial resources of Applicant including description and extent of intern will train; (g). The anticipated organization to cover the costs involved involvement, in priority business housing arrangements to be provided for in providing an internship(s). As sector(s). While Applicants involved in the intern(s). Note that housing evidence of such resources, Applicant any industry sector may apply to the arrangements should be suitable for should submit financial statements program, priority consideration is given mid- and senior-level professionals, and audited by an outside organization or an

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36119 annual report including such 6. If applicants incur any costs prior 10. All primary applicants must also statements. If these are not available, a to an award being made, they do solely submit a completed Standard Form 424, letter should be provided from the at their own risk of not being ‘‘Application for Federal Assistance’’ Applicant’s bank or outside accountant reimbursed by the Government. and a Standard Form 424B, attesting to the financial capability of Notwithstanding any verbal or written ‘‘Assurances—Non-Construction the firm to undertake the scope of work assurance that may have been received, Programs.’’ Form CD–511 and Standard involved in training an intern under the there is no obligation on the part of DOC Forms 424 and 424B are included in the SABIT program. (2). Evidence of a to cover pre-award costs. Application Kit supplied by the SABIT satisfactory record of performance in 7. Past performance: Unsatisfactory office. grants, contracts and/or cooperative performance by an applicant under 11. Lower Tier Certifications: agreements with the Federal prior Federal awards may result in an Recipients shall require applicants/ Government, if applicable. (Applicants application not being considered for bidders for subgrants, contracts, who are or have been deficient in funding. subcontracts, or other lower tier covered current or recent performance in their 8. No obligation for future funding: If transactions at any tier under the award grants, contracts, and/or cooperative an application is selected for funding, to submit, if applicable, a completed agreements with the Federal DOC has no obligation to provide any Form CD–512, ‘‘Certifications Regarding Government shall be presumed to be additional future funding in connection Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility unable to meet this requirement). (3). A with that award. Renewal of an award and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier statement that the Applicant will to increase funding or extend the period Covered Transactions and Lobbying’’ provide medical insurance coverage for of performance is at the total discretion and disclosure form, SF–LLL, interns during their internships. of DOC. ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.’’ Recipients will be required to submit 9. Primary Applicant Certifications: Form CD–512 is intended for the use of proof of the interns’ medical insurance All primary applicants must submit a recipients and should not be transmitted coverage to the Federal Program Officer completed Form CD–511, to DOC. SF–LLL submitted by any tier ‘‘Certifications Regarding Debarment, before the interns’ arrivals. The recipient or subrecipient should be Suspension and Other Responsibility insurance coverage must include an submitted to DOC in accordance with Matters; Drug-Free Workplace accident and comprehensive medical the instructions contained in the award Requirements and Lobbying,’’ and the insurance program as well as coverage document. following explanations are hereby for accidental death, emergency medical 12. Indirect Costs: Indirect costs are provided: evacuation, and repatriation. not allowed under the SABIT program. (a) Nonprocurement Debarment and 13. Applicants are hereby notified Other Requirements: All applicants Suspension: Prospective participants (as that any equipment or products are advised of the following: defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section 105) authorized to be purchased with 1. No award of Federal funds shall be are subject to 15 CFR Part 26, funding provided under this program made to an Applicant who has an ‘‘Nonprocurement Debarment and must be American-made to the greatest outstanding delinquent Federal debt Suspension’’ and the related section of extent practicable. until either the delinquent account is the certification form prescribed above 14. The following statutes apply to paid in full, a negotiated repayment applies. this program: Section 907 of the schedule is established and at least one (b) Drug Free Workplace: Grantees (as FREEDOM Support Act, Public Law payment is received, or other defined at 15 CFR Part 26, Section 605) 102–511, 22 U.S.C. 5812 note arrangements satisfactory to the are subject to 15 CFR Part 26, Subpart (Restriction on Assistance to the Department of Commerce (DOC) are F, ‘‘Government wide Requirements for Government of Azerbaijan); 7 U.S.C. made. Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)’’ and the § 5201 et seq. (Agricultural 2. A false statement on the application related section of the certification form Competitiveness and Trade—the is grounds for denial or termination of prescribed above applies. Bumpers Amendment); The Foreign funds and grounds for possible (c) Anti-Lobbying: Funds provided Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, punishment by a fine or imprisonment under the SABIT program may not be including Chapter 11 of Part I, section as provided in 18 U.S.C. 1001. used for lobbying activities. Persons (as 498A (b) Public Law 102–511, 22 U.S.C. 3. Recipients and subrecipients are defined at 15 CFR Part 28, Section 105) 2295a(b) (regarding ineligibility for subject to all Federal laws and Federal are subject to the lobbying provisions of assistance); 22 U.S.C. 2420(a), Section and Departmental regulations, policies 31 U.S.C. 1352, ‘‘Limitation on use of 660(a) of The Foreign Assistance Act of and procedures applicable to financial appropriated funds to influence certain 1961, as amended (Police Training assistance awards. Federal contracting and financial Prohibition); and provisions in the 4. Participating companies will be transactions,’’ and the lobbying section annual Foreign Operations, Export required to comply with all relevant of the certification form prescribed Financing, and Related Programs U.S. tax and export regulations. Export above applies to applications/bids for Appropriations Acts, concerning impact controls may relate not only to licensing grants, cooperative agreements, and on jobs in the United States (see, e.g., of products for export, but also to contracts for more than $100,000, and 536 of Public Law 106–113). technical data transfer. The U.S. loans and loan guarantees for more than 15. Audit Requirements: The DOC Department of Commerce’s Bureau of $150,000, or the single family maximum Office of Inspector General has authority Export Administration (BXA) reviews mortgage limit for affected programs, under the Inspector General Act of 1978, applications in question to determine whichever is greater. as amended, to conduct an audit of any whether export licenses are required. (d) Anti-Lobbying Disclosures: Any DOC award at any time. SABIT will not award a grant until the applicant that has paid or will pay for 16. Payments. As required by the Debt export license issue has been satisfied. lobbying in connection with this award Collections Improvement Act of 1996, 5. Applications under this program using any funds must submit an SF– all Federal payments to award are not subject to Executive Order LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying recipients pursuant to this 12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Activities,’’ as required under 15 CFR announcement will be made by Federal Programs.’’ Part 28, Appendix B. electronic funds transfer.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36120 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

17. The collection of information is Council address: Gulf of Mexico those issues specifically identified in approved by the Office of Management Fishery Management Council, 3018 U.S. the agendas and any issues arising after and Budget, OMB Control Number Highway 301 North, Suite 1000, Tampa, publication of this notice that require 0625–0225. Public reporting for this FL 33619. emergency action under Section 305(c) collection of information is estimated to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided be three hours per response, including Wayne Swingle, Executive Director, the public has been notified of the the time for reviewing instructions, and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council’s intent to take action to completing and reviewing the collection Council; telephone: 813–228–2815. address the emergency. of information. All responses to this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Copies of the agenda can be obtained collection of information are voluntary, Standing and Special Stone Crab SSC by calling 813–228–2815. and will be protected from disclosure to will convene to review an amendment Special Accommodations the extent allowed under the Freedom to the Stone Crab Fishery Management This meeting is physically accessible of Information Act. Notwithstanding Plan (FMP). The Stone Crab amendment to people with disabilities. Requests for any other provision of law, no person is proposes to extend the trap certificate sign language interpretation or other required to respond to nor shall a program for the commercial stone crab auxiliary aids should be directed to person be subject to the requirements of fishery adopted by the state of Florida Anne Alford at the Council (see the Paperwork Reduction Act unless into the Federal waters off west Florida. ADDRESSES) by June 7, 2000. that collection of information displays a The Florida Fish and Wildlife current valid OMB Control Number. Conservation Commission (FFWCC), Dated: June 1, 2000. Send comments regarding the burden after working with the stone crab Richard W. Surdi, estimate or any other aspect of this industry and the Council over the past Acting Director, Office of Sustainable collection of information, including 4 years, has adopted by rule a trap Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. suggestions for reducing this burden, to certificate program that will gradually [FR Doc. 00–14364 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the Reports Clearance Officer, reduce the number of traps over a 30- BILLING CODE 3510±22±F International Trade Administration, year period. The Florida legislature has Department of Commerce, Room 4001, approved the portion of this program 14th and Constitution Ave., NW, pertaining to licenses and fees. Based on DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Washington, DC 20230. this review, the SSC may make FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: recommendations to the Council for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Special American Business Internship consideration at their meeting in Key Administration Training, International Trade Largo, July 10–14, 2000. [I.D. 052600A] Administration, at (202) 482–0073. This At the conclusion of the Stone Crab is not a toll-free number. SSC meeting, the Standing SSC will also Marine Mammals; File No. 684±1458 Dated: June 1, 2000. review an amendment for a Generic AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Liesel C. Duhon, Amendment Addressing the Establishment of Tortugas Marine Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Director, SABIT Program. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [FR Doc. 00–14271 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Reserves, which proposes to establish the Tortugas South marine reserve that Commerce. BILLING CODE 3510±HE±P will encompass the Riley’s Hump ACTION: Receipt of application for mutton snapper spawning aggregation amendment. site established by the Council in 1994. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Dr. The total area of the proposed Tortugas Donald Siniff, University of Minnesota, National Oceanic and Atmospheric South marine reserve is 60 square Department of Ecology, Evolution and Administration nautical miles. The amendment also Behavior, 100 Ecology Building, 1987 proposes to create the Tortugas North [I.D. 053100B] Upper Buford Circle, St. Paul, MN marine reserve cooperatively with the 55108 has requested an amendment to Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management scientific research Permit No. 684–1458. Council; Public Meeting (FKNMS) program, the state of Florida, and the National Park system, which DATES: Written or telefaxed comments AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries will encompass an area of 120 square must be received on or before July 7, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and nautical miles. The portion proposed to 2000. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), be established by the Council is 13 ADDRESSES: The amendment request Commerce. square nautical miles. The Council and related documents are available for ACTION: Notice of public meeting. proposes that marine reserves be review upon written request or by established for a period of at least 10 appointment in the following office(s): SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery years, during which the ecological Permits and Documentation Division, Management Council (Council) will benefits of the reserve will be evaluated. Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, convene a public meeting of the The Council also proposes that fishing 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Standing and Special Stone Crab and anchoring be prohibited within the Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713– Scientific and Statistical Committees marine reserves. 2289); and (SSC). Although other non-emergency issues Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West DATES: The SSC meeting is scheduled to not on the agendas may come before the Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, begin at 8:00 a.m. on June 21, 2000 and SSCs for discussion, in accordance with CA 90802 (562/980–4001). will conclude by 3:00 p.m. the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Written comments or requests for a ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Conservation and Management Act, public hearing on this request should be the Pier House, 1 Duval Street, Key those issues may not be the subject of submitted to the Chief, Permits and West, FL 33040; telephone: 305–296– formal action during these meetings. Documentation Division, F/PR1, Office 4600. Actions of the SSCs will be restricted to of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36121

East-West Highway, Room 13130, Silver In compliance with the National VII. Discussion of Results of 2000 Grant Spring, MD 20910. Those individuals Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Processes requesting a hearing should set forth the U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial A. Learn and Serve America specific reasons why a hearing on this determination has been made that the B. AmeriCorps particular amendment request would be activity proposed is categorically VIII. AmeriCorps*VISTA Plans appropriate. excluded from the requirement to IX. Future Board Meeting Dates Comments may also be submitted by prepare an environmental assessment or X. Public Comment facsimile at (301) 713–0376, provided environmental impact statement. XI. Adjournment the facsimile is confirmed by hard copy Concurrent with the publication of ACCOMMODATIONS: Anyone who needs submitted by mail and postmarked no this notice in the Federal Register, an interpreter or other accommodation later than the closing date of the NMFS is forwarding copies of this should notify the Corporation’s contact comment period. Please note that application to the Marine Mammal person. Commission and its Committee of comments will not be accepted by e- CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER Scientific Advisors. mail or other electronic media. INFORMATION: Rhonda Taylor, Deputy Dated: May 31, 2000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director of Special Projects and Simona Roberts or Ruth Johnson, 301/ Ann Terbush, Initiatives, Office of Public Liaison, 713–2289. Chief, Permits and Documentation Division, Corporation for National Service, 8th Office of Protected Resources, National Floor, Room 8619, 1201 New York SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Marine Fisheries Service. Avenue NW., Washington, D.C. 20525. subject amendment to Permit No. 684– [FR Doc. 00–14363 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Phone (202) 606–5000 ext. 282. Fax 1458, issued on August 17, 1998 (63 FR BILLING CODE 3510±22±F (202) 565–2794. TDD: (202) 565–2799. 43914) is requested under the authority Dated: June 2, 2000. of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of Thomasenia P. Duncan, 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND General Counsel, Corporation for National seq.) and the Regulations Governing the COMMUNITY SERVICE Taking and Importing of Marine and Community Service. Mammals (50 CFR part 216). Sunshine Act Meeting [FR Doc. 00–14368 Filed 6–2–00; 4:19 pm] BILLING CODE 6050±28±P Permit No. 684–1458 authorizes the The Board of Directors of the permit holder to capture, tag, sample, Corporation for National and and lavage Weddell seals Community Service gives notice of the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (Leptonychotes weddellii) of all age and following meeting: sex classes on McMurdo Sound in the DATE AND TIME: Monday, June 12, 2000, Department of the Air Force Antarctic. The permit holder requests 8:30–11:30 a.m. authorization to place VHF transmitters PLACE: The Westin Seattle, Rooms Notice of Availability of Federally on adult female Weddell seals, and Owned Inventions apply a series of instrument packages Vashon 1 & 2, 1900 Fifth Avenue, that contain: a 3MPDT logger (3- Seattle, Washington 98101. Pursuant to the provisions of part 404 dimensional, magnetic data recorder), STATUS: Open. of title 37, Code of Federal Regulations, DSL (digital still camera), DU MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: which implements Pub. L. 96–517, the (ultrasonic depth sounder), PD2GT I. Chair’s Opening Remarks Department of the Air Force announces (speed, acceleration, depth, and II. Swearing-In of New Board Members the availability of certain Air Force temperature recorder) and ECG III. Approval of March Board Meeting owned inventions. The following list of (electrocardiogram monitor) to male and Minutes patent applications and patents are IV. Status Report by the Chief Executive female Weddell seals of all age classes. available for Nonexclusive or Exclusive Officer For attachment of the instrument V. Committee Reports Licensing from the Air Force Research package, the permit holder requests A. Executive Committee Laboratory (AFRL/DE or /VS) at authorization to anesthetize seals with B. Management, Budget, and Kirtland Air Force Base (AFB). the drug Sevoflurane. The permit holder Governance Committee Additional information concerning the also requests an increase in the number C. Planning and Evaluation inventions is available upon request. of adult female Weddell seals captured Committee All communications concerning this (400 to 500), the number of adult male D. Communications Committee Notice should be sent to Mr. Kenneth Weddell seals fitted with VHF Report on Corporate Initiatives Callahan, Patent Attorney, 377 ABW/ transmitters (30 to 100) and the number Report on AmeriCorps Alumni JAN, 2251 Maxwell SE, Kirtland AFB, of Weddell seal pups fitted with Activities NM 87117. Mr. Callahan can be reached satellite-linked radio transmitters and VI. Presentations by Officials and by telephone at (505) 846–1542, e-mail: the PD2GT and ECG instruments (20 to Projects from the State of [email protected], or 50). Washington fax to (505) 846–0279.

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY PATENTS AVAILABLE FOR LICENSING AT KIRTLAND AFB, NM

Title of invention

Application: 09/563,469 ...... Hermetically Sealed, High Energy Trigatron Switch. 09/562,873 ...... Multifunctional Capillary System for Hoop Heat Pipe. 09/558,527 ...... Circuit for Deriving the Position of a Fast Pulsing Laser. 09/558,456 ...... Pneumatic Airborne Ejection System for Spacecraft Stages From Wide Body and Jet Transport Aircraft. 09/550,582 ...... Smart Docking Surface for Space Serviceable Nano and Micro Satellites. 09/504,551 ...... Space-based CW Laser Detector Package.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36122 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY PATENTS AVAILABLE FOR LICENSING AT KIRTLAND AFB, NMÐContinued

Title of invention

09/493,508 ...... Birefringence Compensation Using a Single Nd:YAG Rod. 09/465,021 ...... Liquid Spray Phase Change Cooling of Laser Devices. 09/444,984 ...... Solar Sail for Power Generation in Space. 09/388,571 ...... Space Environment Protection Satellite Door. 09/387,992 ...... Molecular Field Programmable Gate Array. 09/384,901 ...... Passive Vibroacoustic Attenuator for Structural Acoustic Control. 09/372,725 ...... Broadband Grating Spectrometer Based on Dualband Focal Plane Array. 09/372,724 ...... Adaptive Herschel-Quincke Tubes. 09/326,058 ...... Composite ChamberCore Sandwich-type Structure with Inherent Acoustic Attenuation. 09/277,596 ...... Ultra Wideband RF-enhanced Chemotherapy for Cancer Treatment. 09/277,595 ...... Whole-spacecraft Hybrid (Active/Passive) Isolation System for Launch Vehicles. 09/277,593 ...... Time Domain Focused High-power Microwave System for Cancer Treatment. 09/266,181 ...... High-density Optical Interconnect with an Increased Tolerance of Misalignment. 09/252,379 ...... Coupled Helmholtz Resonators for Broadband Acoustic Attenuation.ÐAllowed. 09/231,149 ...... Active Edge Controlled Optical Quality Membrane Mirror.ÐAllowed. 09/178,876 ...... Advanced Instrument Controller. 09/169,495 ...... Post Process Metallization Interconnects for Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS). 09/169,494 ...... Post Process Deposition Shielding for Microelectromechanical Systems.ÐAllowed. 09/092,608 ...... Liquid Crystal Active Optics Correction for Large Space-Based Optical Systems.ÐAllowed. Patent No.: 6,061,034 ...... Power Enhancer for Solid-state Switched Ultra Wideband Pulsers and array Transmitters. 6,047,541 ...... HAN TEAN Mixing Gas Generator Propellant Tank Pressurizer for Launch Vehicles and Spacecraft. 6,040,935 ...... Flexureless Multi-Stable Micromirrors for Optical Switching. 6,034,351 ...... Cryogenic Pupil Stop for Dual-Band Infrared Focal Plane Array. 6,028,689 ...... Multi-motion Micromirror. 6,020,724 ...... Regulated Capacitor Charging Circuit Using a High Reactance Transformer. 6,005,305 ...... Magnetic Voltage-Pulser. 5,944,913 ...... High-Efficiency Multiple-Junction Solar Cells. 5,923,687 ...... Bandwidth Enhancement and Broadband Noise Reduction in Injection-Locked Semiconductor Lasers. 5,900,986 ...... Columnar Focal Lens. 5,835,545 ...... Compact Intense Radiation System. 5,808,226 ...... Grenade Shell Laser System. 5,774,490 ...... Diode-Pumped Tm: YAG/HBr Four-Micron Laser System. 5,773,787 ...... Plasma Gun Voltage Generator. 5,760,496 ...... Inverse-Pinch Voltage Pulse Generator. 5,748,657 ...... High Efficiency Constant Current Laser Drivers. 5,742,045 ...... Apparatus Using Diode Laser Logic to Form a Configurable Optical Gate System. 5,734,303 ...... Microwave Waveguide Mode Converter Having a Bevel Output End. 5,727,016 ...... Spatially Coherent Diode Laser With Lenslike Media and Feedback From Straight-Toothed Gratings. 5,705,959 ...... High Efficiency Low Distortion Amplification. 5,696,786 ...... Solid-State Laser System. 5,694,602 ...... Weighted System and Method for Spatial Allocation of a Parallel Load. 5,689,958 ...... High Efficiency Thermal Electric Cooler Driver. 5,675,604 ...... Portable Pumped Laser System. 5,658,488 ...... Regeneration of BHP in a Plant Process. 5,656,873 ...... Transmission Line Charging. 5,646,764 ...... Optical Beam Scanner With Rotating Transmissive Optics. 5,629,802 ...... Spatially Multiplexed Optical Signal Processor. 5,604,642 ...... Laser Welding of Light-Weight Honeycomb Mirrors. 5,604,431 ...... Integrated Grid Particle Impact Detector. 5,602,387 ...... Method of Protecting an RF Receiver in a Hostile Electromagnetic Environment. 5,567,995 ...... Multi-Winding Spiral Generator. 5,557,699 ...... NLO Waveguide and Switch and Method. 5,553,629 ...... Portable Medical Laser Pack System. 5,535,029 ...... Spatial Light Modulator Having Amplitude Coupled With Binary Phase Mode. 5,504,578 ...... Temporal Fringe Pattern Analysis System of a Laser Gain Media. 5,500,865 ...... Phased Cascading of Multiple Nonlinear Optical Elements for Frequency Conversion. 5,458,043 ...... Battery Charging Capacitors Electromagnetic Launcher. 5,457,685 ...... Multi-Speaker Conferencing Over Narrowband Channels. 5,444,308 ...... Nanosecond Transmission Line Charging Apparatus. 5,425,044 ...... Compact, Burst Mode, Pulsed, High Energy, Blowdown Flow Photolytic Atomic Iodine Laser. 5,422,047 ...... Carbonaceous Fuel Particles. 5,410,558 ...... Variable Short Period Electron Beam Wiggler for Free Electron Lasers. 5,406,072 ...... Method for Microbeam Ion Radiation Testing of Photonic Devices.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36123

Janet A. Long, supply up to 4.9 mg/30 days of water to at (609) 883–9500 ext. 203 prior to the Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. the applicant’s distribution system from hearing. [FR Doc. 00–14287 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] new Well No. 4, and to increase the Individuals planning to attend the BILLING CODE 5001±05±P existing withdrawal limit from all wells hearing who need an accommodation as to 5.7 mg/30 days. The project is located provided for in the Americans With in the Town of Felton, Kent County, Disabilities Act should contact the DELAWARE RIVER BASIN Delaware. Commission Secretary directly at (609) COMMISSION 3. Whitehall Township Authority D– 883–9500 ext. 203 or through the New 2000–9 CP. A ground water withdrawal Jersey Relay Service at 1–800–852–7899 Notice of Commission Meeting and project to supply up to 33.3 mg/30 days (TTY) to discuss how the Commission Public Hearing of water to the applicant’s public water may accommodate your needs. distribution system from the new Dated: May 30, 2000. Lehnert Road Well, and to increase the existing withdrawal limit from all the Pamela M. Bush, Notice is hereby given that the applicant’s wells to 91.2 mg/30 days. Commission Secretary. Delaware River Basin Commission will The project is located in Whitehall [FR Doc. 00–14288 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] hold an informal conference on Township, Lehigh County, BILLING CODE 6360±01±P Thursday, June 15, 2000 and a public Pennsylvania. hearing on Friday, June 16, 2000. The 4. Uwchlan Township D–2000–16 hearing will be part of the Commission’s CP. A project to expand the applicant’s DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION regular business meeting. Both the Eagleview sewage treatment plant (STP) conference session and business from 0.15 million gallons per day (mgd) Notice of Proposed Information meeting are open to the public and will to 0.475 mgd. The STP will continue to Collection Requests be held at the River Run Restaurant at serve portions of Uwchlan and Upper the West Branch Angler, 150 Faulkner AGENCY: Department of Education. Uwchlan Townships with tertiary SUMMARY: The Leader, Information Road, Deposit, New York. treatment prior to discharge to Shamona Management Group, Office of the Chief The conference among the Creek, a tributary of East Branch Commissioners and staff will begin at Information Officer, invites comments Brandywine Creek. The STP is located on the proposed information collection 1:30 p.m. on Thursday and will include less than one mile south of the status reports on the following subjects: requests as required by the Paperwork intersection of U.S. Route 76 and PA Reduction Act of 1995. a proposed coordinated drought plan; a Route 100 in Uwchlan Township, DATES: study of the flow needs of the Delaware Chester County, Pennsylvania. Interested persons are invited to River and major tributaries; 5. Westtown Township D–2000–21 submit comments on or before August 7, development of a TMDL for PCBs in the CP. A project to expand the applicant’s 2000. Delaware Estuary; a proposed agreement existing 0.29 mgd Chester Creek STP to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 0.495 mgd. The STP is located just 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of for storage at F.E. Walter Reservoir; and southwest of Westtown Road in 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires a proposal for joint DRBC-Corps of Westtown Township, Chester County, that the Office of Management and Engineers projects. In addition, there Pennsylvania and will continue to Budget (OMB) provide interested will be a presentation on a proposed provide secondary treatment to Federal agencies and the public an early new watershed atlas web site and Westtown Township. Treated effluent opportunity to comment on information discussion of possible source water will continue to discharge to East collection requests. OMB may amend or protection activities. Branch Chester Creek. waive the requirement for public The business meeting at 10:30 a.m. on 6. Sunny Dell Foods, Inc. D–2000–23. consultation to the extent that public Friday will include a public hearing on A project to construct a new 0.05 mgd participation in the approval process the projects summarized below. In industrial wastewater treatment plant to would defeat the purpose of the addition, the Commission will address provide tertiary level treatment for the information collection, violate State or the following: minutes of the May 2, applicant’s mushroom cannery facility. Federal law, or substantially interfere 2000 business meeting; announcements; The facility straddles the border with any agency’s ability to perform its report on hydrologic conditions in the between the Borough of Kennett Square statutory obligations. The Leader, basin; reports of the Executive Director and Kennett Township immediately Information Management Group, Office and General Counsel; a resolution south of Baltimore Pike in Kennett of the Chief Information Officer, providing for the election of Township, Chester County, publishes that notice containing Commission officers for the fiscal year Pennsylvania. Treated effluent will be proposed information collection 2000–2001; and public dialogue. discharged to West Branch Red Clay requests prior to submission of these The subjects of the hearing will be as Creek in Water Quality Zone C5. After requests to OMB. Each proposed follows: screening and disinfection, 0.09 mgd of information collection, grouped by 1. Manwalamink Water Company D– cooling water will be discharged to West office, contains the following: (1) Type 89–50 CP RENEWAL. A renewal of a Branch Red Clay Creek via a separate of review requested, e.g. new, revision, ground water withdrawal project to outfall. extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) continue to supply up to 15 million Documents relating to these items Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) gallons (mg)/30 days of water to the may be examined at the Commission’s Description of the need for, and applicant’s public water distribution offices. Preliminary dockets are proposed use of, the information; (5) system from Wells Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and available in single copies upon request. Respondents and frequency of 6. The project is located in Smithfield Please contact Thomas L. Brand at (609) collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Township, Monroe County, 883–9500 ext. 221 concerning docket- Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites Pennsylvania. related questions. Persons wishing to public comment. 2. Town of Felton D–99–26 CP. A testify at this hearing are requested to The Department of Education is ground water withdrawal project to register with the Commission Secretary especially interested in public comment

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36124 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices addressing the following issues: (1) Is DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Dated: June 1, 2000. this collection necessary to the proper William Burrow, functions of the Department; (2) will Notice of Proposed Information Leader, Information Management Group, this information be processed and used Collection Requests Office of the Chief Information Officer. in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate Office of the Undersecretary of burden accurate; (4) how might the AGENCY: Department of Education. Department enhance the quality, utility, SUMMARY: The Leader, Information Type of Review: New. Title: Comprehensive School Reform and clarity of the information to be Management Group, Office of the Chief Demonstration Field Focused Studies. collected; and (5) how might the Information Officer, invites comments Department minimize the burden of this Frequency: Semi-Annually. on the proposed information collection Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal collection on the respondents, including requests as required by the Paperwork through the use of information Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. Reduction Act of 1995. technology. Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour DATES: Interested persons are invited to Burden: Responses: 198. Burden Hours: Dated: June 1, 2000. 324. William Burrow, submit comments on or before August 7, 2000. Abstract: This study is being Leader, Information Management Group, conducted as part of the national Office of the Chief Information Officer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section evaluation of the Comprehensive School Office of Elementary and Secondary 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of Reform Demonstration Program. The Education 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires study will examine the link among three that the Office of Management and components—school reform processes, Type of Review: New. Budget (OMB) provide interested instruction and other educational Title: Annual Performance Report for Federal agencies and the public an early activities, and student achievement. the Smaller Learning Communities opportunity to comment on information Requests for copies of the proposed (SLC) Grant Program. collection requests. OMB may amend or information collection request may be Frequency: Annually. waive the requirement for public accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal consultation to the extent that public Department of Education, 400 Maryland Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. participation in the approval process Avenue, SW., Room 5624, Regional Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Office Building 3, Washington, DC Burden: Responses: 161; Burden Hours: 20202–4651. Requests may also be Federal law, or substantially interfere 1,288. electronically mailed to the internet with any agency’s ability to perform its Abstract: This Annual Performance address [email protected] or Report will allow the Department of statutory obligations. The Leader, faxed to 202–708–9346. Please specify Education to collect data required by the Information Management Group, Office the complete title of the information Government Performance and Results of the Chief Information Officer, collection when making your request. Act (GPRA) and by House publishes that notice containing Comments regarding burden and/or the Appropriations language that proposed information collection collection activity requirements should established the Smaller Learning requests prior to submission of these be directed to Jacqueline Montague at Communities grant program [H.R. 3424, requests to OMB. Each proposed (202) 708–5359 or via her internet 106th Congress (Appropriations 2000)]. information collection, grouped by address [email protected]. The Department will use the office, contains the following: (1) Type Individuals who use a information for GPRA report and the of review requested, e.g. new, revision, telecommunications device for the deaf national evaluation of the SLC program. extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) (TDD) may call the Federal Information Requests for copies of the proposed Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– information collection request may be Description of the need for, and 8339.1 accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or proposed use of, the information; (5) [FR Doc. 00–14240 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Respondents and frequency of BILLING CODE 4000±01±U Department of Education, 400 Maryland collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Avenue, SW, Room 5624, Regional Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites Office Building 3, Washington, D.C. public comment. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 20202–4651. Requests may also be The Department of Education is [CFDA Nos. 84.184H, 84.184K, 84.184M, electronically mailed to the internet especially interested in public comment 84.184N] address [email protected] or addressing the following issues: (1) Is faxed to 202–708–9346. Please specify Office of Elementary and Secondary this collection necessary to the proper the complete title of the information EducationÐSafe and Drug-Free collection when making your request. functions of the Department; (2) will Schools and CommunitiesÐNational this information be processed and used Programs Comments regarding burden and/or in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate the collection activity requirements of burden accurate; (4) how might the AGENCY: Department of Education. should be directed to Kathy Axt at (703) Department enhance the quality, utility, ACTION: Notice reopening the 426–9692 or via her internet address and clarity of the information to be application deadline date for Safe and [email protected]. Individuals who use Drug-Free Schools and Communities a telecommunications device for the collected; and (5) how might the Act—National Programs grant deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Department minimize the burden of this competitions. Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– collection on the respondents, including through the use of information 800–877–8339. SUMMARY: On April 6, 2000, the technology. [FR Doc. 00–14239 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Department published a combined BILLING CODE 4000±01±P notice inviting applications for new

VerDate 112000 20:15 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36125 awards for Safe and Drug-Free Schools DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY region, coordinate the selection process and Communities National Programs for subgrants, and oversee the direct grant competitions (65 FR 18188). Denver Regional Office; Solicitation for management and monitoring of training The Secretary reopens the deadline date Financial Assistance Applications; and enhancement projects. The for the submission of applications for Weatherization Training and Program recipient will also ensure that four of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Enhancement information about the projects, through and Communities—National Programs AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. reports and minutes of informational meetings, are developed and grant competitions from May 12, 2000, ACTION: Solicitation for financial distributed. It is estimated that $100,000 (May 22, 2000, for CFDA #84.184M) for assistance applications, solicitation will be made available for the initial applicants that can show a shipping number DE–PS48–00R810686. label, invoice, or receipt for overnight award in Fiscal Year 2000, and DOE delivery contracted to arrive by May 12, SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of anticipates that up to $750,000 may be made available over the five-year project 2000 (May 22, 2000, for CFDA Energy (DOE), pursuant to the DOE period, depending upon availability of #84.184M). This action is taken due to Financial Assistance Rules, 10 CFR 600.8, is announcing its intention to funding. unexpected or unavoidable delays in solicit applications for a state sponsor receipt of applications sent via certain FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: for Weatherization Training and Dennis D. Maez, Contract Specialist, at overnight delivery services. Program Enhancement activities to be Competitions affected by this change of (303) 275–4825, or send an e-mail to conducted for the Weatherization [email protected]. application deadline date are CFDA Assistance Program (WAP) in the #84.184H, Grant Competition to Prevent Denver Region. The financial assistance Issued in Golden, Colorado, on May 26, High-Risk Drinking and Violent award issued under this Solicitation 2000. Behavior Among College Students; will be a cooperative agreement. Jerry L. Zimmer, CFDA #84.184K, Middle School Drug DATES: The solicitation will be issued on Procurement Director, GO. Prevention and School Safety Program or about May 31, 2000. [FR Doc. 00–14323 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Coordinators Grant Competition; CFDA ADDRESSES: Copies of the Solicitation, BILLING CODE 6450±01±P #84.184M, Effective Alternative once issued, can be obtained from the Strategies: Grant Competition to Reduce Golden Field Office Home page at http:/ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Student Suspensions and Expulsions /www.eren.doe.gov/golden/ and Ensure Educational Progress of solicitations.html. DOE does not intend Environmental Management Site- Students who are Suspended or to issue written copies of the Specific Advisory Board, Los Alamos Expelled; and CFDA #84.184N, Alcohol solicitation. AGENCY: and Other Drug Prevention Models on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is Department of Energy. College Campuses Grant Competition. soliciting Applications for a state ACTION: Notice of open meeting. sponsor for Weatherization Training and DATES: For the competitions listed in SUMMARY: This notice announces a this notice, the application deadline Program Enhancement activities to be meeting of the Environmental conducted for the Weatherization date is reopened to June 7, 2000, for Management Site-Specific Advisory Assistance Program (WAP) in the applicants able to show a shipping Board (EM SSAB), Los Alamos. The Denver Region. Eligibility is restricted to Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. label, invoice, or receipt for overnight the twelve states within DOE’s Denver L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that delivery contracted to arrive by May 12, Region. The selected applicant public notice of these meetings be 2000 (May 22, 2000, for CFDA (hereinafter called recipient) will announced in the Federal Register. #84.184M). The deadline for receive financial assistance to intergovernmental review is extended to administer training and other activities DATES: Wednesday, June 28, 2000; 6 June 26, 2000 for these competitions. that assist with the enhancement and p.m.–9 p.m. ADDRESSES: Holiday Inn, 1005 Paseo de FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Safe advancement of the WAP under a Pueblo Sur, Taos, New Mexico. and Drug-Free Schools Program, U.S. cooperative agreement with the DOE. It FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Department of Education, 400 Maryland is anticipated that one award will result Ann from this solicitation. Under the DuBois, Northern New Mexico Citizens’ Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202– cooperative agreement, the recipient Advisory Board, 1640 Old Pecos Trail, 6123. Telephone: (202) 260–3954. will have primary responsibility for Suite H, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Phone: Individuals who use a providing training and technical 505–989–1662; Fax: 505–989–1752; E- telecommunication device for the deaf development activities that are intended mail: [email protected]; or Internet (TDD) may call the Federal Information to improve the depth, knowledge and http:www.nnmcab.org. Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. the caliber of technical skills of grantees SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131. and subgrantees administering the DOE the Board: The purpose of the Board is WAP in the Denver Region. It is Dated: June 2, 2000. to make recommendations to DOE and expected that the recipient will Michael Cohen, its regulators in the areas of coordinate and work in conjunction environmental restoration, waste Assistant Secretary for Elementary and with Weatherization organizations management, and related activities. Secondary Education. within the region that specialize in the [FR Doc. 00–14278 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] delivery of training and enhancement- Tentative Agenda: BILLING CODE 4000±01±P type activities, such as the Opening Activities—6 p.m.–6:30 p.m. Weatherization Manager’s Association Public Comment—6:30 p.m.–7 p.m. (WMA), and other technical skills Committee Reports: training organizations. Environmental Restoration. The recipient will conduct Monitoring and Surveillance. solicitations for WAP projects in the Waste Management.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36126 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Community Outreach. ADDRESSES: North Valley Senior 5400, MS–0184, Albuquerque, NM Budget. Citizens’ Center, 3825 4th Street, NW., 87185, or by calling (505) 845–4094. Other Board business will be Albuquerque, NM 87107. Issued at Washington, DC on June 2, 2000. conducted as necessary. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Samuel, Public Participation: The meeting is Mike Zamorski, Acting Manager, Deputy Advisory Committee Management open to the public. Written statements Department of Energy Kirtland Area Officer. may be filed with the Committee either Office, P.O. Box 5400, MS–0184, [FR Doc. 00–14325 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] before or after the meeting. Individuals Albuquerque, NM 87185 (505) 845– BILLING CODE 6450±01±P who wish to make oral statements 4094. pertaining to agenda items should SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of contact Ann DuBois at the address or the Board: The purpose of the Board is DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY telephone number listed above. to make recommendations to DOE and Requests must be received 5 days prior its regulators in the areas of Environmental Management Site- to the meeting and reasonable provision environmental restoration, waste Specific Advisory Board, Pantex Plant will be made to include the presentation management, and related activities. in the agenda. The Deputy Designated AGENCY: Department of Energy. Federal Officer is empowered to Tentative Agenda: ACTION: Notice of open meeting. conduct the meeting in a fashion that 6:00 p.m.—Check-In/Agenda SUMMARY: This notice announces a will facilitate the orderly conduct of Approval/Minutes. business. Each individual wishing to meeting of the Environmental 6:15 p.m.—Meeting Manager Update. Management Site-Specific Advisory make public comment will be provided 6:30 p.m.—Public Comment (General a maximum of 5 minutes to present Board (EM SSAB), Pantex Plant, Topics). Amarillo, Texas. The Federal Advisory their comments at the beginning of the 6:40 p.m.—Class III Permit meeting. Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. modification (C3PM) Report. 770) requires that public notice of these Minutes: The minutes of this meeting 7:25 p.m.—Break. will be available for public review and meetings be announced in the Federal 7:40 p.m.—Public Comment on C3PM Register. copying at the Freedom of Information Issue DATE AND TIME: Public Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal 7:50 p.m. Citizens’ Advisory Board Tuesday, June 27, 2000; Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, Consensus. 1:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m. SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 8:10 p.m.—Transition Plan. ADDRESSES: Carson County Square a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday, except 8:30 p.m.—Environmental House Museum, Hwy 207 & 5th Street, Federal holidays. Minutes will also be Management Science Program (EMSP). Panhandle, Texas. available at the Public Reading Room 8:40 p.m.—New/Other Business. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry located at the Board’s office at 528 35th 8:50 p.m.—Adjourn. S. Johnson, Assistant Area Manager, Street, Los Alamos, NM 87544. Hours of Public Participation: The meeting is Department of Energy, Amarillo Area operation for the Public Reading Room open to the public. Written statements Office, P.O. Box 30030, Amarillo, TX are 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on Monday may be filed with the Committee either 79120 (806) 477–3125. through Friday. Minutes will also be before or after the meeting. Individuals SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of made available by writing or calling who wish to make oral statements the Board: The purpose of the Board is Ann DuBois at the Board’s office pertaining to agenda items should to advise the Department of Energy and address or telephone number listed contact Mike Zamorski’s office at the its regulators in the areas of above. address or telephone number listed environmental restoration, waste Issued at Washington, DC on June 1, 2000. above. Requests must be received 5 days management, and related activities. prior to the meeting and reasonable Rachel M. Samuel, Tentative Agenda: Deputy Advisory Committee Management provision will be made to include the Officer. presentation in the agenda. The Deputy 1:00—Agenda Review/Approval of [FR Doc. 00–14324 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Designated Federal Officer is Minutes. empowered to conduct the meeting in a 1:15—Co-Chair Comments. BILLING CODE 6450±01±P fashion that will facilitate the orderly 1:30—Task Force/Subcommittee conduct of business. Each individual Reports. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY wishing to make public comment will 2:00—Ex-Officio Reports. be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to 2:30—Updates—Concurrence Reports— Environmental Management Site- present their comments. This notice is DOE. Specific Advisory Board, Sandia being published less than 15 days in 3:00—Lunch. advance of the meeting due to 3:15—Presentation (To Be Decided). AGENCY: Department of Energy. programmatic issues that needed to be 4:15—Public Comments. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. resolved. 4:30—Closing Comments. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting 5:00—Adjourn. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of will be available for public review and Public Participation: The meeting is the Federal Advisory Committee Act copying at the Freedom of Information open to the public. Written statements (Pub. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) notice is Public Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal may be filed with the Committee either hereby given of the following Advisory Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, before or after the meeting. Individuals Committee meeting: Environmental SW, Washington, DC 20585 between who wish to make oral statements Management Site-Specific Advisory 9:00 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday, pertaining to agenda items should Board (EM–SSAB), Kirtland Area Office except Federal holidays. Minutes will contact Jerry Johnson’s office at the (Sandia). also be available by writing to Mike address or telephone number listed DATES: Wednesday, June 21, 2000: 6:00 Zamorski, Manager, Department of above. Requests must be received 5 days p.m.–9:00 p.m. (MST). Energy Kirtland Area Office, P.O. Box prior to the meeting and every

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36127 reasonable provision will be made to 18 CFR 284.221(d)(2)(ii). In Order No. Swing Customer (CSC). Rate Schedule accommodate the request in the agenda. 637, the Commission revised the ROFR DPO is designed primarily to allow The Deputy Designated Federal Official to limit its applicability. Columbia operators of citygate interconnections is empowered to conduct the meeting in revised General Terms and Conditions with Dominion to offer no-notice service a fashion that will facilitate the orderly (GTC) Section 4, which contains the to marketers serving retail markets conduct of business. Each individual procedures for the awarding the existing behind the citygate. Rate Schedule CSC, wishing to make public comment will firm capacity and the exercise of the a companion service to Rate Schedule be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to ROFR of Columbia, to reflect these DPO, is designed for marketers behind present their comments. changes. On April 26, 2000, the the citygate where, under certain terms Minutes: The minutes of this meeting Commission accepted the filed tariff and conditions, such marketers can will be available for public review and sheets to be effective May 1, 2000, receive no-notice service from copying at the Pantex Public Reading subject to Columbia making certain Dominion. Rooms located at the Amarillo College revisions within 30 days. The instant The Commission in its March 31, Lynn Library and Learning Center, 2201 filing is being made to comply with the 2000 Order accepted Dominion’s South Washington, Amarillo, TX phone April 26 Order. proposed Rate Schedule DPO and CSC (806) 371–5400. Hours of operation are Columbia states that copies of its with the exception of the Dominion’s from 7:45 am to 10:00 p.m. Monday filing and have been mailed to all firm proposed hourly flow restrictions and through Thursday; 7:45 am to 5:00 p.m. customers, interruptible customers, and certain penalty proposals. In that Order, on Friday; 8:30 am to 12:00 noon on affected state commissions. the Commission ordered Dominion to Saturday; and 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Any person desiring to protest this refile revised tariff sheets consistent Sunday, except for Federal holidays. filing should file a protest with the with the Commission’s March 31, 2000 Additionally, there is a Public Reading Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, order. Room located at the Carson County 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Dominion states that the revised tariff Public Library, 401 Main Street, 20426, in accordance with Section sheets fully comply with the Order’s Panhandle, TX phone (806) 537–3742. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and requirements to remove the proposed Hours of operation are from 9:00 am to Regulations. All such protests must be hourly flow restrictions from Rate 7:00 pm on Monday; 9:00 am to 5:00 filed as provided in Section 154.210 of Schedules FT, IT and MCS and the p.m. Tuesday through Friday; and the Commission’s Regulations. Protests other changes required by the closed Saturday and Sunday as well as will be considered by the Commission Commission in the Order. Dominion Federal Holidays. Minutes will also be in determining the appropriate action to also states that it has incorporated available by writing or calling Jerry S. be taken, but will not serve to make minor corrections and clarified tariff Johnson at the address or telephone protestants parties to the proceedings. language in order to satisfy customers number listed above. Copies of this filing are on file with the that have filed for rehearing of the Commission and are available for public March 31, 2000, order or otherwise Issued at Washington, DC on May 31, 2000. commented on Dominion’s April 17, Rachel M. Samuel, inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the 2000, compliance filing, including tariff Deputy Advisory Committee Management changes that would give Dominion Officer. web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for additional responsibility to enforce [FR Doc. 00–14326 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] assistance). contract overrun provisions with its BILLING CODE 6450±01±P CSC customers. To that end, Dominion David P. Boergers, has requested a limited waiver of Secretary. Section 154.203(b) of the Commission’s DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [FR Doc. 00–14234 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] regulations, 18 CFR 154.203(b). BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Dominion indicated that it plans to Federal Energy Regulatory file its motion to move these tariff sheets Commission into effect on or before June 30, 2000, [Docket No. RP00±237±001] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY provided that these tariff sheets are accepted for filing by the Commission Columbia Gas Transmission Federal Energy Regulatory and are allowed to become effective as Corporation; Notice of Proposed Commission proposed. Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Dominion states that copies of its [Docket No. RP00±21±005] filing have been served upon June 1, 2000. Dominion’s customers and interested Take notice that on May 26, 2000, Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff state commissions. Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation Any person desiring to protest this (Columbia) tendered for filing as part of June 1, 2000. filing should file a protest with the its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Take notice that on May 26, 2000, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Volume No. 1, the following revised Dominion Transmission, Inc. 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. tariff sheets with a proposed effective (Dominion), formerly CNG 20426, in accordance with Section date of May 1, 2000: Transmission Corporation, tendered for 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 280 filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Regulations. All such protest must be Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 281 Second Revised Volume No. 1, tariff filed as provided in Section 154.210 of Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 283 sheets with a proposed listed on the Commission’s Regulations. Protests Columbia states that on March 31, Appendix A to the filing, with an will be considered by the Commission 2000, it filed tariff sheets in Docket No. effective date of July 1, 2000. in determining the appropriate action to RP00–237 to revise its tariff to comply Dominion states that the purpose of be taken, but will not serve to make with the Commission’s changes in its this filing is to implement two new rate protestants parties to the proceedings. Order No. 637 to the right-of-first-refusal schedules, Rate Schedules Delivery Copies of this filing are on file with the (ROFR) afforded certain firm shippers in Point Operator (DPO) and City Gate Commission and are available for public

VerDate 112000 20:15 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36128 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices inspection in the Public Reference A fact sheet prepared by the FERC • Construct taps at the interconnects Room. This filing may be viewed on the entitled ‘‘An Interstate Natural Gas with the new Horizon pipeline in web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ Facility On My Land? What Do I Need DuPage and McHenry Counties, Illinois. rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for To Know?’’ was attached to the project The locations of all proposed facilities assistance). notice the applicants provided to are shown in appendix 1. landowners. This fact sheet addresses a David P. Boergers, Land Requirements for Construction number of typically asked questions, Secretary. including the use of eminent domain Construction of the proposed facilities [FR Doc. 00–14233 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] and how to participate in the would require about 424 acres of land. BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Commission’s proceedings. It is Following construction, approximately available for viewing on the FERC 139 acres would be maintained as new Internet website (www.ferc.fed.us). pipeline right-of-way and about 7 acres DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY would be maintained as new Summary of the Proposed Project Federal Energy Regulatory aboveground facility sites. The Commission [Docket No. CP00–129–000] remaining 278 acres of land would be Horizon does not currently own any restored and allowed to prevent to the [Docket No. CP00±129±000; Docket No. former use. CP00±132±000] pipeline facilities and is not engaged in any natural gas transportation The EA Process operations. Upon approval of the subject Horizon Pipeline Company, L.L.C. and The National Environmental Policy applications, Horizon would become a Natural Gas Pipeline Company of Act (NEPA) requires that Commission to new interstate pipeline company subject America; Notice of Intent To Prepare take into account the environmental to Commission jurisdiction under the an Environmental Assessment for the impacts that could result from an action Natural Gas Act. Horizon proposes to Proposed Horizon Project and Request whenever it considers the issuance of a provide 380 thousand dekatherms per for Comments on Environmental Certificate of Public Convenience and day (Mdth/d) of gas transportation Issues Necessity. NEPA also requires us to service to customers in northern Illinois. discover and address concerns the June 1, 2000. The Horizon Project would consist of 71 public may have about proposals. We The staff of the Federal Energy miles of pipeline from near Joliet, call this ‘‘scoping’’. The main goal of the Regulatory Commission (FERC or Illinois to near McHenry, Illinois. scoping process is to focus the analysis Commission) will prepare an Approximately 29 miles would be new in the EA on the important environmental assessment (EA) that will construction with the remaining 42 environmental issues. By this Notice of discuss the environmental impacts of miles consisting of leased capacity along Intent, the Commission requests public the Horizon Project involving an existing Natural pipeline. comments on the scope of the issues it construction and operation of facilities Specifically, Horizon proposes to will address in the EA. All comments by Horizon Pipeline Company, L.L.C. acquire, construct, and operate: received are considered during the (Horizon) and Natural Gas Pipeline • 29 miles of new 36-inch-diameter Company of America (Natural) in Cook, preparation of the EA. State and local pipeline in DuPage, Cook, Kane, and government representatives are DuPage, Kane, McHenry, and Will McHenry Counties, Illinois; 1 encouraged to notify their constituents counties, Illinois. These facilities • Miscellaneous meter stations, taps, would consist of approximately 71 of this proposed action and encourage and values along the new 36-inch- them to comment on their areas of miles of various diameter pipeline, a diameter pipeline; new compressor station, modification to concern. • 380 MDth/d of leased capacity an existing compressor station, meter The EA will discuss impacts that along 42 miles of existing Natural stations, taps, and values. This EA will could occur as a result of the pipeline in Will and DuPage Counties, be used by the Commission in its construction and operation of the Illinois; and proposed project under these general decision-making process to determine • whether the project is in the public 8,900 horsepower new compressor headings: station adjacent to Natural’s Compressor • Geology and soils; convenience and necessity. • If you are a landowner receiving this Station 113 in Will County, Illinois. Water resources, fisheries, and notice, you may be contacted by a [Docket No. CP00–132–000] wetlands; • Vegetation and wildlife; pipeline company representative about Natural proposes to abandon 42 miles • the acquisition of an easement to Endangered and threatened species; of leased capacity on its existing system • Land use; construct, operate, and maintain the to Horizon. The leased capacity would • Cultural Resources; proposed facilities. The pipeline run from Natural’s Gulf Cost mainline • Air quality and noise; and company would seek to negotiate a interconnect with Alliance Pipeline L.P. • Public safety. mutually acceptable agreement. to an interconnect with the proposed We will also evaluate possible However, if the project is approved by Horizon pipeline. The capacity lease alternatives to the proposed project or the Commission, that approval conveys would require Natural to construct new portions of the project, and make with it the right of eminent domain. facilities and to rearrange existing recommendations on how to lessen or Therefore, if easement negotiations fail facilities. Specifically, Natural proposes avoid impacts on the various resource to produce an agreement, the pipeline to: areas. company could initiate condemnation • Abandon by lease 380 MDth/d of Our independent analysis of the proceedings in accordance with state capacity to Horizon; issues will be in the EA. Depending on law. • Increase the total horsepower of its the comments received during the existing Compressor Station 113 by scoping process, the EA may be 1 Horizon and Natural’s application were filed 3,690 horsepower; published and mailed to Federal, state, with the Commission under Section 7 of the Natural • Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission’s Modify the Streamwood Meter and local agencies, public interest regulations. Station; and groups, interested individuals, affected

VerDate 112000 20:15 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36129 landowners, newspapers, libraries, and Becoming an Intervenor DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY the Commission’s official service list for this proceeding. A comment period will In addition to involvement in the EA Federal Energy Regulatory be allotted for review if the EA is scoping process, you may want to Commission published. We will consider all become an official party to the comments on the EA before we make or proceeding known as an ‘‘intervenor.’’ [Docket No. EG00±149±000] our recommendations to the Intervenors play a more formal role in Commission. the process. Among other things, Midwest Electric Power, Inc.; Notice of To ensure your comments are intervenors have the right to receive Amendment to Application for considered, please carefully follow the copies of case-related Commission Commission Determination of Exempt instructions in the public participation documents and filings by other Wholesale Generator Status section beginning on page 4. intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor June 1, 2000. Currently Identified Environmental must provide 14 copies of its filings to Take notice that on May 26, 2000, Issues the Secretary of the Commission and Midwest Electric power, Inc. (MEP), must send a copy of its filings to all 2100 Portland Road, P.O. Box 165, We have already identified several other parties on the Commission’s Joppa, IL 62953, filed with the Federal issues that we think deserve attention service list for this proceeding. If you Energy Regulatory Commission on based on a preliminary review of the want to become an intervenor you must amendment to its application for proposed facilities and the file a motion to intervene according to determination of exempt wholesale environmental information provided by Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of generator status pursuant to Part 365 of Horizon. This preliminary list of issues Practice and Procedure (18 CFR the Commission’s regulations. may be changed based on your 385.214) (see appendix 2). Only Any person desiring to be heard comments and our analysis. Intervenors have the right to seek concerning the application for exempt • The project would be cross 10 rehearing of the Commission’s decision. wholesale generator status should file a perennial streams, 24 acres of wetlands, motion to intervene or comments with Affected landowners and parties with and 22 acres of forest. the Federal Energy Regulatory • Federally listed endangered or environmental concerns may be granted Commission, 888 First Street, NE., threatened species, such as the prairie intervenor status upon showing good Washington, DC 20426, in accordance bush clover and the eastern prairie cause by stating that they have clear and with Rules 211 and 214 of the fringed orchid, may occur in the direct interest in this proceeding which Commission’s Rules of Practice and proposed project area. would not be adequately represented by Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and • The project would cross public any other parties. You do not need 385.214). The Commission will limit its lands and other designated areas, such intervenor status to have your consideration of comments to those that as the Pratts Wayne Woods County environmental comments considered. concern the adequacy of accuracy of the Forest Preserve, the Stickney Run Additional information about the application. All such motions and Conservation Area, and the Bates Fen proposed project is available from Mr. comments should be filed on or before Nature Preserve, in DuPage and Paul McKee of the Commission’s Office June 21, 2000, and must be served on McHenry Counties. of External Affairs at (202) 208–1088 or the applicant. Any person wishing to Public Participation on the FERC website (www.ferc.fed.us) become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on You can make a difference by using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link to information in this docket number. Click on the file with the Commission and are providing us with your specific available for public inspection or on the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ from the comments or concerns about the project. Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/ RIMS Menu, and follow the By becoming a commentor, your online/rims.htm (please call (202) 208– instructions. For assistance with access concerns will be addressed in the EA 2222 for assistance). and considered by the Commission. You to RIMS, the RIMS helpline can be should focus on the potential reached at (202) 208–2222. David P. Boergers, environmental effects of the proposal, Similarly, the ‘‘CIPS’’ link on the Secretary. alternatives to the proposal (including FERC Internet website provides access [FR Doc. 00–14226 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] alternative routes, and measure to avoid to the texts of formal documents issued BILLING CODE 6717±01±M or lessen environmental impact. The by the Commission, such as orders, more specific your comments, the more notices, and rulemakings. From the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY useful they will be. Please carefully FERC Internet website, click on the follow these instructions to ensure that ‘‘CIPS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ from the your comments are received in time and Federal Energy Regulatory CIPS menu, and follow the instructions. properly recorded: Commission For assistance with access to CIPS, the • Send two copies of your letter to: David P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal CIPS helpline can be reached at (202) [Docket No. RP99±176±020] 208–2474. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Natural Gas Pipeline Company of First St., NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC David P. Boergers, America; Notice of Proposed Change 20426. • Secretary. in FERC Gas Tariff Label one copy of the comments for [FR Doc. 00–14229 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the attention of Gas 1. June 1, 2000. • Reference Docket Nos. CP00–129– BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Take notice that on May 26, 2000, 000 & CP00–132–000. Natural Gas Pipeline Company of • Mail your comments so that they America (Natural) tendered for filing will be received in Washington, DC on First Revised Sheet No. 26J to be a part or before June 30, 2000. of its FERC Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36130 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Volume No. 1, to be effective April 25, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Substitute First Revised Sheet Number 13C 2000. Substitute Original Sheet Number 13D On April 25, 2000, Natural filed Federal Energy Regulatory SIPI asserts that the purpose of this Original sheet No. 26J at Docket No. Commission filing is to comply with Order No. 587 RP99–176–018 to implement a [Docket No. ER00±2176±000] issued on July 17, 1996; the Notice negotiated rate formula transaction Clarifying procedures for Filing Tariff under Rate Schedule ITS with the New Hampshire Electric Cooperative, Sheets issued on September 12, 1996, in Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company. Inc.; Notice of Filing Docket No. RM96–1–000; and the Original Sheet No. 26J was accepted by Commission’s direction of 10 May, 2000 letter order dated May 19, 2000, to June 1, 2000. in Docket No. RP00–244–000 to correct become effective April 25, 2000. Take notice that on May 2, 2000, New errors in definitions on certain tariff Subsequently to Natural’s initial filing Hampshire Electric Cooperative, Inc. sheets and to revise tariff language to on April 25, 2000, it was discovered that (NHEC), tendered for filing a request for incorporate Gas Industry Standards the executed negotiated rate agreement withdrawal of its petition for acceptance Board (GISB) Standards 1.3.38 and inadvertently omitted all storage and of changes to NHEC’s FERC Rate 1.3.46. pooling points in Natural’s Iowa Illinois Schedule No. 2 filed with the SIPI states that copies of this filing Gulf Receipt Zone from among the Commission on April 11, 2000 in the were mailed to all customers of SIPI and qualified delivery points. The above-referenced docket. Interested Parties. negotiated rate agreement was amended Any person desiring to be heard or to Any person desiring to protest this to remedy this omission. Therefore, protest such filing should file a motion filing should file a protest with the Natural is now submitting First Revised to intervene or protest with the Federal Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Sheet No. 26J reflecting the revised Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC footnote six (6) to supersede Original First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 20426, in accordance with Section Sheet No. 26J previously submitted on in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and April 25, 2000. of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Regulations. All such protests must be Natural requests waiver of the and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and filed as provided in Section 154.210 of Commission’s Regulations, including 385.214). All such motions and protests the Commission’s Regulations. Protests the 30-day notice requirement of should be filed on or before June 9, will be considered by the Commission Section 154.207, to the extent necessary 2000. Protests will be considered by the in determining the appropriate action to to permit First Revised Sheet No. 26J to Commission to determine the be taken, but will not serve to make become effective April 25, 2000, which appropriate to be taken, but will not protestants parties to the proceedings. coincides with the effective date of the serve to make protestants parties to the Copies of this filing are on file with the amendment to the underlying proceedings. Any person wishing to Commission and are available for public negotiated rate agreement. become a party must file a motion to inspection in the Public Reference Natural states that copies of the filing intervene. Copies of this filing are on Room. This filing may be viewed on the are being mailed to Natural’s customers, file with the Commission and are web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ interested state commissions and all available for public inspection. This rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for parties set out on the Commission’s filing may also be viewed on the assistance). official service list in Docket No. RP99– Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/ 176. online/rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for David P. Boergers, Any person desiring to be heard or to assistance). Secretary. protest said filing should file a motion [FR Doc. 00–14235 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Linwood A. Watson, Jr., to intervene or a protest with the BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Acting Secretary. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC [FR Doc. 00–14236 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] 20426, in accordance with sections BILLING CODE 6717±01±M DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 385.215 or 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Regulations. All such motions Federal Energy Regulatory or protests must be filed in accordance DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission with section 154.210 of the [Docket No. RP97±408±012] Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Federal Energy Regulatory be considered by the Commission in Commission Trailblazer Pipeline Company; Notice determining the appropriate action to be [Docket No. RP00±244±001] of Filing of Refund Report taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Sumas International Pipeline Inc; June 1, 2000. Any person wishing to become a party Notice of Compliance Filing Take notice that on May 26, 2000, must file a motion to intervene. Copies Trailblazer Pipeline Company of this filing are on file with the June 1, 2000. (Trailblazer) filed a refund report in Commission and are available for public Take notice that on May 26, 2000, Docket No. RP97–408–000. Trailblazer inspection in the Public Reference Sumas International Pipeline Inc. (SIPI), states that the filing and refunds were Room. This filing may be viewed on the tendered for filing as part of its FERC made to comply with the Commission’s web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 2, the Orders of April 3, 1999 and March 30, rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for following tariff sheets to become 2000. Trailblazer states that these assistance). effective May 1, 2000: amounts were paid by Trailblazer on April 28, 2000. David P. Boergers, Substitute Second Revised Sheet Number 10 Substitute Second Revised Sheet Number 11 The refund report summarizes Secretary. Substitute Original Sheet Number 11A transportation refund amounts for the [FR Doc. 00–14231 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Substitute First Revised Sheet Number 13A period January 1, 1998 through March BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Substitute First Revised Sheet Number 13B 31, 2000 pursuant to Article II of

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36131

Trailblazer’s Stipulation and Agreement Schedules LNG and LNG–R to provide activities to collect and flow through as approved in the Commission’s April some receipt and delivery point refunds of the taxes at issue. 3, 1999 Order. flexibility. Specifically, secondary point Williams states that a copy of its filing Trailblazer states that the copies of its rights under these rate schedules will be was served on all parties included on filing are being mailed to its customers, provided, but will be limited to (1) the the official service list maintained by interested state commissions and all same zone in which the customer’s the Secretary in this proceeding. parties set out on the Commission’s primary receipt and delivery point are Any person desiring to protest said official service list in Docket No. RP97– located and (2) physical points on filing should file a protest with the 408. Transco’s system where measurement Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Any person desiring to protest said facilities exist, excluding pipeline 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC filing should file a protest with the interconnects. 20426, in accordance with Section Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Transco states that it is serving copies 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC of the instant filing to its interveners as Regulations. All such protests must be 20426, in accordance with Section reflected on the official service list. filed in on or before June 8, 2000. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Any person desiring to protest this Protests will be considered by the Regulations. All such protests must be filing should file a protest with the Commission in determining the on or before June 8, 2000. Protests will Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, appropriate action to be taken, but will be considered by the Commission in 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC not serve to make protestants parties to determining the appropriate action to be 20426, in accordance with Section the proceedings. Copies of this filing are taken, but will not serve to make 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and on file with the Commission and are protestants parties to the proceedings. Regulations. All such protests must be available for public inspection in the Copies of this filing are on file with the filed as provided in Section 154.210 of Public Reference Room. This filing may Commission and are available for public the Commission’s Regulations. Protests be viewed on the web at http:// inspection in the Public Reference will be considered by the Commission www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call Room. This filing may be viewed on the in determining the appropriate action to 202–208–2222 for assistance). web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ be taken, but will not serve to make David P. Boergers, rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for protestants parties to the proceedings. Secretary. assistance). Copies of this filing are on file with the [FR Doc. 00–14230 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] David P. Boergers, Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Secretary. Room. This filing may be viewed on the [FR Doc. 00–14228 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717±01±M rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for assistance). Federal Energy Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY David P. Boergers, Commission Secretary. Federal Energy Regulatory [Project No. 137±002] [FR Doc. 00–14232 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Commission BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Pacific Gas & Electric Company; [Docket No. RP99±291±002] Notice of Meetings

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY June 1, 2000. Corporation; Notice of Compliance Take notice there will be meetings of Filing Federal Energy Regulatory the Ecological Resources subgroup of Commission the Mokelumne Relicensing June 1, 2000. Collaborative on June 7–8, and 13–15, Take notice that on May 26, 2000, [Docket No. RP98±52±037] 2000. There will be meetings of the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Recreation subgroup on June 8 and 14– Corporation (Transco) tendered for Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc.; 15, 2000. The Ecological Resources and filing certain revised tariff sheets for Notice of Filing of Refund Report Recreation subgroups will meeting inclusion in its FERC Gas Tariff, Third jointly on June 9, 2000. The Full Revised Volume No, 1, which tariff June 1, 2000. Collaborative will meet on June 21–22, sheets are enumerated in Appendix A Take notice that on May 26, 2000, and 28–29, 2000. These meetings will be attached to the filing. Such tariff sheets Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc. held from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at 2740 are proposed to be effective April 14, (Williams), tendered for filing its report Gateway Oaks Drive, in Sacramento, 2000. of activities regarding collection of California. Expected participants need Transco states that the purpose of the Kansas ad valorem taxes. to give their names to David Moller instant filing is to revise Rate Schedules Williams states that this filing is being (PG&E) at (415) 973–4696. LNG and LNG–R to be consistent with made in compliance with Commission For further information, please the requirements for a Part 284 open- order issued September 10, 1997 in contact Diana Shannon at (202) 208– access service as discussed in the Docket Nos. RP97–397–000, et al. The 7774. Commission’s April 14, 2000 Order on September 10 order requires first sellers Rehearing Rejecting Tariff Sheets in the to make refunds for the period October David P. Boergers, referenced docket. (April 14 Order). In 3, 1983 through June 28, 1988. The Secretary. compliance with the April 14 Order, Commission also directed that pipelines [FR Doc. 00–14227 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Transco is herein revising Rate file a report annually concerning their BILLING CODE 6717±01±M

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36132 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY will expire September 30, 2000. This necessary to extend the current rates notice of proposed extension of rates is pursuant to 10 CFR part 903. Upon its Federal Energy Regulatory issued pursuant to 10 CFR part approval, Rate Order No. WAPA–71 will Commission 903.23(a)(1). In accordance with 10 CFR be extended under Rate Order No. part 903.23(a)(2), Western Area Power WAPA–91. Under Rate Order No. Notice Administration (Western) will not have WAPA–71, the three types of June 1, 2000. a consultation and comment period and transmission service rates approved Take notice that the format of the will not hold public information and were (1) a firm point-to-point notice issued pursuant to section 3(a) of comment forums. transmission service rate for the AC the Government in the Sunshine Act, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Intertie 230/345-kV transmission Pub. L. 94–409, 5 U.S.C. 552b, is being Maher Nasir, Rates Team Lead, Desert system; (2) a firm point-to-point revised to reflect the new organizational Southwest Customer Service Region, transmission service rate for the AC structure of the Commission’s technical Western Area Power Administration, Intertie 500-kV transmission system; offices. P.O. Box 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005– and (3) a nonfirm point-to-point Consent agenda items from the 6457, (602) 352–2768, or by e-mail: transmission service rate for the AC Commission’s Office of Markets, Tariffs, [email protected]. Intertie 230/345/500-kV transmission and Rates will be listed first as CAE- system. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By Western’s firm point-to-point and CAG-items (for electric and gas, Amendment No. 3 to Delegation Order respectively) followed by consent transmission service rate for the AC No. 0204–108, published November 10, Intertie 230/345-kV transmission system agenda items from the Commission’s 1993 (58 FR 59716), the Secretary of Office of Projects listed as CAH- and was superseded through Rate Order No. Energy delegated (1) the authority to WAPA–76 and submitted to FERC for CAC-items (for hydro and certificate, develop long-term power and respectively). Regular agenda items will confirmation and approval on February transmission rates on a nonexclusive 8, 1999. On June 22, 1999, in Docket No. be listed in the following order: H-, C-, basis to Western’s Administrator; and M-, E-, and G- (for hydro, certificate, EF99–5191–000, at 87 FERC ¶ 61,346, (2) the authority to confirm, approve, FERC issued an order confirming, miscellaneous, electric, and gas, and and place into effect on a final basis, to items, respectively). approving, and placing in effect on a remand, or to disapprove such rates to final basis the firm point-to-point The new format will be used for the the Federal Energy Regulatory first meeting in June. Accordingly, the transmission service rate of $12.00/ Commission (FERC). In Delegation Sunshine Act Notice will be issued kilowattyear for the AC Intertie 230/345- Order No. 0204–172, effective under this format on June 7, 2000. kV transmission system. The rate set November 24, 1999, the Secretary of In addition, beginning on June 7, forth in Rate Order No. WAPA–76 was Energy delegated the authority to 2000, the Sunshine Act Notice will be approved for a 5-year period beginning confirm, approve, and place such rates available in the HTML format on the January 1, 1999, and ending December into effect on an interim basis to the day of issuance to all interested persons 31, 2003. Deputy Secretary. on the Commission’s Internet Web-Site Western is now proposing, through Pursuant with Delegation Order No. at the following locations: Daily Notices, Rate Order No. WAPA–91, to extend the 0204–108 and existing Department of Commission Meeting Information, and existing firm point-to-point Energy procedures for public Office of the Secretary. transmission service rate of $17.23/ participation in power and transmission kilowattyear for the AC Intertie 500-kV David P. Boergers, rate adjustments in 10 CFR part 903, transmission system and the nonfirm Secretary. Western’s firm point-to-point point-to-point transmission service rate [FR Doc. 00–14225 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] transmission service rate for the AC of 2.00 mills/kilowatthour for the AC BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Intertie 500-kV transmission system and Intertie 230/345/500-kV transmission nonfirm point-to-point transmission system through December 31, 2003. This service rate for the AC Intertie 230/345/ proposed extension will synchronize DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 500-kV transmission system were the expiration dates for all firm and submitted to FERC for confirmation and nonfirm point-to-point transmission Western Area Power Administration approval on January 31, 1996. On July service rates for the AC Intertie 230/345/ 24, 1996, in Docket No. EF96–5191–000, 500-kV transmission system. Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest at 76 FERC ¶ 62,061, FERC issued an During the firm point-to-point Intertie ProjectÐNotice of Proposed order confirming, approving, and transmission service rate development Extension of Firm and Nonfirm placing in effect on a final basis the firm for the AC Intertie 230/345-kV Transmission Service RatesÐRate point-to-point transmission service rate transmission system (Rate Order No. Order No. WAPA±91 for the AC Intertie 500-kV transmission WAPA–76), Western determined that it AGENCY: Western Area Power system and the nonfirm point-to-point will take approximately 10 years for the Administration, DOE. transmission service rate for the AC AC Intertie 500-kV transmission system ACTION: Notice of proposed extension. Intertie 230/345/500-kV transmission to be subscribed to a level sufficient to system. The rates set forth in Rate Order meet its own revenue repayment SUMMARY: This action is a proposal to No. WAPA–71 were approved for the 5- requirements. The ratesetting Power extend the existing Pacific Northwest- year period beginning February 1, 1996, Repayment Study (PRS), established for Pacific Southwest Intertie Project (AC and ending September 30, 2000. the AC Intertie 230/345/500-kV Intertie) firm point-to-point The firm point-to-point transmission transmission system (Rate Order No. transmission service rate for the 500-kV service rate for the AC Intertie 500-kV WAPA–76), reflected the phasing-in of transmission system and the nonfirm transmission system and the nonfirm AC Intertie 500-kV transmission system point-to-point transmission service rate point-to-point transmission service rate revenues starting in FY 1999 through FY for the 230/345/500-kV transmission for the AC Intertie 230/345/500-kV 2008. This ratesetting PRS remains system, Rate Order No. WAPA–71, transmission system will expire on valid. The projected revenue levels through December 31, 2003. Both rates September 30, 2000. This makes it through sales of firm and nonfirm point-

VerDate 112000 20:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36133 to-point transmission service and The telephone number for the Sheraton related documents that might be miscellaneous items are sufficient to Hotel is (703) 486–1111. available electronically, from the recover project expenses and capital Requests to participate may be FIFRA/SAP Internet Home Page at http:/ requirements through FY 2049 for the submitted by mail, electronically, or in /www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/. To access AC Intertie 230/345/500-kV person. Please follow the detailed this document, on the Home Page, select transmission system. instructions for each method as ‘‘Federal Register Notice Announcing All documents made or kept by provided in Unit III. of the This Meeting.’’ You can also go directly Western for developing the proposed ‘‘SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.’’ to the Federal Register listings at http:/ extension of the firm point-to-point To ensure proper receipt by EPA, your /www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. transmission service rate for the AC request must identify docket control 2. In person. The Agency has Intertie 500-kV transmission system and number OPP–00664 in the subject line established an administrative record for the nonfirm point-to-point transmission on the first page of your response. this meeting under docket control service rate for the AC Intertie 230/345/ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: number OPP–00664. The administrative 500-kV transmission system will be Larry Dorsey, Designated Federal record consists of the documents made available for inspection and Official (7101C), Office of Science specifically referenced in this notice, copying at the Desert Southwest Coordination and Policy, Environmental any public comments received during Customer Service Region, located at 615 Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., an applicable comment period, and South 43rd Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona. 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., other information related to Atrazine: Within ninety days after publication Washington, DC 20460; telephone Hazard and Dose Response Assessment of this notice, Rate Order No. WAPA– number: (703) 305–5369; fax number: and Characterization, including any 91 will be submitted to the Deputy (703) 605–0656; e-mail address: information claimed as Confidential Secretary for approval through [email protected]. Business Information (CBI). This December 31, 2003. administrative record includes the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: documents that are physically located in Dated: May 30, 2000. I. Does this Action Apply to Me? the docket, as well as the documents Michael S. Hacskaylo, that are referenced in those documents. Administrator. This action is directed to the public The public version of the administrative [FR Doc. 00–14327 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] in general. This action may, however, be record, which includes printed, paper BILLING CODE 6450±01±P of interest to those persons who are or versions of any electronic comments may be required to conduct testing of that may be submitted during an chemical substances under the Federal applicable comment period, is available ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), for inspection in the Public Information AGENCY or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Since Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2 (CM #2), 1921 [OPP±00664; FRL±6591±9] other entities may also be interested, the Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, Agency has not attempted to describe all from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; the specific entities that may be affected Notice of Public Meeting through Friday, excluding legal by this action. If you have any questions holidays. The PIRIB telephone number AGENCY: Environmental Protection regarding the applicability of this action is (703) 305–5805. Agency (EPA). to a particular entity, consult the person III. How Can I Request to Participate in ACTION: Notice. listed under ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.’’ This 3– this Meeting? SUMMARY: There will be a 3-day meeting day meeting concerns several scientific You may submit a request to of the Federal Insectide, Fungicide, and issues undergoing consideration within participate in this meeting through the Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Food the EPA Office of Pesticide Programs mail, in person, or electronically. Do not Quality Protection Act (FQPA) (OPP). The topics to be discussed submit any information in your request Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) to include both the cancer and non-cancer that is considered CBI. To ensure proper review a set of issues being considered hazard and dose-response assessment of receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you by the Agency pertaining to atrazine atrazine. identify docket control number OPP– cancer and reproductive developmental Copies of the Panel’s report of their 00664 in the subject line on the first hazard and dose response assessment. recommendations will be available page of your request. Members of the The meeting is open to the public. approximately 45 working days after the public wishing to submit comments Seating at the meeting will be on a first- meeting, and will be posted on the should contact the persons listed under come basis. Individuals requiring FIFRA SAP web site or may be obtained ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION special accommodations at this meeting, by contacting the Public Information CONTACT’’ to confirm that the meeting including wheelchair access, should and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) at date and agenda have not been modified contact Larry Dorsey at the address the address and telephone listed below or changed. listed under ‘‘FOR FURTHER under Unit II.2. of ‘‘SUPPLEMENTARY Interested persons are permitted to INFORMATION CONTACT’’ at least 5 INFORMATION.’’ file written statements before the business days prior to the meeeting so meeting. To the extent that time II. How Can I Get Additional permits, and upon advanced written that appropriate arrangements can be Information, Including Copies of this made. request to the persons listed under Document and Other Related ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION DATES: The meeting will be held on June Documents? CONTACT,’’ interested persons may be 27, 28, and 29 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 1. Electronically. A meeting agenda permitted by the Chair of the FIFRA p.m. and copies of EPA background Scientific Advisory Panel to present oral ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at documents for the meeting are available. statements at the meeting. The request the Sheraton Crystal City Hotel, 1800 You may obtain electronic copies of should identify the name of the Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. these documents, and certain other individual making the presentation, the

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36134 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices organization (if any) the individual will ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION represent, and any requirements for AGENCY AGENCY audiovisual equipment (e.g., overhead [FRLÐ6711±5] projector, 35mm projector, chalkboard, [OPP±301000; FRL±6556±1] etc.) There is no limit on the length of Notice of Scientific and Technological written comments for consideration by Achievement Awards SubcommitteeÐ Cut-Roses; Request for Exception to the Panel, but oral statements before the Closed Meeting Worker Protection Standard's Panel are limited to approximately 5 Prohibition of Early Entry Into AGENCY: Environmental Protection minutes. The Agency also urges the Pesticide-Treated Areas to Harvest Agency (EPA). public to submit written comments in Roses by Hand Cutting ACTION: Notice. lieu of oral presentations. Persons AGENCY: Environmental Protection wishing to make oral or written SUMMARY: An ad hoc Subcommittee of Agency (EPA). statements at the meeting should the Science Advisory Board will meet at contact the persons listed under ‘‘FOR the U.S. Environmental Protection ACTION: Notice of exception request; FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT’’ Agency (EPA), Washington, DC, on June request for comment. and submit 30 copies of their 22–23, 2000. Pursuant to section 10(d) presentation and/or remarks to the of the Federal Advisory Committee Act SUMMARY: EPA has received a request for Panel. The Agency encourages that (FACA), 5 U.S.C. app. 2, and section an exception from some of the restricted written statements be submitted before (c)(6) of the Government in the entry provisions of the Worker the meeting to provide Panel Members Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6), EPA Protection Standard for rose harvesters. the time necessary to consider and has determined that the meeting will be The exception would allow rose review the comments. closed to the public. The purpose of the harvesters to harvest roses by hand meeting is to recommend to the 1. By mail. You may submit a request before restricted entry intervals (REIs) Assistant Administrator of the Office of have expired. Roses, Inc. has submitted to: Public Information and Records Research and Development (ORD) the a request to the Agency for a 5-year WPS Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information recipients of the Agency’s 1999 cut-rose exception similar to the terms Resources and Services Division Scientific and Technological of a previous exception. This Notice (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs Achievement Cash Awards. These acknowledges receipt of Roses, Inc.’s (OPP), Environmental Protection awards are established to honor and request and invites comment on the Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 recognize EPA employees who have request. Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, made outstanding contributions in the DC 20460. advancement of science and technology DATES: Comments, identified by docket 2. In person or by courier. Public through their research and development control number OPP–301000, must be Information and Records Integrity activities, as exhibited in publication of received on or before August 7, 2000. their results in peer reviewed journals. Branch (PIRIB), Information Resources ADDRESSES: In making these recommendations, Comments may be and Services Division (7502C), Office of submitted by mail, electronically, or in Pesticide Programs (OPP), including the actual cash amount of each award, the Agency requires full person. Please follow the detailed Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. and frank advice from the Science instructions for each method as 119, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Advisory Board. This advice will provided in Unit I. of the Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from involve professional judgments on the ‘‘SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.’’ 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through relative merits of various employees and To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is Friday, excluding legal holidays. The their respective work. Such personnel imperative that you identify docket PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– issues, where disclosure would control number OPP–301000 in the 5805. constitute an unwarranted invasion of subject line on the first page of your 3. Electronically. You may submit personal privacy, are protected from response. your request electronically by e-mail to: disclosure by section (c)(6) of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ‘‘[email protected].’’ Do not submit Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 Robert I. Rose, Field and External any information electronically that you U.S.C. 552b(c)(6). In accordance with Affairs Division (7506C), Office of consider to be CBI. Use WordPerfect the provisions of the Federal Advisory Pesticide Programs, Environmental 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format and avoid Committee Act, minutes of the meeting Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., the use of special characters and any will be kept for Agency and 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, form of encryption. Be sure to identify Congressional review. DC 20460; telephone number: (703) by docket control number OPP–00664. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 305–6708; fax number: (703) 308–2962; You may also file a request online at Robert Flaak, Team Leader, Committee e-mail address: [email protected]. many Federal Depository Libraries. Operations Staff, Science Advisory Board (1400A), U.S. Environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: List of Subjects Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania I. General Information Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20460, Environmental protection. telephone: (202) 564–4546 or e-mail at: A. Does this Action Apply to Me? Dated: June 2, 2000. [email protected]. You may be potentially affected by Steven Galson, Dated: June 1, 2000. this action if you are a rose producer or Director, Office of Science Coordination and Carol M. Browner, harvester or pesticide manufacturer. Policy. Administrator. Potentially affected categories and [FR Doc. 00–14420 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 00–14460 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] entities may include, but are not limited BILLING CODE 6560±50±F BILLING CODE 6560±50±P to:

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36135

Categories NAICS codes Examples of potentially affected entities

Agriculture 11 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

Agriculture pest control services 115112 Control of rose pests and diseases

Crop harvesting 115113 Cut rose harvesting

Postharvest crop activities 115114 Reentry for management and maintenance

Agriculture production or harvesting crews 115115 Rose harvesters

This listing is not intended to be Davis Highway, Arlington, VA, from 8 you submit to EPA in response to this exhaustive, but rather provides a guide a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, document as CBI by marking any part or for readers regarding entities likely to be excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB all of that information as CBI. affected by this action. Other types of telephone number is (703) 305–5805. Information so marked will not be entities not listed in this table could disclosed except in accordance with C. How and to Whom Do I Submit also be affected. The North American Comments? procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Industrial Classification System In addition to one complete version of (NAICS) codes are provided to assist You may submit comments through the comments that includes any you and others in determining whether the mail, in person, or electronically. To information claimed as CBI, a copy of or not this action might apply to certain ensure proper handling by EPA, it is the comment that does not contain the entities. The complete NAICS codes and imperative that you identify docket information claimed as CBI must be descriptions are listed at: http:// control number OPP–301000 in the submitted for inclusion in the public www.census.gov/epcd/www/ subject line on the first page of your version of the official record. naics.html. If you have questions response. Information not marked confidential regarding the applicability of this action 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: will be included in the public version to a particular entity, consult the person Public Information and Records of the official record without prior listed under ‘‘FOR FURTHER Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information notice. If you have any questions about INFORMATION CONTACT.’’ Resources and Services Division CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs please consult the person listed under B. How Can I Get Additional (OPP), Environmental Protection Information, Including Copies of this ‘‘FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 CONTACT’’ section. Document and Other Related Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, DC Documents? 20460. E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 1. Electronically. You may obtain 2. In person or by courier. Deliver My Comments for EPA? electronic copies of this document, and your comments to: Public Information You may find the following certain other related documents that and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), suggestions helpful for preparing your might be available electronically, from Information Resources and Services comments: the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide 1. Explain your views as clearly as www.epa.gov/. To access this Programs (OPP), Environmental possible. document, on the Home Page select Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal 2. Describe any assumptions that you ‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then look Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, used. up the entry for this document under Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 3. Provide copies of any technical the ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through information and/or data you used that Documents.’’ You can also go directly to Friday, excluding legal holidays. The support your views. the Federal Register listings at http:// PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– 4. If you estimate potential burden or www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. 5805. costs, explain how you arrived at the 2. In person. The Agency has 3. Electronically. You may submit estimate that you provide. established a docket for this action your comments electronically by e-mail 5. Provide specific examples to under docket control number OPP– to: ‘‘[email protected]’’, or you can illustrate your concerns. 301000. The docket consists of submit a computer disk to the address 6. Make sure to submit your documents specifically referenced in above. Do not submit any information comments by the deadline in this this action, any public comments electronically that you consider to be notice. received during an applicable comment CBI. Avoid the use of special characters 7. To ensure proper handling by EPA, period, and other information related to and any form of encryption. Electronic be sure to identify the docket control this action. The public version of the submissions will be accepted in number assigned to this action in the official record does not include any Wordperfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file subject line on the first page of your information claimed as confidential format. All comments in electronic form response. You may also provide the business information (CBI). The public must be identified by docket control name, date, and Federal Register version of the official record including number OPP–301000. citation. printed paper versions of electronic comments submitted during an D. How Should I Handle CBI That I II. Background applicable comment period is available Want to Submit to the Agency? for inspection in the Public Information Do not submit any information A. What Action is the Agency Taking? and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), electronically that you consider to be The Agency is announcing the receipt Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson CBI. You may claim information that of a request from Roses, Inc., of Haslett

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36136 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Michigan, representing rose growers conditions. It expired on June 10, 1996. Considering the specific harvest and throughout the U.S. for an exception to In the spring of 1996, Roses, Inc., a rose- pest and disease control requirements of the USEPA Worker Protection Standard grower association, approached the the crop, the need for a cosmetically to allow early entry of workers to Agency with the need to continue the perfect rose and competitive market harvest greenhouse grown fresh cut exception. Roses, Inc. stated the pressure from imports, Roses, Inc. roses prior to the end of pesticide domestic cut-rose industry would not asserts that an early-entry exception to reentry intervals. The rationales survive economically without the the WPS is essential to the cut-roses supporting this request are provided. exception. After consulting with the industry. Without it, the loss of roses The Agency is providing a 60-day rose industry, EPA published a notice in would be more than rose flower period for public comment before the Federal Register of October 30, 1996 producers could economically making a final decision. (61 FR 56099) (FR–5571–8). This notice withstand. Exemption usage: Roses, Inc. B. WPS Background acknowledged receipt of Roses, Inc.’s request, described their proposal and surveyed those cut-rose growers that Introduced in 1974, and revised in provided a 30-day public comment had not registered to use the most recent 1992, the Worker Protection Standard period. On December 18, 1996, the exemption to determine their reasons. (WPS) 40 CFR part 170, is intended to Agency sent a letter to the cut-rose Twenty survey response forms were protect agricultural workers and community announcing the WPS Cut- returned. Each response had one or pesticide handlers from risks associated Rose Exception. In the Federal Register more reasons for not registering to use with agricultural pesticides. The WPS of October 3, 1997 (62 FR 51993) (FRL– the exemption. Eleven indicated they covers employees working in or on were making a tight bud cut and harvest 5599–2), the Agency announced that it farms, forests, nurseries, and before each spray application and did had granted a limited administrative greenhouses who perform hand-labor not enter before the expiration of the exemption to the 1992 WPS restrictions operations in areas treated with REI. Eight said they did not need the on early entry into pesticide-treated pesticides. It also applies to workers exception because they have a local areas allowing workers to hand harvest who mix, load, apply or otherwise market that will accept roses that are handle pesticides. The WPS contains roses during REIs. It was effective from more open than would be accepted in requirements for pesticide safety December 18, 1996 until October 4, traditional markets. Five reported they training, notification of pesticide 1999. would rather suffer the loss of roses too applications, use of personal protective III. Regulatory Assessment far open to market or accept a lower equipment (PPE), restricted entry price for open roses than use the intervals (REIs) following pesticide A. Roses, Inc.’s Exception Request exception. Eighteen also indicated they application, decontamination supplies, spray 12-hour REI (or less) pesticides at Summary of request: Roses, Inc. and emergency medical assistance. night and harvest in the morning when 40 CFR 170.112 prohibits agricultural asserts that without an early-entry the REI has expired. workers from entering a pesticide- exception allowing cut roses to be Exemption terms proposed by Roses, treated area during an REI. Under harvested at least two times per day, Inc: Roses, Inc. is proposing a further specified conditions, the WPS contains cut-rose growers will lose a significant exception to the WPS to allow trained exceptions (40 CFR 170.112(b–e)) to the portion of the cash value of their crop. workers to enter a pesticide-treated general prohibition against worker entry The competitive market in the United greenhouse to harvest roses under into treated areas during the REI. States requires that roses be cut at a certain conditions before the end of the EPA may establish exceptions under narrowly specific stage of bud REI. Roses, Inc. proposes the following 40 CFR 170.112(e) to the WPS development, after which, they decrease conditions. provisions restricting early entry to in value. The required twice daily All growers who wish to use the perform routine hand-labor tasks. The harvest is not possible when pesticides exception would be required to register WPS defines hand-labor as any with an REI greater than 4 hours have for the exemption with EPA. Roses, Inc. agricultural activity performed by hand been applied because the WPS early- proposes that the appropriate form be or with hand tools that causes a worker entry restriction eliminates the filed with Roses, Inc. Roses Inc. would to have substantial contact with treated possibility of a second harvest on the consolidate the forms and transmit them surfaces such as plants or soil that may day of pesticide treatment. For longer to EPA. Exemption would be granted contain pesticide residues. The process reentry intervals, additional harvests on only to growers that are members of and information that must be included subsequent days may also not be Roses, Inc. in a request for exception is described possible. Roses, Inc. estimates the losses The exemption would last 5 years. in 40 CFR 170.112(e)(1). When a request to be as high as $35,000 per acre per Roses, Inc. proposes that the first 2 years is received, EPA issues a public notice year from not being able to cut roses at of the exception have the same stating that an exception is being the most appropriate stage of bud conditions as the current exception considered and describes the nature of development due to pesticide REI followed by a planned phaseout in years the exception. At least 30 days is requirements. The fresh cut-rose 3, 4, and 5. The third year of the allowed for public comment. EPA grants industry competes with roses imported exception would limit rose harvest or denies the exception request based on from countries where labor costs are before the end of the pesticide REI to a risk-benefit analysis as required by 40 often less per day than a U.S. grower’s only those harvest periods just prior to CFR 170.112(e)(3). pay per hour. Roses, Inc. states growers major floral holidays such as Mother’s have not moved to alternative methods Day, Valentine’s Day, Easter, Christmas, C. WPS Cut-Rose Exception History of crop pest and disease protection and New Year’s and other recognized In June 1994, EPA granted a 2-year because reliable, safe, proven pest floral holidays. The frequency of use exception to the WPS for cut rose management controls are not yet in the would be limited at other times of the harvest in response to a request from the market. Those that are available are year to no more than once every 2 floral industry. This exemption allowed typically more costly than conventional weeks. Individual growers would be early entry to harvest greenhouse-grown chemical pesticide programs and not as required to submit a statement to Roses, cut roses under certain specified effective. Inc. explaining their need for the

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36137 exemption to justify its use during the include: the situation prior to C. Comments Solicited implementation of this final rule, the 4th year of the exemption. Roses, Inc. The Agency is interested in a full would consolidate these statements and situation after implementation of this final rule if the exception is not granted, the range of comments and information on submit them to the Agency. An this exception request. The Agency individual statement of need would situation after implementation of this final rule if the exception is granted, and specific particularly welcomes comments continue to be required during the 5th information on individual factors which supported by information that would year of the exemption. The exemption cause differences in revenues and costs help establish the economic need for the would terminate at the end of its 5th among the three situations. exception in light of the significant year. (vi) A description or documentation of the number of rose growers that continue Roses, Inc. bases its exception request safety and feasibility of such an exception, production without it, the appropriate on the following proposed conditions. including, but not limited to, the feasibility group to administer or manage the There is continued development of IPM of performing the necessary hand labor exception since Roses Inc. has proposed programs that include effective and activity while wearing the personal to administer several aspects such as economic predator and parasite protective equipment required for early entry grower registration, justification of need, biological control agents for the rose for the pesticide(s) expected to be applied, the means of mitigating heat-related illness limitation of eligibility to use an greenhouse industry during the concerns, the period of time required daily exception to Roses, Inc. membership, proposed 5 years of the exemption. per worker to perform the hand labor and pesticide exposure risks to workers There is also continued development activity, any suggested methods of reducing from allowing early entry for harvesting. and registration of effective short REI the worker’s exposure, and any other Data and information that will assist pesticides for this industry during this mitigating factors such as the availability of worker and harvester risk assessment time. An annual review of the exception running water for routine and emergency and adverse incident reports are of and the industry’s progress toward decontamination and mechanical devices particular need. Through public phasing out the exception would be that would reduce the workers’ contact with comment, the Agency is seeking conducted by Roses, Inc. and the the treated surfaces. information to further improve the risk- Agency. There is continued EPA The information should include the benefit analysis. Individuals are support of the Rose Exception Advisory costs associated with early-entry, such encouraged to provide comments on all Workgroup. The Food Quality as decontamination facilities, special or any portions of the information Protection Act will not negatively information and training for the sought by the Agency. impact the cut-rose industry because of workers, heat stress avoidance mitigation measures or suspensions procedures, and provision, inspection, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170 based on aggregate and cumulative risk cleaning, and maintenance of PPE. EPA Environmental protection, assessments. Increasing foreign imports will not grant exceptions where the Administrative practice and procedure, will not be priced so low that individual costs of early entry equal or exceed the Occupational safety and health, growers cannot afford transition to new expected loss in value of crop yield or Pesticides and pests, Roses. insect and disease control agents and quality. products that facilitate optimal Dated: May 23, 2000. harvesting procedures. The National Since receipt of Roses, Inc.’s request Marcia E. Mulkey, Institute for Occupational Safety and for an exception, the Agency has been Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. Health study on risk to early-entry discussing the content with Roses, Inc. [FR Doc. 00–14322 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] and within the Agency to better workers in the rose greenhouse does not BILLING CODE 6560±50±F produce significant adverse effects data understand and supplement the request on early entry after pesticide use or with other information. Even though the other adverse pesticide effects in floral request remains incomplete, the Agency greenhouses. has chosen to publish this notice of FEDERAL EMERGENCY receipt and would like public comment MANAGEMENT AGENCY B. Agency Assessment, Concerns, and prior to making a decision on the Opinion request. Agency Information Collection Under CFR 40 170.112, (e) Exception The petition by Roses, Inc. does not Activities: Proposed Collection; requiring Agency approval—(1) adequately address the information Comment Request Requesting an exception, the following requirements regarding specific ACTION: information must be submitted to the information on individual factors which Notice and request for Agency for an exception to be cause differences in revenues and costs. comments. considered: The petition also did not provide the SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency (i) The name, address and telephone information required regarding the Management Agency (FEMA), as part of number of the submitter. means of mitigating heat-related illness its continuing effort to reduce (ii) The time period for which the concerns, the period of time required paperwork and respondent burden, exception is requested. daily per worker to perform the hand invites the general public and other (iii) A description of the crop(s) and labor activity, and the costs associated specific crop production tasks for which the Federal agencies to take this exception is requested. with early-entry as stated above. opportunity to comment on proposed (iv) A description of the geographic area for The Agency would also like to new information collections. In which the exception is requested. consider a narrower exception request, accordance with the Paperwork (v) An explanation as to why, for each such as one confined to specific Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. requested crop-task combination, alternative pesticide products, time, pest or 3506(c)(2)(A)), this notice seeks practices would not be technically or infestations where risks and benefits can comments concerning implementation financially viable. This information should include estimates or data on a per acre be better defined. This would allow for of Project Impact Baseline and Progress revenue and cost of production for the crop an exception with potentially less risk Reports in Project Impact communities. and area for which the exception is for workers because of less frequent These reports will provide data, both requested. These estimates or data should exposure. narrative and quantitative, for assessing

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36138 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices a community’s progress towards disaster information will not only gauge the a picture of the community’s ability to resistance. momentum towards disaster resistance withstand disasters at the beginning of but will indicate success of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Congress its designation as a Project Impact tasked FEMA with the responsibility to collaborative processes as well. The data community. It requests information design and implement a meaningful pre- collected will also be used as a basis for necessary to evaluate the disaster initiative development. disaster initiative that would reduce resistant status of a community and The community may also use the data rapidly escalating disaster costs, and should help Project Impact for their own evaluation. The results of provided funding towards that goal. Communities establish their initial the evaluation, particularly when they focus. The Annual Progress Report, This initiative is entitled Project Impact: reflect hard work and accomplishment, Building a Disaster Resistant which is due annually to FEMA for five can be publicized as a way of affirming years starting on the 1st anniversary of Community. Congress, through the the community’s commitment to the mechanism of the Government the Signing Ceremony, allows FEMA to initiative in the previous year. Included assess the community’s progress with Performance Results Act, requires that in the reports are questions about the we show that the money is being used respect to both national goals and community’s insurance ratings (the program initiatives. It also provides an effectively by establishing a systematic Building Code Effectiveness Grading process of evaluation. The Baseline opportunity for a community to evaluate Scale (BCEGS) and the Community its own success with respect to local Report and subsequent Annual Progress Rating System (CRS)). These indicators Report provide a means of data goals. Both of these data collection provide financial incentives, in the form mechanisms provide means to measure collection for this objective and have of lower premium rates, to communities been developed to capture the progress the proper use of grant funding as well who are increasing their disaster as data for Government Performance of a community towards disaster resistance. resistance in a non-disaster situation. Results Act (GPRA) reporting. The questions in both reports request Collection of Information Affected Public: Completing the form information relevant to the hazards and Title. Project Impact Baseline and will be the primary responsibility of the vulnerabilities faced by the community. Annual Progress Reports. Local Government or their designee but There are also questions that request Type of Information Collection. New. will contain information about information about damage prevention Abstract. The Baseline report, due households, businesses, not for profit activity and public education and only the 1st year and 60 days after the institutions, State, Local, and tribal awareness activity. The requested Signing Ceremony, is critical to provide Government.

No. of Frequency of Hours per response Annual burden hours FEMA Forms respondents response × × (A) (B) (C) (A B C)

Baseline Report ...... 65 One-time ...... 2 Hours ...... 130 Hours Progress Reports ...... 113 Annually ...... 2 Hours ...... 226 Hours

Total ...... 178 ...... 356 Hours

Estimated Cost. $15,000.00 (Fifteen ADDRESSES: Interested persons should FEDERAL EMERGENCY Thousand dollars). submit written comments to Muriel B. MANAGEMENT AGENCY Anderson, Chief, Record Management Comments [FEMA±1326±DR] Branch, Program Service Division, Written comments are solicited to (a) Operations Support Directorates, Maine; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of evaluate whether the proposed data Federal Emergency Management a Major Disaster Declaration collection is necessary for the proper Agency, 500 C Street, SW, Room 316, AGENCY: Federal Emergency performance of the agency, including Washington, DC 20472. Telephone Management Agency (FEMA). whether the information shall have number (202) 646–2625. FAX number practical utility; (b) evaluate the (202) 646–3524, Or e-mail ACTION: Notice. [email protected]. accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice burden of the proposed collection of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of a major disaster for the State of Maine information, including the validity of Contact Priscilla Scruggs, Evaluation (FEMA–1326–DR), dated April 28, 2000, the methodology and assumptions used; and Assessment Specialist, Mitigation and related determinations. (c) enhance the quality, utility, and Directorate—Project Impact, at (202) EFFECTIVE DATE: May 24, 2000. clarity of the information to be 646–4155 for additional information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: collected; and (d) minimize the burden Contact Muriel B. Anderson at (202) Madge Dale, Response and Recovery of the collection of information on those 646–2625 for copies of the proposed Directorate, Federal Emergency who are to respond, including through collection of information. Management Agency, Washington, DC the use of appropriate automated, 20472, (202) 646–3772. electronic, mechanical, or other Mike Bozzelli, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is technological collection techniques or Acting Director, Program Services Division, hereby given that the incident period for other forms of information technology, Operations Support Directorate. this disaster is closed effective April 26, e.g., permitting electronic submission of [FR Doc. 00–14298 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] 2000. responses. Comments should be BILLING CODE 6718±01±P received within 60 days of the date of (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used this notice. for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537,

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36139

Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora FEDERAL EMERGENCY EFFECTIVE DATE: May 24, 2000. Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment [FEMA±1329±DR] Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Directorate, Federal Emergency Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family New Mexico; Amendment No. 3 to Management Agency, Washington, DC Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration 20472, (202) 646–3772. Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice AGENCY: Federal Emergency Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant of an emergency for the State of New Management Agency (FEMA). Program.) Mexico is hereby amended to include ACTION: Notice. Lacy E. Suiter, reimbursement for the eligible costs Executive Associate Director, Response and SUMMARY: This is a notice of the associated with the pre-staging of Recovery Directorate. Presidential declaration of a major Federal, State, Compact, and Emergency [FR Doc. 00–14299 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] disaster for the State of New Mexico Management Assistance Compact fire BILLING CODE 6718±02±P (FEMA–1329–DR), dated May 13, 2000, suppression assets for a 30-day period and related determinations. beginning with the incident period of EFFECTIVE DATE: May 31, 2000. May 5, 2000. This assistance period may FEDERAL EMERGENCY be extended. All pre-staging will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MANAGEMENT AGENCY provided contingent upon joint Madge Dale, Response and Recovery recommendations and staging plans of Directorate, Federal Emergency the New Mexico Department of Forestry [FEMA±1328±DR] Management Agency, Washington, DC and the U.S. Forest Service. 20472, (202) 646–3772. Missouri; Amendment No. 1 to Notice Reimbursement for costs associated of a Major Disaster Declaration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice with suppressing wildland fires will of a major disaster for the State of New continue to be authorized under Section AGENCY: Federal Emergency Mexico is hereby amended to include 420 of the Stafford Act. This assistance Management Agency (FEMA). the following area among those areas is for the following areas determined to ACTION: Notice. determined to have been adversely have been adversely affected by the affected by the catastrophe declared a catastrophe declared an emergency by SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice major disaster by the President in his the President in his declaration of May of a major disaster for the State of declaration of May 13, 2000. Act (42 10, 2000: Missouri, (FEMA–1328–DR), dated May U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), as follows: 12, 2000, and related determinations. Bernalillo, Catron, Chaves, Cibola, Colfax, Otero County for Public Assistance Curry, DeBaca, Dona Ana, Eddy, Grant, EFFECTIVE DATE: May 23, 2000. (already designated for Individual Guadalupe, Harding, Hidalgo, Lea, Lincoln, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistance). Luna, McKinley, Mora, Otero, Quay, Madge Dale, Response and Recovery (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Roosevelt, San Juan, San Miguel, Sierra, Directorate, Federal Emergency Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Socorro, Taos, Torrance, Union, and Valencia Management Agency, Washington, DC for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Counties. 20472, (202) 646–3772. Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Los Alamos, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, and Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Santa Fe Counties (previously designated for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services emergency protective measures (Category B). of a major disaster for the State of Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Missouri is hereby amended to include Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Public Assistance to the following areas Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, among those areas determined to have Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora been adversely affected by the Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis catastrophe declared a major disaster by Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services the President in his declaration of May Program.) Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment 12, 2000: Lacy E. Suiter, Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Franklin, Jefferson, and Gasconade Executive Associate Director, Response and Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Counties for Public Assistance (already Recovery Directorate. Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing designated for Individual Assistance). [FR Doc. 00–14301 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic BILLING CODE 6718±02±P Program.) Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Lacy E. Suiter, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora FEDERAL EMERGENCY Executive Associate Director, Response and Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis MANAGEMENT AGENCY Recovery Directorate. Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services [FR Doc. 00–14303 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] [FEMA±3154±EM] Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment BILLING CODE 6718±02±U Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family New Mexico; Amendment No. 3 to Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Notice of an Emergency Declaration FEDERAL EMERGENCY Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant AGENCY: Federal Emergency MANAGEMENT AGENCY Program.) Management Agency (FEMA). [FEMA±3154±EM] ACTION: Notice. Lacy E. Suiter, New Mexico; Amendment No. 4 to Executive Associate Director, Response and SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Notice of an Emergency Declaration Recovery Directorate. of an emergency for the State of New [FR Doc. 00–14300 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Mexico, (FEMA–3154–EM), dated May AGENCY: Federal Emergency BILLING CODE 6718±02±P 10, 2000, and related determinations. Management Agency (FEMA).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36140 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

ACTION: Notice. disaster under the authority of the FEDERAL EMERGENCY Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and MANAGEMENT AGENCY SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. of an emergency for the State of New 5121 et seq.), as follows: U.S. Fire Administrator's National Fire Mexico, (FEMA–3154–EM), dated May Safety Campaign Grant Program 10, 2000, and related determinations. I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of South Dakota, AGENCY: Federal Emergency EFFECTIVE DATE: May 26, 2000. resulting from a severe winter storm, Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Fire FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: flooding, landslides, and mudslides on April Administration (USFA). Madge Dale, Response and Recovery 18–20, 2000, is of sufficient severity and ACTION: Notice of funds and grant Directorate, Federal Emergency magnitude to warrant a major disaster availability. Management Agency, Washington, DC declaration under the Robert T. Stafford 20472, (202) 646–3772. Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance SUMMARY: We (USFA) give notice of Act, P.L. 93–288, as amended (‘‘the Stafford SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: $250,000 of appropriated grant funds to The notice Act’’). I, therefore, declare that such a major of an emergency for the State of New disaster exists in the State of South Dakota. assist eligible organizations with their Mexico is hereby amended to include In order to provide Federal assistance, you current fire prevention/reduction the following areas among those areas are hereby authorized to allocate from funds educational initiatives for high risk determined to have been adversely available for these purposes, such amounts as groups. This is a one-time, non- affected by the catastrophe declared an you find necessary for Federal disaster appealable grant. All selections are emergency by the President in his assistance and administrative expenses. final. declaration of May 10, 2000: You are authorized to provide Public DATES: We will issue the Request for Assistance and Hazard Mitigation in the Lincoln and San Miguel Counties for Application (RFA) packages on or about designated areas and any other forms of emergency protective measures (Category B) June 7, 2000. Complete application under the Public Assistance program. assistance under the Stafford Act you may deem appropriate. Consistent with the packages must be postmarked and (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic requirement that Federal assistance be received by FEMA on or before July 24, Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used supplemental, any Federal funds provided 2000. for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance ADDRESSES: Eligible applicants can Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora or Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis download the RFA from the FEMA/ percent of the total eligible costs. Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services USFA website (www.usfa.fema.gov), or Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Further, you are authorized to make they may contact the Information Point Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression changes to this declaration to the extent of Contact listed below who will mail an Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family allowable under the Stafford Act. RFA to them. Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public INFORMATION POINT OF CONTACT: Denise Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the authority vested in the Director of A. Brown, Program Analyst, Office of Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant the U.S. Fire Administrator, Federal Program.) the Federal Emergency Management Agency under Executive Order 12148, I Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Lacy E. Suiter, hereby appoint Steven Emory of the Street, SW., room 806, Washington, DC Executive Associate Director, Response and Federal Emergency Management Agency 20472; (telephone) (202) 646–3731; Recovery Directorate. to act as the Federal Coordinating facsimile (202) 646–4301; (email) [FR Doc. 00–14304 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Officer for this declared disaster. [email protected]. BILLING CODE 6718±02±U I do hereby determine the following REQUEST FOR APPLICATION POINT OF CONTACT: areas of the State of South Dakota to Cindy Adams, Contract Specialist, Federal Emergency FEDERAL EMERGENCY have been affected adversely by this declared major disaster: Management Agency, U.S. Fire MANAGEMENT AGENCY Administration, 16825 South Seton Custer, Fall River, Jackson, Pennington, [FEMA±1330±DR] Avenue, Emmitsburg, MD 21727; and Shannon Counties for Public Assistance. (telephone) (301) 447–1221; (facsimile) South Dakota; Major Disaster and All counties within the State of South (301) 447–1092; or (email) Related Determinations Dakota are eligible to apply for [email protected]. assistance under the Hazard Mitigation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Federal Emergency Grant Program. Management Agency (FEMA). Throughout this notice the term ‘‘we’’ (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic refers to the USFA. ACTION: Notice. Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Under the Federal Fire Prevention for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, SUMMARY: This is a notice of the and Control Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2218, we Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Presidential declaration of a major are issuing an RFA to implement a Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis competitive $250,000 grant program that disaster for the State of South Dakota Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services (FEMA–1330–DR), dated May 19, 2000, is limited to eligible grant applicants. Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment (Please see Eligibility criteria below). and related determinations. Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression We intend to award ten (10) grants of EFFECTIVE DATE: May 19, 2000. Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public $25,000.00 each under this grant FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing program. All grant awards will have a Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant project period of one year, and will Directorate, Federal Emergency Program.) require a six (6) month report and a final Management Agency, Washington, DC report detailing the progress of the grant 20472, (202) 646–3772. James L. Witt, program, and how the grantees are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Director. spending the funds. hereby given that, in a letter dated May [FR Doc. 00–14302 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Description of Grant Program: Public 19, 2000, the President declared a major BILLING CODE 6718±02±U fire safety education is an integral part

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36141 of the USFA’s mission. In order to meet (b) The applicant’s public fire safety • achievement of program goals that goal, the U.S. Fire Administrator and prevention program must have been (provide statistics); will provide funding to grass roots in place for at least one (1) year. • reduction of fire loss of life or groups, fire departments, and to other (c) The applicant must be located in property (provide statistics); established organizations to assist them the United States. • publicity received (copies of media in their current fire prevention/ Restrictions: Awards made under this coverage); and • reduction educational initiatives for grant program are one-time, non- other measures of success (provide high risk groups. Citizens who are at appealable grants. All selections are evidence of measured results). greatest risk of being injured or killed by final. (3) Finally, the narrative must include • fire include the elderly, children, Grants awarded under this program an analysis of the growth potential for African-Americans, Latinos, Native will support existing programs only; the program, describing how the Americans, and rural and urban grantees may not use the funds to create applicant will use grant funds to reach residents. or establish a new program. a larger target audience(s). • Evaluation: We intend to evaluate all Grantees are to use grants awarded OMB Circular A–21, Cost Principles applications received by the established under this program to deliver for Educational Institutions; A–87, Cost Principles for State and Local application due date and award ten (10) educational services, materials, and Governments; or A–122, Cost Principles $25,000.00 grants based upon the information to strengthen fire and life for Non-Profit Organizations will govern following criteria: safety awareness for high-risk the allowability of costs associated with (1) Demonstrated relevance/need for audiences, and to enhance the supporting the program identified in a the program; continued partnerships between fire grant awardee’s project description. (2) Applicant’s past use of resources service organizations and other non- • Grantees are not to use this grant to for the program, and proposed future profit organizations within the purchase or acquire: fire prevention use of resources; community. equipment or apparatus; office furniture (3) Measured results of program, and Eligibility: Applicants applying for and equipment such as computers and future goals; grants must meet the following telephones; contractors, subcontractors (4) Demonstrated growth and requirements: or instructors for the program. replicability of the program. (a) The applicant must be a • Nor may grantees use this grant to Dated: June 1, 2000. community-based, grass roots lease, rent, alter, or construct real organization or other established non- Carrye B. Brown, property. U.S. Fire Administrator. profit organization demonstrating that it Supplemental Application works in partnership with a local fire Information: Eligible applicants will [FR Doc. 00–14305 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] department. The applicant can also be a explain, in detail, how they will spend BILLING CODE 6718±08±P fire department (but not Federal/ the funds under this grant. All military fire departments). The applicants must submit the following organization must currently work supplemental information as part of FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION toward increasing the public’s their application package (Please note: Notice of Agreement(s) Filed knowledge and awareness of the We will not return application importance of fire safety and prevention packages): The Commission hereby gives notice in an innovative manner, implementing (a) A one (1) page (maximum) of the filing of the following a unique delivery style. It is the hope of summary that describes how the agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of the Administrator that the grant applicant meets the eligibility 1984. Interested parties can review or recipients’ programs can be replicated requirements. Please address each of the obtain copies of agreements at the for use by other organizations that teach three (3) eligibility criteria separately. Washington, DC offices of the and reinforce fire safety education and (b) A five (5) page (maximum) project Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, initiatives, and can be ‘‘best practices’’ narrative that explains, in detail, how NW, Room 940. Interested parties may examples within USFA curriculum. We the applicant intends to use the grant submit comments on an agreement to will limit the grants to U.S. funding. the Secretary, Federal Maritime organizations, and we intend that (1) This narrative must include, but Commission, Washington, DC 20573 grantees use the funds only in this need not be limited to: • within 10 days of the date this notice country and its protectorates. Examples specific program goals; • target audience(s) the program appears in the Federal Register. of non-fire and fire organizations follow: Agreement No.: 11305–007. (1) Non-fire organizations. For reaches or will reach; • innovative methodology the Title: United Alliance Agreement. example: program uses to reach the target Parties: • Community-based organizations; audience(s); Cho Yang Shipping Company, Ltd. • Non-profit organizations; • DSR-Senator Lines GmbH • the program’s current operating Civic organizations (i.e., civic clubs, budget/funding level/source of funding; Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd. youth or senior citizen organizations, • number of citizens that the program United Arab Shipping Company fraternities/sororities, etc.); serves, Synopsis: The proposed amendment • Schools (i.e., public or private • partnerships with local fire would permit a party belonging to schools—kindergarten through high departments and other organizations in another agreement in the trade to obtain school, colleges/universities). carrying out the program, and space from carriers operating under that (2) Fire Organizations. For example: • how the applicant promotes the agreement for its own use or sale to a • Fire Departments (i.e., municipal, program. (Please include samples of any member of this Agreement. It also lists volunteer, private), existing promotional materials—i.e., other agreements, currently in effect, • Fire Professional Organizations (at print, audio, video, and media from which such space would be the local level), coverage—for review). obtained and makes other conforming, • Fire Historical or Educational (2) A description of program results is administrative changes to the Organizations. also critical to the narrative, addressing: Agreement.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36142 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Agreement No.: 011441–004. 400 Challenger Road, Cape Port of New Orleans Place, New Title: NYK/NOS Joint Service Canaveral, FL 32920 Orleans, LA 70130–1890 Agreement. Vessels: The Big Red Boat II, The Big Vessel: American Queen Parties: Red Boat III, Oceanic, Rembrandt The Delta Queen Steamboat Co. and Wallenius Wilhelmsen Lines AS and Seabreeze I Great Pacific NW Cruise Line, Nippon Yusen Kaisha Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise L.L.C., 1380 Port of New Orleans Synopsis: The amendment deletes the Lines, Ltd., and The Peninsular and Place, New Orleans, LA 70130– Mediterranean, Black, Red and Arabian Oriental Steam Navigation 1890 Seas from the geographic scope of the Company, 10100 Santa Monica Vessel: Columbia Queen agreement, reduces the number of Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA The Delta Queen Steamboat Co. and vessels operated, and restates/updates 90067 Great River Cruise Line, L.L.C., the agreement. Vessels: Crown Princess, Dawn 1380 Port of New Orleans Place, Princess, Golden Princess, Grand New Orleans, LA 70130–1890 Agreement No.: 011675–001. Princess, Ocean Princess, Regal Vessel: Delta Queen Title: DSEN/EMC-Slot Charter Princess, Sea Princess and Sun The Delta Queen Steamboat Co. and Agreement. Princess Great Ocean Cruise Line, L.L.C., Parties: Radisson Seven Seas Cruises, Inc., 600 1380 Port of New Orleans Place, DSR-Senator Lines GmbH Corporate Drive, Suite 410, Fort New Orleans, LA 70130–1890 Evergreen Marine Corp. (Taiwan) Ltd. Lauderdale, FL 33334 Vessel: Mississippi Queen Synopsis: The proposed modification Vessel: Seven Seas Mariner Imperial Majesty Cruise Line L.L.C., reduces Evergreen’s westbound slot Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. (d/b/a Celebration World Cruises, Inc. and allocation and establishes a 45-day Royal Caribbean International), OB Limited, 5100 N. State Road, notice period to terminate the agreement 1050 Caribbean Way, Miami, FL Suite 137, Fort Lauderdale, FL on or after September 30, 2000. 33132–2096 33319 Dated: June 2, 2000. Vessels: Adventure of the Seas, Vessel: Oceanbreeze By Order of the Federal Maritime Brilliance of the Seas, Radiance of Lindblad Expeditions, Inc., E.T.I.C.A. Commission. the Seas, Vantage III and Vantage and Metrohotel C.A., 720 Fifth Bryant L. VanBrakle, IV Avenue, New York, NY 10019 Secretary. Silversea Cruises, Ltd., 110 East Vessel: Polaris Lindblad Expeditions, Inc., SPEX Sea [FR Doc. 00–14346 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Broward Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, FL Bird Ltd. and Majestic Alaska Boat BILLING CODE 6730±01±P 33301 Vessel: Silver Shadow Company, 720 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10019 Dated: June 2, 2000. FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Vessel: Sea Bird Bryant L. VanBrakle, Lindblad Expeditions, Inc. and SPEX Security for the Protection of the Secretary. Sea Lion Ltd., 720 Fifth Avenue, Public Indemnification of Passengers [FR Doc. 00–14345 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] New York, NY 10019 Vessel: Sea Lion for Nonperformance of Transportation; BILLING CODE 6730±01±P Notice of Issuance of Certificate Premier Operations, Ltd. and (Performance) International Shipping Partners, FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Inc., 400 Challenger Road, Cape Notice is hereby given that the Canaveral, FL 32920 following have been issued a Certificate Security for the Protection of the Vessel: The Big Red Boat III of Financial Responsibility for Public Financial Responsibility To Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise Indemnification of Passengers for Meet Liability Incurred for Death or Lines, Ltd., and The Peninsular and Nonperformance of Transportation Injury To Passengers or Other Persons Oriental Steam Navigation pursuant to the provisions of section 3, On Voyages; Notice of Issuance of Company, 10100 Santa Monica Public Law 89–777 (46 U.S.C. § 817 (e)) Certificate (Casualty) Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA and the Federal Maritime Commission’s 90067 implementing regulations at 46 CFR part Notice is hereby given that the Vessels: Crown Princess and Regal 540, as amended: following have been issued a Certificate Princess American Classic Voyages Company, of Financial Responsibility to meet Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise 1380 Port of New Orleans Place, Liability Incurred for Death or Injury to Lines, Ltd., Fairline Shipping New Orleans, LA 70130–1890 Passengers or other Persons on Voyages Corporation, Ltd., and The Vessels: Coastal Queen No. 1 and pursuant to the provisions of Section 2, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Coastal Queen No. 2 Public Law 89–777 (46 U.S.C. 817(d)) Navigation Company, 10100 Santa Costa Crociere S.p.A. and Costa Cruise and the Federal Maritime Commission’s Monica Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Lines N.V.,World Trade Center, 80 implementing regulations at 46 CFR part Angeles, CA 90067 S.W. 8th Street, Miami, FL 33130– 540, as amended: Vessel: Dawn Princess 3097 Celebrity Cruises Inc. and Millennium Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise Vessel: Costa Atlantica Inc., 1050 Caribbean Way, Miami, Lines, Ltd., Fairline Shipping Cunard Line Limited (d/b/a Seabourn FL 33132 International Corporation, Ltd., and Cruise Line), 6100 Blue Lagoon Vessel: Millennium The Peninsular and Oriental Steam Drive, Suite 400, Miami, FL 33126 Cunard Line Limited, 6100 Blue Lagoon Navigation Company, 10100 Santa Vessels: Seabourn Goddess I, Drive, Suite 400, Miami, FL 33126 Monica Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Seabourn Goddess II and Seabourn Vessels: Seabourn Goddess I and Angeles, CA 90067 Sun Seabourn Goddess II Vessel: Grand Princess Premier Operations, Ltd. (d/b/a Premier The Delta Queen Steamboat Co. and Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise Cruises and Premier Cruise Lines), Great AQ Steamboat, L.L.C., 1380 Lines, Ltd., OP Shipping

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36143

Corporation, Ltd., and The Heights, NJ 07604, Officer: Yunyop Stynchula, Isle of Palms, South Peninsular and Oriental Steam Kim, Director Carolina; and Sam Sawyer, Tullahoma, Navigation Company, 10100 Santa Tennessee; to retain voting shares of Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier Monica Blvd., Suite 1800, Los American City Bancorp, Inc., and Ocean Freight Forwarder Angeles, CA 90067 Tullahoma, Tennessee, and thereby Transportation Intermediary indirectly retain voting shares of Vessel: Ocean Princess Applicants Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise American City Bank, Tullahoma, Lines, Ltd., CP Shipping Cosmic Express Corp., 14545 Valley Tennessee. Corporation, Ltd, and The View Avenue, #F, Santa Fe Springs, B. Federal Reserve Bank of Peninsular and Oriental Steam CA 90670, Officer: Jennifer Huang, Minneapolis (JoAnne F. Lewellen, Navigation Company, 10100 Santa President (Qualifying Individual) Assistant Vice President) 90 Hennepin Monica Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Planes Moving & Storage, Inc., 9823 Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota Angeles, CA 90067 Cincinnati-Dayton Road, West 55480–0291: Vessel: Sea Princess Chester, OH 45069, Officers: Jimmy 1. Cobb Voting Trust, St. Croix Falls, Princess Cruises, Inc., Princess Cruise Huff, Vice President; John Planes, Wisconsin; and Walter George Fries (as an individual and as a Trustee of the Lines, Ltd., COROT Shipping C.E.O. Trust), Wabasha, Minnesota; to acquire Corporation (Sociedade Unipessoal) Ocean Freight Forwarders—Ocean additional voting voting shares of Lda., and The Peninsular and Transportation Intermediary Financial Services of St. Croix Falls, St. Oriental Steam Navigation Applicants Croix Falls, Wisconsin, and thereby Company, 10100 Santa Monica Carolina Shipping Company, 1064 indirectly acquire voting shares of Eagle Blvd., Suite 1800, Los Angeles, CA Gardner Rd., Suite 312, Charleston, Valley Bank, N.A., St. Croix Falls, 90067 SC 29407, Officers: Dennis Forsberg, Wisconsin. Vessel: Sun Princess President; John Springer, Chairman Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Dated: June 2, 2000. AmCar Forwarding, Inc., 7700 NW 81 System, June 2, 2000. Place, #1, Miami, FL 33166, Officers: Bryant L. VanBrakle, Robert deV. Frierson, Henk Geenen, President (Qualifying Secretary. Associate Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 00–14348 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Individual); Robert Van Vliet, Vice President [FR Doc. 00–14307 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730±01±P BILLING CODE 6210±01±P Dated: June 2, 2000. Bryant L. VanBrakle, FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Secretary. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [FR Doc. 00–14344 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Ocean Transportation Intermediary BILLING CODE 6730±01±U Formations of, Acquisitions by, and License Applicant Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Notice is hereby given that the The companies listed in this notice following applicants have filed with the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM have applied to the Board for approval, Federal Maritime Commission an pursuant to the Bank Holding Company application for licenses as Non-Vessel Change in Bank Control Notices; Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part Freight Forwarder—Ocean Bank Holding Companies 225), and all other applicable statutes Transportation Intermediary pursuant to The notificants listed below have and regulations to become a bank section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 applied under the Change in Bank holding company and/or to acquire the as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and assets or the ownership of, control of, or CFR 515). § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 the power to vote shares of a bank or Persons knowing of any reason why CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank bank holding company and all of the the following applicants should not holding company. The factors that are banks and nonbanking companies receive a license are requested to considered in acting on the notices are owned by the bank holding company, contact the Office of Transportation set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 including the companies listed below. Intermediaries, Federal Maritime U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The applications listed below, as well Commission, Washington, DC 20573. The notices are available for as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier immediate inspection at the Federal inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank Ocean Transportation Intermediary Reserve Bank indicated. The notices indicated. The application also will be Applicants also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. available for inspection at the offices of YT Youngtrans, Inc. d/b/a Youngtrans, Interested persons may express their the Board of Governors. Interested 177–25 Rockaway Blvd., Jamaica, NY views in writing to the Reserve Bank persons may express their views in 11434, Officers: Young S. Sue, Vice indicated for that notice or to the offices writing on the standards enumerated in President (Qualifying Individual); of the Board of Governors. Comments the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the Veaumyung Yoon, President must be received not later than June 22, proposal also involves the acquisition of Global Ocean (Chicago) Inc., d/b/a 2000. a nonbanking company, the review also Global Logix, Inc., 659 Supreme A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta includes whether the acquisition of the Drive, Bensenville, IL 60106, Officers: (Lois Berthaume, Vice President) 104 nonbanking company complies with the Hyun Soon Yoon, President Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (Qualifying Individual); Hyo Sub 30303–2713: (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise (Steven) Yoon, Director 1. George Vibbert, Jr., Tullahoma, noted, nonbanking activities will be Worldlink Logix Service, Inc., 440 Route Tennessee; Elwanda Vibbert, conducted throughout the United States. 17 North, Suite 3B, Hasbrouck Tullahoma, Tennessee; Faye Sawyer Additional information on all bank

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36144 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices holding companies may be obtained must be received at the Reserve Bank or the offices of the Board of Governors from the National Information Center indicated or the offices of the Board of not later than June 21, 2000. website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. Governors not later than July 3, 2000. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Unless otherwise noted, comments A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Lois Berthaume, Vice President), 104 regarding each of these applications (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia must be received at the Reserve Bank Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 30303–2713: indicated or the offices of the Board of 63166–2034: 1. Regions Financial Corporation, Governors not later than June 30, 2000. 1. Arvest Bank Group, Inc., Birmingham, Alabama; to acquire A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Bentonville, Arkansas; to retain Arvest Heritage Mortgage Company, Hutto, (Lois Berthaume, Vice President), 104 Bank, Joplin, Missouri, after its Texas, and thereby engage in making, Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia conversion from a savings bank to a acquiring, brokering, or servicing loans 30303–2713: commercial bank. or other extensions of credit, pursuant 1. Cheaha Financial Group, Inc., B. Federal Reserve Bank of San to § 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y. This Oxford, Alabama; to become a bank Francisco (Maria Villanueva, Consumer activity will be conducted throughout holding company by acquiring 100 Regulation Group) 101 Market Street, the State of Texas. percent of the voting shares of Cheaha San Francisco, California 94105–1579: Bank, Oxford, Alabama (in 1. American River Holdings, Board of Governors of the Federal organization). Sacramento, California; to acquire 100 Reserve System, June 1, 2000. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve percent of the voting shares of North Robert deV. Frierson, System, June 1, 2000. Coast Bank, N.A., Santa Rosa, Associate Secretary of the Board. California. Robert deV. Frierson, [FR Doc. 00–14220 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Associate Secretary of the Board. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve BILLING CODE 6210±01±P [FR Doc. 00–14219 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] System, June 2, 2000. BILLING CODE 6210±01±P Robert deV. Frierson, Associate Secretary of the Board. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM [FR Doc. 00–14306 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM BILLING CODE 6210±01±P Sunshine Act Meeting

Formations of, Acquisitions by, and AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Board of Mergers of Bank Holding Companies FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The companies listed in this notice Notice of Proposals To Engage in TIME AND DATE: have applied to the Board for approval, Permissible Nonbanking Activities or 11:00 a.m., Monday, June pursuant to the Bank Holding Company To Acquire Companies That Are 12, 2000. Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part Activities Reserve Board Building, 20th and C 225), and all other applicable statutes Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20551. and regulations to become a bank The companies listed in this notice holding company and/or to acquire the have given notice under section 4 of the STATUS: Closed. assets or the ownership of, control of, or Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Personnel the power to vote shares of a bank or 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 actions (appointments, promotions, bank holding company and all of the CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to assignments, reassignments, and salary banks and nonbanking companies acquire or control voting securities or actions) involving individual Federal owned by the bank holding company, assets of a company, including the Reserve System employees. including the companies listed below. companies listed below, that engages 2. Any items carried forward from a The applications listed below, as well either directly or through a subsidiary or previously announced meeting. as other related filings required by the other company, in a nonbanking activity Board, are available for immediate that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; indicated. The application also will be determined by Order to be closely 202–452–3204. available for inspection at the offices of related to banking and permissible for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may the Board of Governors. Interested bank holding companies. Unless call 202–452–3206 beginning at persons may express their views in otherwise noted, these activities will be approximately 5 p.m. two business days writing on the standards enumerated in conducted throughout the United States. before the meeting for a recorded the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the Each notice is available for inspection announcement of bank and bank proposal also involves the acquisition of at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. holding company applications a nonbanking company, the review also The notice also will be available for scheduled for the meeting; or you may includes whether the acquisition of the inspection at the offices of the Board of contact the Board’s Web site at http:// nonbanking company complies with the Governors. Interested persons may www.federalreserve.gov for an standards in section 4 of the BHC Act express their views in writing on the electronic announcement that not only (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise question whether the proposal complies lists applications, but also indicates noted, nonbanking activities will be with the standards of section 4 of the procedural and other information about conducted throughout the United States. BHC Act. Additional information on all the meeting. Additional information on all bank bank holding companies may be Dated: June 2, 2000. holding companies may be obtained obtained from the National Information from the National Information Center Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. Robert deV. Frierson, website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. Unless otherwise noted, comments Associate Secretary of the Board. Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be [FR Doc. 00–14373 Filed 6–2–00; 4:40 pm] regarding each of these applications received at the Reserve Bank indicated BILLING CODE 6210±01±P

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36145

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND assumptions and methods underlying Any interested member of the public HUMAN SERVICES the HI and SMI annual reports. may submit written comments to the The panel’s review will include the Executive Director and Panel members Office of the Assistant Secretary for following four topics: for review. Comments should be Planning and Evaluation 1. Medicare assumptions (e.g., received by the Executive Director by 12 utilization rates, medical price [Account Number: 4151±04] noon, June 19, 2000, for distribution to increases). the Panel members. Technical Review Panel on the 2. Projection methodology (how Individuals requiring sign language Medicare Trustees Reports; Notice of assumptions are used to make cost interpretation for the hearing impaired June 28±29 Meeting projections). and/or other special accommodation, 3. Long-range growth assumptions for should contact Ariel Winter at (202) AGENCY: Office of the Assistant HI and SMI. 690–6860 by June 16, 2000. Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 4. Use of stochastic forecasting HHS. techniques. Dated: May 30, 2000. Margaret A. Hamburg, ACTION: Notice of June 28–29 meeting. The Panel will issue its findings in reports to the Secretary and the other Assistant Secretary for Planning and SUMMARY: In accordance with section Trustees. Evaluation. 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee The Panel will consist of seven [FR Doc. 00–14238 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Act, this notice announces the first members who are experts in the fields BILLING CODE 4110±60±P meeting of the Technical Review Panel of economics and actuarial science. The on the Medicare Trustees Reports (the following individuals will be sworn in Panel). This meeting is open to the as members at the first meeting: Len DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND public. Nichols, Ph.D.; David Cutler, Ph.D.; HUMAN SERVICES Pursuant to Public Law 92–463 (the Michael Chernew, Ph.D.; Dale Federal Advisory Committee Act), the Yamamoto, F.S.A., M.A.A.A., F.C.C.A., Centers for Disease Control and Panel was established on August 12, E.A., B.S.; James Robinson, F.S.A., Prevention 1999, by the Secretary of HHS to review M.A.A.A., Ph.D.; Alice Rosenblatt, [Program Announcement 00062] the methods and assumptions F.S.A., M.A.A.A., M.A.; and Sam underlying the annual reports of the Gutterman, F.S.A., F.C.A.S., M.A.A.A., Postdoctoral Fellowship Training Board of Trustees of the Hospital M.A. (the chair-designate). The Program in Infectious Diseases; Notice Insurance and Supplementary Medical members’ terms will end August 12, of Availability of Funds Insurance Trust Funds. 2001. A. Purpose DATES: The first meeting will be held on The first meeting of the Panel is June 28, 2000 (11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) scheduled for June 28, 2000 (11:00 a.m. The Centers for Disease Control and and June 29, 2000 (9:00 a.m. to 1:00 to 5:00 p.m.), and June 29, 2000 (9:00 Prevention (CDC) announces the p.m.). a.m. to 1:00 p.m.). The meeting will be availability of fiscal year (FY) 2000 funds for a cooperative agreement ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at held at the Health Care Financing the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) Headquarters, program for Postdoctoral Fellowship Administration (HCFA) Headquarters, Training Center, Room C–101, 7500 Training Programs in Infectious Training Center Room C–101, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Diseases. CDC is committed to achieving Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland. The meeting is open to the the health promotion and disease Maryland. public, but attendance is limited to the prevention objectives of ‘‘Healthy space available. There will also be an People 2010,’’ a national activity to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: executive session on June 28 from 9:00 reduce morbidity and mortality and Ariel Winter, Executive Director, a.m. to 11:00 a.m. for the swearing-in of improve the quality of life. This Technical Review Panel on the Panel members. This session will be announcement is related to the focus Medicare Trustees Reports, Department closed to the public. area of Immunization and Infectious of Health and Human Services, Room At this meeting, the members will Disease. 442E, 200 Independence Avenue, SW., discuss the Panel’s scope of work. The purpose of this cooperative Washington, DC, 20201, (202) 690–6860, HCFA’s Office of the Actuary will make agreement is to assist recipients in the [email protected]. Additional presentations to the Panel on how the development and implementation of a information is also available on the estimates in the Medicare Trustees’ two- to three-year Postdoctoral Panel’s web site: http://aspe.hhs.gov/ Reports are developed. Specific Fellowship Training Program in health/medpanel.htm. presentation topics may include: the HI Infectious Diseases (PFTP) which SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board and SMI benefits and income models, provides a combination of clinical of Trustees of the Medicare Trust Funds measures of actuarial soundness, and training and basic laboratory or (the Hospital Insurance (HI) and health care utilization assumptions. epidemiologic training in infectious Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) Individuals or organizations that wish diseases. The goal is to improve the Trust Funds) report annually on the to make 5-minute oral presentations on ability of the U.S. public health system funds’ financial condition. The reports the agenda issues mentioned in this to respond to the problem of infectious describe the trust funds’ current and notice should contact the Executive diseases by increasing the number of projected financial condition, within the Director by 12 noon on June 12, 2000. academic infectious disease physicians next 10 years (the short term) and over The number of oral presentations may with demonstrated skills in the public the subsequent 65 years (the long term). be limited to the time available. A health aspects of infectious diseases and The Medicare Board of Trustees has written copy of the presenters’ oral to provide them with the essential, directed the Secretary of Health and remarks should be submitted to the pertinent clinical and research skills. Human Services (who is one of the Executive Director no later than 12 PFTPs should be implemented as new Trustees) to establish a panel of noon, June 19, 2000, for distribution to distinct fellowship positions/tracks in technical experts to review the the Panel members. recipient’s existing infectious disease

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36146 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices postdoctoral training program. PFTPs $25,000 to $100,000. It is expected that f. Assist fellows in publishing and/or should be aimed at physicians with the awards will begin on or about otherwise disseminating results of their training in infectious diseases who wish September 30, 2000, and will be made research. to pursue a career in academic for a 12-month budget period within a g. Monitor and evaluate the progress infectious diseases of public health project period of up to three years. of fellows and progress toward importance. The objective is to offer a Funding estimates may change. achieving program goals. To measure combination of research and clinical Continuation awards within an the overall success of the PFTP, training which will lead to eligibility for approved project period will be made establish a mechanism to follow-up and certification in infectious diseases by on the basis of satisfactory progress as report on fellows (e.g., where they work, the American Board of Internal evidenced by required reports and the in what field, etc.) periodically for up to Medicine, Subspecialty Board of availability of funds. five years after they complete the PFTP. Infectious Diseases (the cognizant h. If fellow’s research involves the use member board of the American Board of Use of Funds of human subjects, assure appropriate Medical Specialties). Specific areas of Grantee cost-sharing is required under IRB review by all cooperating clinical concentration may include: this program. CDC will provide up to 50 institutions participating in the project. Clinical rotations in infectious diseases, percent of the total cost for items 2. CDC Activities infectious diseases in transplant directly related to the support of fellows recipients, clinical microbiology, such as stipends (consistent with PHS a. The laboratory or epidemiologic outpatient infectious diseases, pediatric policies) and professional travel. CDC research training may occur at CDC infectious diseases, or infectious disease funds will not be provided for supplies facilities. Provide preceptors and pharmacology. The recipient must be and equipment or for direct salaries/ facilities for research training that able to provide support for physicians of fringe, travel, space, etc., for recipient’s occurs at CDC facilities. unusual ability and promise or proven faculty or administrative personnel. In a b. If CDC researchers participate in achievement by giving them an training grant, recipient’s indirect fellow’s research that involves the use of opportunity to conduct clinical, charges are limited to 8 percent of direct human subjects, assist in the laboratory, and epidemiologic research costs. CDC funds are not intended to development of a research protocol for on significant public health problems supplant recipient’s existing infectious IRB review by all cooperating caused by infectious diseases. Specific disease fellowships, rather they are institutions participating in the research areas of research concentration may intended to support new fellowship project. The CDC IRB will review and include: Viral and rickettsial infections, opportunities that are consistent with approve the protocol initially and on at nosocomial infections, antimicrobial the stated Purpose of this cooperative least an annual basis until the research resistance, vector-borne infectious agreement program. project is completed. diseases, respiratory and food-borne D. Program Requirements E. Application Content bacterial diseases, parasitic diseases, Use the information in this section sexually transmitted diseases, and In conducting activities to achieve the and the Program Requirements, Other acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. purpose of this program, the recipient Requirements, and Evaluation Criteria In 1994, CDC initiated the will be responsible for the activities sections to develop the application Postdoctoral Fellowship Training under 1. (Recipient Activities), and CDC content. Your application will be Program in Infectious Diseases (PFTP) will be responsible for the activities evaluated on the criteria listed, so it is and made awards to two U.S. medical listed under 2. (CDC Activities). schools. The PFTP was renewed important to follow them in laying out competitively in 1997 and continued 1. Recipient Activities your program plan. The narrative should be no more than 10 single- programs at the original two schools and a. As a distinct and separate track of spaced pages, printed on one side, with added a third. Under all three awards, recipient’s existing infectious disease one inch margins (including headers the PFTP was integrated into the postdoctoral fellowship program, and footers), and unreduced font. school’s existing postdoctoral program develop and conduct a two- to three- as a separate PFTP track and several year PFTP that combines clinical and Typing and Mailing physicians have been enrolled. basic laboratory or epidemiologic All pages must be clearly numbered B. Eligible Applicants research in prevention and control of and a complete index to the application infectious diseases of public health and its appendices must be included. Assistance will be provided only to importance. university affiliated schools of medicine All pages of the application and b. Design and conduct the PFTP such appendices must be easily run through with infectious disease programs that, upon completion of the fellowship, accredited by the Accreditation Council an automatic document feed copier, fellows will become eligible for thus do not bind, staple, or paperclip for Graduate Medical Education certification in infectious diseases by (ACGME). any pages of any copy of the application the American Board of Internal and do not include any bound Note: Public Law 104–65 states that an Medicine. documents (e.g., pamphlets or other organization described in section 501(c)(4) of c. Provide preceptors for training. the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that publications) in the appendices. Do not engages in lobbying activities is not eligible d. Develop a fellowship candidate include cardboard, plastic, or other page to receive Federal funds constituting an application, review, ranking, and separators between sections. award, grant, cooperative agreement, selection process. Based on this process, contract, loan, or any other form. select applicants to be awarded two- to Specific Instructions three-year PFTP fellowships. The application narrative must not C. Availability of Funds e. Provide administrative support to exceed 10 pages (excluding abstract, Approximately $180,000 is available fellows during their tenure in the PFTP budget, and appendixes). Unless in FY 2000 to fund approximately three including the payment of stipends, indicated otherwise, all information awards. It is expected that the average professional travel, etc. (see Availability requested below must appear in the award will be $60,000, ranging from of Funds for cost sharing requirements). narrative. Materials or information that

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36147 should be part of the narrative will not space, facilities, supplies, etc., for Specialist identified in the ‘‘Where to be accepted if placed in the appendices. fellows. Obtain Additional Information’’ section The application narrative must contain of this announcement. 4. Operational Plan the following sections in the order Deadline: Applications shall be presented below: Present a detailed and time-phased considered as meeting the deadline if plan for establishing and conducting the they are either: 1. Abstract PFTP. Describe procedures to (a) Received on or before the deadline Provide a brief (less than two pages) accomplish all of the required recipient date; or summary of the proposed PFTP. activities. Describe how the clinical and (b) Sent on or before the deadline date research activities will be coordinated and received in time for orderly 2. Background and Need within the PFTP. Present a plan for processing. (Applicants must request a Demonstrate an understanding of the monitoring and evaluating the progress legibly dated U.S. Postal Service background and need for the PFTP. of fellows and the progress toward postmark or obtain a legibly dated Discuss how your proposed PFTP track achieving program goals. Describe how receipt from a commercial carrier or differs from existing tracks/ the plan will ensure that all fellows U.S. Postal Service. Private metered opportunities in your fellowship become eligible for certification in postmarks shall not be acceptable as program and how your proposed PFTP infectious diseases by the American proof of timely mailing.) track meets the Purpose of this Board of Internal Medicine by the end Late Applications: Applications cooperative agreement program. of fellowship tenure. Describe which do not meet the criteria in (a) or procedures and plans for assuring any (b) above are considered late 3. Capacity and Personnel fellow’s research that involves the use of applications, will not be considered, a. Describe applicant’s goals, human subjects will receive appropriate and will be returned to the applicant. IRB review by all cooperating objectives, and efforts to promote the G. Evaluation Criteria field of academic infectious diseases. institutions participating in the project. Each application will be evaluated Describe relevant degree programs and 5. Budget individually against the following sponsored regular national meetings, Provide a line-item budget and seminars, and/or workshops devoted to criteria by an independent review group accompanying detailed, line-by-line appointed by CDC. pertinent issues in academic infectious justification that demonstrates the diseases with relevance to public health. request is consistent with the purpose 1. Background and Need (15 Points) b. Demonstrate applicant’s experience and objectives of this program. Clearly Extent to which applicant in academic infectious diseases indicate by line-item both (a) the full demonstrates an understanding of the education and training in general, cost and (b) the amount requested from background and need for the PFTP. including experience in maintaining CDC (see Availability of Funds section Extent to which they clearly programs that lead to eligibility for for further information regarding cost- demonstrate that their proposed PFTP certification in infectious diseases by sharing). fellowship positions add to and do not the American Board of Internal F. Submission and Deadline supplant existing positions in their Medicine. Describe applicant’s existing fellowship program. Extent to which postdoctoral fellowship training Letter of Intent (LOI) they demonstrate and how the proposed programs for physicians in infectious In order to assist CDC in planning the PFTP track meets the Purpose of this diseases. evaluation of applications submitted cooperative agreement program. c. Describe applicant’s resources, under this Program Announcement, all 2. Capacity (50 Points) facilities, and professional personnel parties intending to submit an that will be involved in conducting the application are requested to submit an a. Institutional (25 points): The extent project. Include (in an appendix) LOI to inform CDC of their intention to to which the applicant demonstrates curriculum vitae for all professional do so as soon as possible but not later that they have been and are devoted to personnel involved with the project. than 30 days prior to the application promoting the field of academic Describe plans for administration of the due date. The LOI should include (1) infectious diseases. The extent to which project and identify administrative Name and address of institution, (2) the applicant has promoted the field of resources/personnel that will be name, address, and telephone number of academic infectious diseases by assigned to the project. Provide (in an contact person, and if proposing that conducting regular national meetings appendix) letters of support from all key research component be conducted at and workshops devoted to current participating non-applicant CDC facilities, (3) name and telephone topics. The extent to which the organizations, individuals, etc., which number of CDC scientist agreeing to applicant documents experience in clearly indicate their commitment to participate. Notification can be provided education and training in academic participate as described in the by facsimile, postal mail, or Email to the infectious diseases, including operational plan. Grants Management Specialist documentation of relevant degree d. If proposing that fellows conduct identified in the ‘‘Where to Obtain programs offered and evidence of their laboratory or epidemiologic Additional Information’’ section of this experience in successfully preparing training at CDC facilities, include a announcement. students for certification in infectious letter of support (in an appendix) from diseases by the American Board of the appropriate CDC scientist (co-signed Application Internal Medicine. The extent to which by their Division/Program Principal Submit the original and two copies of the applicant demonstrates significant Management Officer) that clearly PHS 5161–1 (OMB Number 0937–0189). institutional experience in managing indicates their commitment to Forms are available at the following postdoctoral fellowship training participate as described in your Internet address: www.cdc.gov/ . . . programs for physicians in the area of application Operational Plan including Forms, or in the application kit. On or infectious diseases. The extent to which agreement to 1) serve as preceptor for before Friday, June 30, 2000, submit the applicant documents they have a the research training and 2) provide application to the Grants Management successful existing postdoctoral

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36148 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices fellowship program in infectious the protection of human subjects? Procurement and Grants Office, Centers diseases. Yesll Noll for Disease Control and Prevention, b. Staff and administrative (25 points): Room 3000, 2920 Brandywine Road, H. Other Requirements The extent to which applicant describes Atlanta, GA 30341–4146, Telephone adequate resources and facilities Technical Reporting Requirements number: (770) 488–2749, Email address: (clinical, academic, and administrative) Provide CDC with original plus two [email protected]. for conducting the PFTP. The extent to copies of— For program technical assistance, which applicant documents that their 1. Annual progress reports (included contact: Greg J. Jones, M.P.A., Office of professional personnel involved in the with each noncompeting continuation the Director, National Center for PFTP are qualified and have past application); Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease experience and achievements related to 2. Financial status report, no more Control and Prevention (CDC), Mailstop that proposed as evidenced by than 90 days after the end of the budget C–12, 1600 Clifton Road, N.E., Atlanta, curriculum vitae, publications, etc. If period; and GA 30333, Phone: (404) 639–4180, proposing that fellow’s research be 3. Final financial and performance Facsimile: (404) 639–3106, Email: conducted at CDC facilities, the extent reports, no more than 90 days after the [email protected]. to which applicant includes a Letter of end of the project period. Dated: June 1, 2000. Support as described in Application Send all reports to the Grants John L. Williams, Content section 3.b., above (i.e., that is Management Specialist identified in the signed by the appropriate CDC officials Director, Procurement and Grants Office, ‘‘Where to Obtain Additional Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and that clearly indicates their Information’’ section of this (CDC). commitment to participate as proposed announcement. [FR Doc. 00–14267 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] in the application). The following additional BILLING CODE 4163±18±P 3. Operational Plan (30 Points) requirements are applicable to this The extent to which the proposed program. For a complete description of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND operational plan is clear, detailed, time- each, see Attachment I in the HUMAN SERVICES phased, and meets the purpose and application kit. AR–1 Human Subjects Requirements goals of this cooperative agreement Food and Drug Administration program. The extent to which the AR–2 Requirements for Inclusion of proposed operational plan addresses all Women and Racial and Ethnic [Docket No. 00C±1321] required Recipient Activities. If specific Minorities in Research fellow(s) research projects are proposed AR–3 Animal Subjects Requirements Wesley Jessen Corp.; Filing of Color that involve the use of human subjects, AR–7 Executive Order 12372 Review Additive Petition AR–9 Paperwork Reduction Act the degree to which the applicant has AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Requirements met the CDC Policy requirements HHS. AR–10 Smoke-Free Workplace regarding the inclusion of women, ACTION: Notice. ethnic, and racial groups in the Requirements AR–11 Healthy People 2010 proposed research. This includes: SUMMARY: The Food and Drug a. The proposed plan for the inclusion AR–12 Lobbying Restrictions Administration (FDA) is announcing of both sexes and racial and ethnic I. Authority and Catalog of Federal that Wesley Jessen Corp. has filed a minority populations for appropriate Domestic Assistance Number petition proposing that the color representation. additive regulations be amended to This program is authorized under b. The proposed justification when provide for the safe use of mica in Sections 301 [42 U.S.C. 241] and representation is limited or absent. contact lenses. c. A statement as to whether the 317(k)(2) [42 U.S.C. 247b(k)(2)] of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: design of the study is adequate to Public Health Service Act, as amended. Ellen M. Waldron, Center for Food measure differences when warranted. The Catalog of Federal Domestic d. A statement as to whether the plans Assistance Number is 93.283. Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– for recruitment and outreach for study 215), Food and Drug Administration, J. Where To Obtain Additional 200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, participants include the process of Information establishing partnerships with 202–418–3089. community(ies) and recognition of This and other CDC announcements SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the mutual benefits. can be found on the CDC home page Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Internet address—http://www.cdc.gov. (sec. 721(d)(1) (21 U.S.C. 379e(d)(1))), 4. Evaluation Plan (5 Points) Click on ‘‘Funding’’ then ‘‘Grants and notice is given that a color additive The quality of the proposed plan to Cooperative Agreements.’’ petition (CAP 0C0271) has been filed by monitor, evaluate and track individual To receive additional written Wesley Jessen Corp., 333 East Howard fellows; and overall plan to evaluate information and to request an Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018. The activities and objectives. application kit, call 1–888–GRANTS4 petition proposes to amend the color (1–888–472–6874). You will be asked to additive regulations in 21 CFR part 73 5. Budget (Not Scored) leave you name and address and will be subpart D—Medical Devices to provide The extent to which the proposed instructed to identify the for the safe use of mica in contact budget is reasonable, clearly justified, Announcement number of interest. lenses. and consistent with the intended use of If you have questions after reviewing The agency has determined under 21 cooperative agreement funds. the contents of all the documents, CFR 25.32(l) that this action is of a type 6. If research involving the use of business management technical that does not individually or human subjects is proposed, does the assistance may be obtained from: cumulatively have a significant effect on application adequately address the Andrea Wooddall, Grants Management the human environment. Therefore, requirements of Title 45 CFR Part 46 for Specialist, Grants Management Branch, neither an environmental assessment

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36149 nor an environmental impact statement publishes abstracts of information insurance program); the Lender’s is required. collection requests under review by the Manifest (used by the lender to report Dated: May 15, 2000. Office of Management and Budget, in recent HEAL loan activity); the Loan Laura M. Tarantino, compliance with the Paperwork Transfer Statement (used by the lender Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Acting Director, Office of Premarket to report the transfer of a HEAL loan); Approval, Center for Food Safety and Applied Chapter 35). To request a copy of the and the Borrower Status Request Nutrition. clearance requests submitted to OMB for (completed by the borrower and the [FR Doc. 00–14272 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] review, call the HRSA Reports borrower’s employer and used by the Clearance Office on (301)–443–1129. BILLING CODE 4160±01±F lender to determine eligibility for The following request has been deferment). The reports assist the submitted to the Office of Management Department in protecting its investment DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND and Budget for review under the in this loan insurance program. HUMAN SERVICES Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: The estimate of burden for the forms Health Resources and Services Proposed Project: The Health Education are as follows: Administration Assistance Loan (HEAL) Program: Forms (OMB No. 0915–0034) Extension Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB This clearance request is for extension Review; Comment Request of approval for four HEAL forms: the Lenders Application for Contract of Periodically, the Health Resources Federal Loan Insurance (used by lenders and Services Administration (HRSA) to make application to the HEAL

Responses Average time Collection activity Number of re- per respond- Total re- per response Total burden spondents ent sponses (in minutes) hours

HRSA Form 504 ...... 22 1 22 8 3 HRSA Form 508: Borrowers ...... 12,430 1 12,430 10 2,071 Employers ...... 7,550 1.646 12,430 5 1,035 Borrower Loan Status Update Electronic Submission ...... 22 8,498 186,970 3 9,348 Loan Purchase/consolidation Electronic Submission ...... 22 850 18,700 4 1,246

Total ...... 20,046 ...... 227,552 ...... 13,703

Written comments and proposed data collection projects, the quality of data is sufficient to justify recommendations concerning the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the conducting a comprehensive national proposed information collection should National Institutes of Health (NIH) will prevalence study of family history of be sent within 30 days of this notice to: publish periodic summaries of proposed cancer. The questionnaire will be John Morrall, Human Resources and projects to be submitted to the Office of administered in a telephone survey of Housing Branch, Office of Management Management and Budget (OMB) for adults, age 25 to 64 years who will be and Budget, New Executive Office review and approval. randomly selected from households in Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC Proposed Collection Connecticut. Respondents will be asked 20503. to report about family structure and Dated: June 1, 2000. Title The Family Health Survey cancer diagnoses occurring in their first Jane Harrison, (Validation of a Family History of and second degree relatives. Positive and negative reports of five major cancer Director, Division of Policy Review and Cancer Questionnaire for Risk Factor Coordination. Surveillance). Type of Information sites (i.e. breast, prostate, colorectal, lung, and ovarian cancers) will be [FR Doc. 00–14273 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Collection Request: New. Need and Use of Information Collection: In this validated for approximately four BILLING CODE 4160±15±P methologic pilot study, the NCI will relatives per respondent through data develop a family history of cancer linkage to state and federal health DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND questionnaire for use in cancer risk registries or by review of death HUMAN SERVICES factor surveillance, and will evaluate certificates and medical records. Living how accurately individuals in the relatives and next-of-kin of deceased National Institutes of Health general population can report major relatives may be interviewed as part of cancers occurring in their immediate the validation process. Information Proposed Collection; Comment and extended family. This study is about the accuracy of reports and factors Request; The Family Health Survey needed because there are currently no associated with reporting error will help (Validation of a Family History of validated questionnaires with which to to evaluate the feasibility of conducting Cancer Questionnaire for Risk Factor collect comprehensive data for assessing surveys on family history of cancer. Surveillance) the burden of family history of cancer in Frequency of Response: One-time study. the U.S. population, and no general Affected Public: Individuals or SUMMARY: In compliance with the population estimates of reporting error households. Type of Respondents: requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of for the major cancers that affect families. Adults, age 25 to 64, who reside in the the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, The results on reporting accuracy will state of Connecticut and their selected for opportunity for public comment on be used to determine whether the adult relatives over age 25 or the

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36150 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices relative’s next-of-kin. The annual respondents is estimated at: $23,700. There are no Operating or Maintenance reporting burden is presented in the There are no Capital Costs to report. Costs to report. table below. The annualized cost to

Estimated Estimated total Estimate num- number of re- Average bur- annual burden Type of respondents ber of re- sponses per den hours per hours re- spondents respondent response quested

Adults age 25 to 64 ...... 1800 1 0.835 1503 Adults relatives or their next-of kin ...... 5190 1 0.167 867

Total ...... 2370

Request for Comments: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND a minor constituent of opium and is HUMAN SERVICES generally in short supply. The demand Written comments and/or suggestions for these products has resulted in a from the public and affected agencies National Institutes of Health steadily increasing cost for thebaine and are invited on one or more of the thebaine derivatives. Government-Owned Inventions; following points: (1) Whether the The present technology consists of a Availability for Licensing proposed collection of information is new and practical, nonchromatographic necessary for the proper performance of AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, method of preparing 14- the function of the agency, including Public Health Service, DHHS. hydroxycodeinone by the direct whether the information will have ACTION: Notice. oxidation of codeinone with cobalt (III) practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the acetate (easily prepared in situ). The agency’s estimate of the burden of the SUMMARY: The inventions listed below technology gives a 51% unoptimized proposed collection of information, are owned by agencies of the U.S. yield of 14-hydroxycodeinone easily including the validity of the Government and are available for isolated by extractive workup and direct methodology and assumptions used; (3) licensing in the U.S. in accordance with crystallization. This process is Ways to enhance the quality, utility, 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious ultimately based on morphine (which is sand clarity of the information to be commercialization of results of by far the major constituent and collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the federally-funded research and cheapest of the opium alkaloids) burden of the collection of information development. Foreign patent through the sequence: morphine to on those who are to respond, including applications are filed on selected codeine to codeinone to 14- inventions to extend market coverage the use of appropriate automated, hydroxycodeinone. This technology is for companies and may also be available electronic, mechanical, or other not limited by the availability of for licensing. technological collection techniques or thebaine and thus offers more efficient ADDRESSES: Licensing information and other forms of information technology. production of the 14-hydroxy copies of the U.S. patent applications derivatives from opium. For Further Information: listed below may be obtained by contacting Marlene Shinn, J.D., at the Use of Oligonucleotides To Target To request more information on the Office of Technology Transfer, National Nucleic Acid Sequences Encoding proposed project or to obtain a copy of Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive Apolipoprotein B To Decrease Serum the data collection plans and Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, Apolipoprotein B and Cholesterol instruments, contact Dr. Louise Maryland 20852–3804; telephone: 301/ Levels Wideroff, Project Officer, Applied 496–7056 ext. 285; fax: 301/402–0220; Thomas L Eggerman (FDA), Amy Research Program, National Cancer e-mail: [email protected]. A signed Patterson, Paul F. Torrence (NIDDK), Institute, 6130 Executive Blvd. EPN Confidential Disclosure Agreement will Julie K Rhie 4010, Bethesda, MD 20892, or call non- be required to receive copies of the DHHS Reference No. E–236–98/0 filed toll-free number (301) 435–6823 or E- patent applications. 12 Oct 1999 mail your request, including your Direct C–14 Oxidation of Opioids address to: [email protected]. Coronary heart disease is caused by Andrew Coop, Kenner C. Rice (NIDDK) the atherosclerotic narrowing of the Comments Due Date: DHHS Reference No. E–032–99/1 filed coronary arteries affecting nearly 14 04 May 2000 million persons in the United States. Comments regarding this information Opioid agonist drugs including the Approximately 480,000 deaths in 1995 collection are best assured of having 14-hydroxy derivatives are utilized in were caused by the disease and it is the their full effect if received on or before the treatment of pain. The 14-hydroxy leading cause of death in the United August 7, 2000. substituted opioid antagonists have also States today. Two of the established Dated: May 30, 2000. been found to be useful in the treatment causes of atheroscleorosis include Reesa Nichols, of opiate abuse, opiate overdose and elevated cholesterol levels and OMB Project Liaison Officer. alcohol addiction. In addition, there are elevations of the major protein certain derivatives which have been responsible for carrying cholesterol— [FR Doc. 00–14340 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] found to be useful in the prevention of apolipoprotein B (apoB). Optimal BILLING CODE 4140±01±M tolerance to morphine and as therapy, however is still not available immunosuppressants. The 14-hydroxy for the most severely affected patients, agonist and antagonist drugs are in particular those with familial produced by a multistep process from hypercholesterolemia and those with the starting material, thebaine, which is elevated apoB levels.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36151

The NIH announces a new gene Dated: May 30, 2000. the discussions could disclose therapy approach which will lower the Jack Spiegel, confidential trade secrets or commercial risk for atheroscleoric heart disease by Director, Division of Technology Development property such as patentable material, decreasing plasma cholesterol and apoB and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer, and personal information concerning levels. Our researchers have shown that National Institutes of Health. individuals associated with the grant antisense DNA oligonucleotides targeted [FR Doc. 00–14343 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] applications, the disclosure of which for apoB decreased apoB mRNA in a BILLING CODE 4140±01±P would constitute a clearly unwarranted human liver cell line by up to 80%. This invasion of personal privacy. in turn has led to a new gene therapy DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Name of Committee: National Cancer which utilizes a vector designed to HUMAN SERVICES Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Diet, produce antisense mRNA targeted for Lifestyle and Cancer in U.S. Special apoB. The result is a decrease in liver National Institutes of Health Populations. apoB production, which is the major Date: June 29, 2000. source of circulating apoB. These Clinical Center; Notice of Meeting Time: 12 pm to 1:30 pm. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant oligonucleotides and oligonucleotide Pursuant to section 10(a) of the applications. analogs are a novel and useful way of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as reducing low density lipoprotein (LDL) Place: Executive Plaza North, 6130 amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Executive Boulevard, Conference Room E, in patients, as well as for research and is hereby given of a meeting of the diagnostic purposes. Rockville MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Board of Governors of the Warren Grant Call). T20/D178 and T21/D107 Are Activators Magnuson Clinical Center. Contact Person: Gerald G. Lovinger, The meeting will be open to the of Human Phagocyte Formyl Peptide Scientific Review Administrator, Grants public, with attendance limited to space Receptors Review Branch, Division of Extramural available. Individuals who plan to Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Ji Ming Wang (NCI), Joost J Oppenheim attend and need special assistance, such Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive (NCI), Shao-Bo Su, Wang-Hua Gong, as sign language interpretation or other Boulevard, Room 8070, Rockville, MD Philip M. Murphy (NIAID), Ji-Liang reasonable accommodations, should 20892–7405, 301/496–7987. Gao (NIAID) notify the Contact Person listed below This notice is being published less than 15 in advance of the meeting. DHHS Reference No. E–164–99/0 filed days prior to the meeting due to the timing 05 May 1999 Name of Committee: Board of Governors of limitations imposed by the review and the Warren Grant Magnuson Clinical Center funding cycle. The use of immunotherapy to treat Executive Committee. Date: July 21, 2000. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance inflammatory diseases is prescribed to Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; thousands each and every year. In use Time: 8:30 am to 1:30 pm. Agenda: Topics Related to Clinical Center 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention currently are steroidal and non-steroidal Budget. Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and anti-inflammatory drugs, which have Place: National Institutes of Health, Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer serious side effects including: adrenal Clinical Center Medical Board Room, 2C116, Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology suppression, gastrointestinal disorders, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892. Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; increased susceptibility to infections, Contact Person: Maureen E. Gormley, 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, fluid retention and bone loss. Executive Secretary, Warren Grant Magnuson Cancer Control, National Institutes of health, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, HHS) The NIH announces a new technology Building 10, Room 2C146, Bethesda, MD which can be used in drug discovery 20892, 301/496–2897. Dated: May 31, 2000. dealing with the modulation of the Dated: May 31, 2000. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, immune response. This technology LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. identifies two polypeptides, T20/DP178 Director, Office of Federal Advisory and T21/DP107, which are peptide Committee Policy. [FR Doc. 00–14333 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] domains of the HIV–1 envelope protein [FR Doc. 00–14332 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140±01±M and are potent chemoattractants and BILLING CODE 4140±01±M activators of human peripheral blood phagocytes (monocytes and neutrophils) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND but not T lymphocytes. These DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES polypeptides have been determined to HUMAN SERVICES interact with the Formyl Peptide National Institutes of Health Receptors (FPR), which in turn up- National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute; Notice of regulates the immune response by National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting inducing cell migration and calcium Closed Meeting mobilization. The activation of FPR Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Pursuant to section 10(d) of the class receptors by their agonists also Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Federal Advisory Committee Act, as results in desensitization of cell amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice responses to other chemotactic factors. is hereby given of the following is hereby given of the following By identifying analogs to T20/DP178 meeting. and T21/DP107 and then evaluating meeting. The meeting will be closed to the their ability to bind to the FPR, one will The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the public in accordance with the be able to determine if the analog is a provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) provisions set forth in sections good candidate for either inhibiting or and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., activating the immune response. amended. The grant applications and as amended. The contract proposals and

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36152 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices the discussions could disclose would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: Holiday Inn, 1450 Glenarm Place, confidential trade secrets or commercial invasion of personal privacy. Denver, CO 80202. property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Elsie D. Taylor, Scientific Name of Committee: Environmental Health Review Administrator, Extramural Project and personal information concerning Sciences Review Committee. individuals associated with the contract Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Date: July 20–21, 2000. Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. proposals, the disclosure of which Health, Suite 409, 6000 Executive Blvd., Agenda: To review and evaluate grant would constitute a clearly unwarranted Bethesda, MD 20892–7003, 301–443–9787, applications. invasion of personal privacy. [email protected]. Place: NIEHS-South Campus, Building 101, Name of Committee: National Cancer Conference Room B, Research Triangle Park, Name of Committee: National Institute on Institute Special Emphasis Panel, NC 27709. Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Continuation of Follow-Up of DES-Exposed Contact Person: Linda K. Bass, Scientific Emphasis Panel. Cohorts. Review Administrator, Nat’l Institute of Date: June 29, 2000. Date: June 21–22, 2000. Environmental Health Sciences, P.O. Box Time: 12 pm to 1 pm. Time: 7 p.m. to 5 p.m. 12233, MD EC–24, Research Triangle Park, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate contract NC 27709, (919) 541–1307. applications. proposals. Place: Holiday Inn, 1450 Glenarm Place, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Place: Double Tree Hotel, 1750 Rockville Denver, CO 80202. Program Nos. 93.113, Biological Response to Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Contact Person: Elsie D. Taylor, Scientific Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Contact Person: Kirt Vener, Branch Chief, Review Administrator, Extramural Project Special Review, Referral and Resources Applied Toxicological Research and Testing; Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, 93.115, Biometry and Risk Estimation— Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of National Cancer Institute, National Institutes Health Risks from Environmental Exposures; Health, Suite 409, 6000 Executive Blvd., of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker 8072, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301/496–7174. Health and Safety Training; 93.143, NIEHS Bethesda, MD 20892–7003, 301–443–9787, This notice is being published less than 15 Superfund Hazardous Substances—Basic [email protected]. days prior to the meeting due to the timing Research Education; 93.894, Resources and Name of Committee: National Institute on limitations imposed by the review and Manpower Development in the Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special funding cycle. Environmental Health Sciences, National Emphasis Panel. Institutes of Health, HHS) Date: June 30, 2000. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Dated: May 30, 2000. Time: 4 pm to 5 pm. Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention applications. Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. Place: Holiday Inn, 1450 Glenarm Place, Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Denver, CO 80202. Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology [FR Doc. 00–14328 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Contact Person: Elsie D. Taylor, Scientific Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Review Administrator, Extramural Project 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Review Branch, National Institute on Alcohol Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of HHS) DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Health, Suite 409, 6000 Executive Blvd., Dated: May 31, 2000. HUMAN SERVICES Bethesda, MD 20892–7003, 301–443–9787, LaVerne Y. Stringfield, [email protected]. Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health Committee Policy. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance National Institute on Alcohol Abuse Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research [FR Doc. 00–14334 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] and Alcoholism; Notice of Closed Career Development Awards for Scientists BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Meetings and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for Research Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants, HUMAN SERVICES amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice National Institutes of Health, HHS) is hereby given of the following National Institutes of Health Dated: May 30, 2000. meetings. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, National Institute of Environmental The meetings will be closed to the Director, Office of Federal Advisory Health Sciences; Notice of Closed public in accordance with the Committee Policy. Meeting provisions set forth in sections [FR Doc. 00–14330 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Pursuant to section 10(d) of the as amended. The grant applications and Federal Advisory Committee Act, as the discussions could disclose amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice confidential trade secrets or commercial DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND is hereby given of the following property such as patentable material, HUMAN SERVICES meeting. and personal information concerning The meeting will be closed to the individuals associated with the grant National Institutes of Health public in accordance with the applications, the disclosure of which provisions set forth in sections would constitute a clearly unwarranted National Institute of Arthritis and 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., invasion of personal privacy. Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; as amended. The grant applications and Notice of Closed Meeting the discussions could disclose Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special confidential trade secrets or commercial Emphasis Panel. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the property such as patentable material, Date: June 29, 2000. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as and personal information concerning Time: 4 pm to 5 pm. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice individuals associated with the grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant is hereby given of the following applications, the disclosure of which applications. meeting.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36153

The meeting will be closed to the Time: 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. 20892–7610, 301–496–2550, public in accordance with the Agenda: To review and evaluate contract [email protected]. provisions set forth in sections proposals. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Place: Neuroscience Center, National Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, Institutes of Health, 6001 Executive Blvd., and Transplantation Research; 93.856, as amended. The grant applications and Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference the discussions could disclose Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Call). Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) confidential trade secrets or commercial Contact Person: Eric Zatman, Contract Dated: May 31, 2000. property such as patentable material, Review Specialist, Office of Extramural and personal information concerning Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, LaVerne Y. Stringfield, individuals associated with the grant National Institutes of Health, DHHS, 6001 Director, Office of Federal Advisory applications, the disclosure of which Executive Boulevard, Room 3158, MSC 9547, Committee Policy. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Bethesda, MD 20892–9547, (301) 435–1438. [FR Doc. 00–14337 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140±01±M invasion of personal privacy. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Name of Committee: National Institute of Program Nos. 93.277, Drug Abuse Scientist Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist Diseases Special Emphasis Panel. Development Awards, and Research Scientist DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Date: July 17, 2000. Awards; 93.278, Drug Abuse National HUMAN SERVICES Time: 8:30 am to 12:30 pm. Research Service Awards for Research Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Training; 93.279, Drug Abuse Research National Institutes of Health applications. Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Place: Doubletree Hotel, 1750 Rockville National Institute of Dental & Dated: May 31, 2000. Craniofacial Research; Notice of Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Contact Person: John R. Lymangrover, Meeting Scientific Review Administrator, National Director, Office of Federal Advisory Institutes of Health, NIAMS, Natcher Bldg., Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Room 5As25N, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301– [FR Doc. 00–14336 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 594–4952. BILLING CODE 4140±01±M amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, National Advisory Dental and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Craniofacial Research Council. National Institutes of Health, HHS) HUMAN SERVICES The meeting will be open to the Dated: May 31, 2000. public as indicated below, with National Institutes of Health attendance limited to space available. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Individuals who plan to attend and Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Institute of Allergy and need special assistance such as sign Committee Policy. Infectious Diseases; Notice of Closed language interpretation or other [FR Doc. 00–14335 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Meeting reasonable accommodations, should BILLING CODE 4140±01±M notify the Contact Person listed below Pursuant to section 10(d) of the in advance of the meeting. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as The meeting will be closed to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice public in accordance with the HUMAN SERVICES is hereby given of the following provisions set forth in sections meeting. National Institutes of Health 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., The meeting will be closed to the as amended. The grant applications public in accordance with the National Institute on Drug Abuse; and/or contract proposals and the provisions set forth in sections Notice of Closed Meeting discussions could disclose confidential 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., trade secrets or commercial property Pursuant to section 10(d) of the as amended. The grant applications and such as patentable material, and Federal Advisory Committee Act, as the discussions could disclose personal information concerning amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice confidential trade secrets or commercial individuals associated with the grant is hereby given of the following property such as patentable materials, applications and/or contract proposals, meeting. and personal information concerning the disclosure of which would The meeting will be closed to the individuals associated with the grant constitute a clearly unwarranted public in accordance with the applications, the disclosure of which invasion of personal privacy. provisions set forth in sections would constitute a clearly unwarranted 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., invasion of personal privacy. Name of Committee: National Advisory as amended. The contract proposals and Dental and Craniofacial Research Council. Name of Committee: National Institute of Date: June 8–9, 2000. the discussions could disclose Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Open: June 8, 2000, 8:30 am to 5:30 pm. confidential trade secrets or commercial Emphasis Panel. Agenda: Director’s Presentation & property such as patentable material, Date: June 21–23, 2000. Scientific Presentations. and personal information concerning Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Place: 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31C, individuals associated with the contract Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. proposals, the disclosure of which applications. Open: June 9, 2000, 9 am to 10 am. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Place: Georgetown Holiday Inn, 2101 Agenda: Concept review. Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC invasion of personal privacy. Place: 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31C, 20007. Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892. Name of Committee: National Institute on Contact Person: Gerald L. McLaughlin, Closed: June 9, 2000, 10 am to 5 pm. Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel, Phase II Scientific Review Administrator, Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant SBIR: ‘‘Develop CD–ROM Based Instrument Review Program, Division of Extramural applications and/or proposals. Wizard’’. Activities, NIAID, NIH, Room 2217, 6700–B Place: 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31C, Date: June 28, 2000. Rockledge Drive, MSC 7610, Bethesda, MD Conference Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36154 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Contact Person: Dushanka V. Kleinman, OMB’s ‘‘Mandatory Information Scientific Review, National Institutes of Deputy Director National Institute of Dental Requirements for Federal Assistance Program Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5158, & Craniofacial Res., National Institutes of Announcements’’ (45 FR 39592, June 11, MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, 31/2C39, 1980) requires a statement concerning the 1242. Bethesda, MD 20892. official government programs contained in Name of Committee: Biophysical and This notice is being published less than 15 the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. Chemical Sciences Integrated Review Group, days prior to the meeting due to the timing Normally NIH lists in its announcements the Molecular and Cellular Biophysics Study limitations imposed by the review and number and title of affected individual Section. funding cycle. programs for the guidance of the public. Date: June 15–16, 2000. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Because the guidance in this notice covers Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and virtually every NIH and Federal research Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Disorders Research, National Institutes of program in which DNA recombinant applications. Health, HHS) molecule techniques could be used, it has Place: Hotel Sofitel, 1914 Connecticut been determined not to be cost effective or Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20009. Dated: June 1, 2000. in the public interest to attempt to list these Contact Person: Nancy Lamontagne, LaVerne Y. Stringfield, programs. Such a list would likely require Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Director, Office of Federal Advisory several additional pages. In addition, NIH Scientific Review, National Institutes of Committee Policy. could not be certain that every Federal Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4170, [FR Doc. 00–14338 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] program would be included as many Federal MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– agencies, as well as private organizations, 1726. BILLING CODE 4140±01±M both national and international, have elected Name of Committee: Oncological Sciences to follow the NIH Guidelines. In lieu of the Integrated Review Group, Experimental individual program listing, NIH invites Therapeutics Subcommittee 1. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND readers to direct questions to the information HUMAN SERVICES Date: June 15–16, 2000. address above about whether individual Time: 8 am to 5 pm. programs listed in the Catalog of Federal National Institutes of Health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Domestic Assistance are affected. applications. Recombinant DNA Advisory Dated: May 31, 2000 Place: Arlington Hyatt, 1325 Wilson LaVerne Stringfield, Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22209. Committee; Notice of Meeting Contact Person: Philip Perkins, Scientific Director, Officer of Federal Advisory Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Committee Policy. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Federal Advisory Committee Act, as [FR Doc. 00–14342 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Rockledge Drive, Room 4148, MSC 7804, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1718, is hereby given of a meeting of the [email protected]. Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee. Name of Committee: Biochemical Sciences The meeting will be open to the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Integrated Review Group, Medical public as indicated below, with HUMAN SERVICES Biochemistry Study Section. attendance limited to space available. Date: June 15–16, 2000. Individuals who plan to attend and National Institutes of Health Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm need special assistance, such as sign Agenda: To review and evaluate grant language interpretation or other Center for Scientific Review; Notice of applications. Closed Meetings Place: Double Tree Hotel, 1750 Rockville reasonable accommodations, should Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. notify the Contact Person listed below Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Contact Person: Alexander S. Liacouras, in advance of the meeting. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Name of Committee: Recombinant DNA amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Scientific Review, National Institutes of Advisory Committee. is hereby given of the following Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5154, Date: June 28–29, 2000. meetings. MSC 7842, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Time: June 28–9 a.m. to 5 p.m.; June 29– The meetings will be closed to the 1740. 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Name of Committee: Biochemical Sciences public in accordance with the Integrated Review Group, Biochemistry Agenda: The agenda will include a provisions set forth in sections discussion on novel human gene transfer Study Section. protocol(s), DHHS Initiatives for Human 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Date: June 15–16, 2000. Subjects Protections, continued deliberation as amended. The grant applications and Time: 8:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on issues involving serious adverse events, the discussions could disclose Agenda: To review and evaluate grant review of the findings and recommendations confidential trade secrets or commercial applications. from the Advisory Committee to the Director property such as patentable material, Place: Chevy Chase Holiday Inn, 5520 Working Group on Gene Transfer Studies, and personal information concerning Wisconsin Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20815. discussion of data management activities individuals associated with the grant Contact Person: Chhanda L. Ganguly, related to human gene transfer clinical trials, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications, the disclosure of which Scientific Review, National Institutes of other matters to be considered by the would constitute a clearly unwarranted Committee. Additional information is also Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5156, available at the Officer of Biotechnology invasion of personal privacy. MSC 7842, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Activities’ web site: http://www.nih.gov/od/ Name of Committee: Center for Scientific 1739. oba/ on the Internet. Review Special Emphasis Panel. IFCN–7 (01) Name of Committee: Cell Development and Place: National Institutes of Health, Date: June 15–16, 2000. Function Integrated Review Group, Cell Building 31, Conference Room 10, 9000 Time: 8 am to 5 pm. Development and Function 5. Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 15–16, 2000. Contact Person: Amy P. Patterson, Director applications. Time: 8:30 am to 4 pm. and Acting Executive Secretary, Officer of Place: One Washington Circle Hotel, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Biotechnology Activities, National Institutes Conference Center, One Washington Circle, applications. of Health, MSC 7010, 6000 Executive Washington, DC 20037. Place: Holiday Inn Georgetown, 2101 Boulevard, Suite 302, Bethesda, MD 20892– Contact Person: Bernard F. Driscoll, Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 7010, 301–496–9838. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 20007.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36155

Contact Person: Sherry L. Dupere, Review Group, Visual Sciences A Study Place: Governor’s House Hotel, 17th & Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Section. Rhode Island Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 15–16, 2000. 20036. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5136, Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Contact Person: Michael Micklin, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 1021, [email protected] applications. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: Bethesda Holiday Inn, 8120 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3178, Review Special Emphasis Panel. Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20852. MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Date: June 15–16, 2000. Contact Person: Michael H. Chaitin, 1258, [email protected] Time: 8:30 am to 4 pm. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of Review Special Emphasis Panel. applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5202, Date: June 16, 2000. Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. 0910. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Lee S. Mann, Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Place: Holiday Inn Central, 1501 Rhode Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Date: June 15–16, 2000. Rockledge Drive, Room 3186, MSC 7848, Island Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Time: 9 am to 5 pm. Contact Person: Nancy Hicks, Scientific Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–0677. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific applications. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel. Place: Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Date: June 15–16, 2000. Rockledge Drive Room 3158, MSC 7770, Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–0695. Contact Person: Richard Marcus, Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: The George Hotel, 15 E Street, NE, Date: June 16, 2000. Rockledge Drive, Room 5168, MSC 7844, Washington, DC 20001. Time: 9 am to 12 pm. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1245, Contact Person: Gillian Einstein, Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific applications. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: Georgetown Suites, 1111 30th Street, Rockledge Drive, Room 5198, MSC 7850, Review Special Emphasis Panel. NW., Washington, DC 20007. Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435–4433, Date: June 15–16, 2000. Contact Person: Sandy Warren, Scientific [email protected] Time: 9 am to 5 pm. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel. applications. Rockledge Drive, Room, 5134, MDC 7840, Date: June 15–16, 2000. Place: Georgetown Suites, 1000 29th St., Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1019. Time: 8:30 am to 4 pm. NW., Washington, DC 20007. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Michael J. Kozak, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Review Special Emphasis Panel. Place: Governor’s House Hotel, 17th & Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: June 16, 2000. Rhode Island Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3170, Time: 12 pm to 2 pm. 20036. MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Michael Micklin, 0913. applications. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: Georgetown Suites, 1000 29th St., Scientific Review, National Institutes of Review Special Emphasis Panel. NW., Washington, DC 20007. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3178, Date: June 15–16, 2000. Contact Person: Anita Miller Sostek, MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Time: 9 am to 4 pm. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 1258, [email protected] Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of Name of Committee: Immunological applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3176, Sciences Integrated Review Group, Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Experimental Immunology Study Section. Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW, 1260. Date: June 15–16, 2000. Washington, DC 20015. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Time: 8:30 am to 4:30 pm. Contact Person: Michael A. Lang, Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Date: June 17–18, 2000. applications. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Rockledge Drive, Room 5210, MSC 7850, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1265. applications. Contact Person: Calbert A. Laing, Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: Copper Mountain Resort, P.O. Box Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. 3001, Copper Mountain, CO 80443. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Date: June 15–16, 2000. Contact Person: Jay Joshi, Scientific Rockledge Drive, Room 4210, MSC 7812, Time: 9:30 am to 5 pm. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1221. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Rockledge Drive, Room 5184, MSC 7846, Review Special Emphasis Panel. Place: Radisson Barcelo Hotel, 2121 P St, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1184. Date: June 15–16, 2000. NW., Washington, DC 20037. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Time: 8:30 am to 5 pm. Contact Person: Carl D. Banner, Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Date: June 18, 2000. applications. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Time: 1 pm to 4 pm. Place: Bethesda Holiday Inn, 8120 Rockledge Drive, Room 5212, MSC 7850, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1251, applications. Contact Person: Robert Weller, Scientific [email protected] Place: Georgetown Holiday Inn, 2101 Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Wisconsin Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Special Emphasis Panel. 20007. Rockledge Drive, Room 3160, MSC 7770, Date: June 15, 2000. Contact Person: Dharam S. Dhindsa, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–0694. Time: 3 p.m. to 5 pm. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Name of Committee: Molecular, Cellular Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of and Developmental Neuroscience Integrated applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5126,

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36156 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 1174, [email protected] as amended. The grant applications and Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: Center for Scientific the discussions could disclose applications. Review Special Emphasis Panel. confidential trade secrets or commercial Place: Georgetown Suites, 1111 30th Street, Date: June 18–19, 2000. NW., Washington, DC 20007. property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Michael H. Sayre, Time: 3 pm to 5 pm. and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for applications. individuals associated with the grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard applications, the disclosure of which Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5128, Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1219. Contact Person: Ann A. Jerkins, Scientific invasion of personal privacy. This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 limitations imposed by the review and Review Special Emphasis Panel. funding cycle. Rockledge Drive, Room 6154, MSC 7892, Date: June 5, 2000. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–4514. Time: 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Agenda: To Review and evaluate grant Review Special Emphasis Panel. Review Special Emphasis Panel. applications. Date: June 9, 2000. Date: June 18, 2000. Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD Time: 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. Time: 4 pm to 5:30 pm. 20892 (Telephone Conference Call). Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Bruce Maurer, Scientific applications. applications. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Place: Georgetown Suites, 1111 30th Street, Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 NW., Washington, DC 20007. Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. Rockledge Drive, Room 5222, MSC 7852, Contact Person: Ramesh K. Nayak, Contact Person: N. Krish Krishnan, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1168. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for This notice is being published less than 15 Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review, National Institutes of days prior to the meeting due to the timing Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5146, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6164, limitations imposed by the review and MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– funding cycle. 1026. 1041. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance This notice is being published less than 15 Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, days prior to the meeting due to the timing Review Special Emphasis Panel. 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, limitations imposed by the review and Date: June 18, 2000. 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, funding cycle. Time: 6 pm to 8 pm. 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Name of Committee: Pathophysiological Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Institutes of Health, HHS) Sciences Integrated Review Group, Alcohol applications. Dated: May 30, 2000. and Toxicology Subcommittee 4. Date: June 19–20, 2000. Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Contact Person: Abubakar A. Shaikh, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Committee Policy. applications. Scientific Review, National Institutes of [FR Doc. 00–14331 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Place: Chevy Chase Holiday Inn, 5520 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6166, BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Wisconsin Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20815. MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Contact Person: Mushtaq A. Khan, 1042. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2176, Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, National Institutes of Health 1778, [email protected] 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, This notice is being published less than 15 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National days prior to the meeting due to the timing Institutes of Health, HHS) Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings limitations imposed by the review and Dated: May 30, 2000. funding cycle. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Name of Committee: Endocrinology and Director, Office of Federal Advisory Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Committee Policy. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Group, Human Embryology and Development [FR Doc. 00–14329 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] is hereby given of the following Subcommittee 1. Date: June 19–20, 2000. BILLING CODE 4140±01±M meetings. The meetings will be closed to the Time: 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant public in accordance with the applications. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND provisions set forth in sections Place: Embassy Suites & Chevy Pavilion, HUMAN SERVICES 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 4300 Military Road, NW., Wisconsin at as amended. The grant applications and Western Avenue, Washington, DC 20015. National Institutes of Health the discussions could disclose Contact Person: Michael Knecht, Scientific confidential trade secrets or commercial Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Center for Scientific Review; Notice of property such as patentable material, Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Closed Meeting and personal information concerning Rockledge Drive, Room 6176, MSC 7892, individuals associated with the grant Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1046. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the This notice is being published less than 45 Federal Advisory Committee Act, as applications, the disclosure of which days prior to the meeting due to the timing amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice would constitute a clearly unwarranted limitations imposed by the review and is hereby given of the following invasion of personal privacy. funding cycle. meeting. Name of Committee: Cell Development and Name of Committee: Surgery, Radiology The meeting will be closed to the Function Integrated Review Group, Cell and Bioengineering Integrated Review Group, public in accordance with the Development and Function 1. Surgery and Bioengineering Study Section. provisions set forth in sections Date: June 8–9, 2000. Date: June 19–20, 2000.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36157

Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: Residence Inn, Conference Room, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD applications. Place: Monarch Hotel, 2400 M Street, NW, 20814. Place: Hyatt Regency Hotel, One Bethesda Washington, DC 20037. Contact Person: Timothy J. Henry, Metro Center, Bethesda, MD 20814. Contact Person: Anshumali Chaudhari, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Contact Person: Teresa Nesbitt, Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Scientific Review, National Institute of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4180, Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4128, MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Rockledge Drive, Room 5118, MSC 7854, MSC 7801, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 1147. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1172, 1210. This notice is being published less than 15 [email protected] This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific funding cycle. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, IFCN–6 (01). Date: June 20–21, 2000. Review Special Emphasis Panel. Date: June 19–20, 2000. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Date: June 19–20, 2000. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Place: Holiday Inn, 8120 Wisconsin applications. Place: Governor’s House Hotel, 17th & Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Place: Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Rhode Island Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Contact Person: Mary Custer, Scientific Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. 20036. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Contact Person: Gloria B. Levin, Scientific Contact Person: Joseph Kimm, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Rockledge Drive, Room 5102, MSC 7850, Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1164. Rockledge Drive, Room 5178 MSC 7844, Rockledge Drive, Room 3166, MSC 7848, Name of Committee: Social Sciences, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1249. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1017, Nursing, Epidemiology and Methods This notice is being published less than 15 [email protected] Integrated Review Group, Nursing Research days prior to the meeting due to the timing This notice is being published less than 15 Study Section. limitations imposed by the review and days prior to the meeting due to the timing Date: June 20–22, 2000. funding cycle. limitation imposed by the review and Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. funding cycle. Name of Committee: Nutritional and Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Metabolic Sciences Integrated Review Group, applications. Name of Committee: Nutritional and Nutrition Study Section. Place: Holiday Inn-Silver Spring, 8777 Metabolic Sciences Integrated Review Group, Date: June 19–20, 2000. Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Metabolism Study Section. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Contact Person: Gertrude McFarland, Date: June 19–20, 2000. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. applications. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4110, applications. Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. MSC 7816, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard Contact Person: Sooja K. Kim, Scientific 1784. Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Krish Krishnan, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Rockledge Drive, Room 6158, MSC 7892, Date: June 20–21, 2000. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1780. Rockledge Drive, Room 6164, MSC 7892, Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. This notice is being published less than 15 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1041. days prior to the meeting due to the timing applications. This notice is being published less than 15 limitations imposed by the review and Place: The Doyle Hotel, 1500 New days prior to the meeting due to the timing funding cycle. Hampshire Avenue, NW., Washington, DC limitations imposed by the review and Name of Committee: Endocrinology and 20036. funding cycle. Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Contact Person: Syed Husain, Scientific Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Group, Endocrinology Study Section. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel. Date: June 19–20, 2000. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Date: June 19–20, 2000. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Rockledge Drive, Room 5216, MSC 7850, Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Bethesda, MD 20892–7850, (301) 435–1224. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific applications. Place: Delta Chelsea Hotel, 33 Gerrard Review Special Emphasis Panel. Place: Bethesda Holiday Inn, 8120 Street West Toronto, Ontario, ON 000000. Date: June 20–21, 2000. Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20852 Contact Person: Syed M. Amir, Scientific Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Contact Person: Stephen M. Nigida, Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 applications. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Rockledge Drive, Room 6168, MSC 7892, Place: Chevy Chase Holiday Inn, 5520 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4112, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1043, Wisconsin Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20815. MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– [email protected] Contact Person: Herman Teitelbaum, 3565. This notice is being published less than 15 Scientific Review Administrator, Center for This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing Scientific Review, National Institutes of days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5190, limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– funding cycle. Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases 1254. Name of Committee: Cardiovascular and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, Name of Committee: Center for Scentific Sciences Integrated Review Group, Bacteriology and Mycology Subcommittee 1. Review Special Emphasis Panel. Experimental Cardiovascular Sciences Study Date: June 19–20, 2000. Date: June 20–21, 2000. Section. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Date: June 19–20, 2000. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Time: 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. applications. applications.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36158 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Place: The Governor’s House Hotel, 1615 Place: Chevy Chase Holiday Inn, 5520 Contact Person: Eugene M. Zimmerman, Rhode Island Avenue, NW., Washington, DC Wisconsin Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for 20036. Contact Person: Marcia Steinberg, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: John Bishop, Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4202, Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Scientific Review, National Institutes of MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5140, 1220. Rockledge Drive, Room 5180, MSC 7844, MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1250. 1023. Review Special Emphasis Panel. Name of Committee: Pathophysiological Name of Committee: Biochemical Sciences Date: June 22–23, 2000. Sciences Integrated Review Group, Lung Integrated Review Group, Physiological Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Biology and Pathology Study Section. Chemistry Study Section. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 21–22, 2000. Date: June 22–23, 2000. applications. Time: 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Time: 8 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Place: Wyndham Bristol Hotel, 2430 Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: to review and evaluate grant Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC applications. applications. 20037. Place: St. James Hotel, 950 24th Street, Place: Embassy Square, 2000 N Street, NW, Contact Person: Michael Nunn, Scientific NW., Washington, DC 20037. Washington, DC 20036. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Contact Person: George M. Barnas, Contact Person: Richard Panniers, Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Rockledge Drive, Room 5202, MSC 7850, Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review, National institutes of Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–0910. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2182, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5148, Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 7842, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1741. and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, _ 0696, george [email protected] Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Microbial Physiology and Genetics Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases Review Special Emphasis Panel. Subcommittee 2. and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, Date: June 22–23, 2000. Date: June 22–23, 2000. Microbial Physiology and Genetics Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Subcommittee 1. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 21–22, 2000. applications. applications. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Place: Georgetown Suites, 1111 30th Street, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. NW., Washington, DC 20007. applications. Contact Person: Michael Micklin, Contact Person: Rona L. Hirschberg, Place: Holiday Inn, Montgomery Village Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Ave, Gathersburg, MD 20879. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Scientific Review, National Institutes of Contact Person: Martin L. Slater, Scientific Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3178, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4186, Review Administrator, Center for Scientific MSC 7848, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 1258, [email protected] 1150. Name of Committee: Biophysical and Rockledge Drive, Room 4184, MSC 7808, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Chemical Sciences Integrated Review Group, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1149. Review Special Emphasis Panel, IFCN–8 (01). Biophysical Chemistry Study Section. Name of Committee: Biophysical and Date: June 22–23, 2000. Date: June 22–23, 2000. Chemical Sciencies Integrated Review Group, Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Medicinal Chemistry Study Section. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Date: June 21–22, 2000. applications. applications. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Place: Holiday Inn, 8120 Wisconsin Place: Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Ave, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Palladian West, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. applications. Contact Person: Samuel Rawlings, Contact Person: Arnold Revzin, Scientific Place: Holiday Inn, 8120 Wisconsin Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Contact Person: Ronald J. Dubois, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5160, Rockledge Drive, Room 4192, MSC 7806, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1153. Scientific Review, National Institutes of 1243. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, room 4156, Name of Committee: Immunological Review Special Emphasis Panel. MSC 7806, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Sciences Integrated Review, Group, Date: June 22–23, 2000. 1722, [email protected] Immunological Sciences Study Section. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Name of Committee: Infectious Diseases Date: June 22–23, 2000. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant and Microbiology Integrated Review Group, Time: 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. applications. Experimental Virology Study Section. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Place: Holiday Inn, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Date: June 21–22, 2000. applications. Silver Spring, MD 20910. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Place: The Watergate Hotel, 2650 Virginia Contact Person: John L, Bowers, Scientific Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Review Administrator, Center for Scientific applications. Contact Person: Alexander D. Politis, Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Place: Holiday Inn, Select, 480 King Street, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Rockledge Drive, Room 4168, MSC 7806, Old Town Alexandria, VA 22314. Scientific Review, National Institutes of Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1725. Contact Person: Rona L. Hirschberg, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4204, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Scientific Review Administrator, Center for MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Review Special Emphasis Panel. Scientific Review, National Institutes of 1225. Date: June 22–23, 2000. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4186, Name of Committee: Immunological Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. MSC 7808, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Sciences Integrated Review Group, Allergy Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 1150. and Immunology Study Section. applications. Name of Committee: Cell Development and Date: June 22–23, 2000. Place: Georgetown Suites, 1000 29th St., Function Integrated Review Group, Cell Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. NW., Washington, DC 20007. Development and Function 4. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Mariana Dimitrov, Date: June 22–23, 2000. applications. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Place: Wyndham City Center, 1143 New Scientific Review, National Institutes of Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Hampshire Avenue NW., Washington, DC Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3180, applications. 20037. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1281.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36159

Name of Committee: Center for Scientific exclusive license should be directed to: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Review Special Emphasis Panel. Girish C. Barua, Ph.D., Office of Date: June 22, 2000. Technology Transfer, National Institutes Bureau of Land Management Time: 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. of Health, 6011 Executive Boulevard, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Suite 325, Rockville, MD. 20852–3804. applications. [MT010±1220±DA] Place: St James Preferred Residence, 950 Telephone: 301/496–7056, ext. 263; 24th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. Facsimile: 301/402–0220; E-mail: Motorized Vehicle Use Within the Contact Person: Russell T. Dowell, [email protected]. Following Areas of Critical Scientific Review Administrator, Center for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S. Environmental Concern: Bridger Fossil Scientific Review, National Institutes of Patent 5,722,395 claims an ultra thin Area; East Pryor Mountain; Meeteetse Health, 6701 Rockledge Dr., Rm. 2180, MSC walled wire reinforced endotracheal 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1169, Spires; Petroglyph Canyon and [email protected] tubing which includes a thin walled Weatherman Draw, within Carbon and tubing comprising a polymeric material (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Musselshell Counties, Montana Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, having a spring material incorporated 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, therewith. Utilization of the spring wire AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, material in combination with polymeric Interior. 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National material results in a reduced wall Institutes of Health, HHS) thickness which results in a significant ACTION: Notice. decrease in resistance to air flow Dated: June 1, 2000. through the endotracheal tubing and SUMMARY: The decision to approve the LaVerne Y. Stringfield, therefore should permit a patient to designation of seven ACEC’s within Director, Office of Federal Advisory breathe in more relaxed fashion so as Carbon and Yellowstone Counties, Committee Policy. not to become exhausted. The Montana with associated restrictions on [FR Doc. 00–14339 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] endotracheal tubing of the present motorized vehicle use is final. BILLING CODE 4140±01±M invention is made by depositing a Motorized use in the Bridger Fossil dissolvable polymeric material onto a Area, East Pryor Mountain, Meeteese rotating mandrel in successive layers. A Spires, Petroglyph Canyon and Stark DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND spring material is also applied around Site ACEC’s is restricted to designated HUMAN SERVICES the mandrel to produce the ultra thin roads. Motorized vehicle use in the walled wire reinforced endotracheal Weatherman Draw ACEC is limited to National Institutes of Health tubing. The prospective co-exclusive license: authorized use only. The final decision Prospective Grant of Co-exclusive will be royalty-bearing; will comply was signed on March 10, 1999 and the License: ``Ultra Thin Walled Wire with the terms and conditions of 35 restrictions became effective on April Reinforced Endotracheal Tubing'' U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7; and it will 10, 1999. These areas are posted with AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, be structured in such a way not to signs listing the specific restrictions for Public Health Service, DHHS. preclude the U.S. Public Health Service each area. ACTION: Notice. from licensing the patent rights of U.S. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patents 5,305,740, 5,429,127, 5,537,729, Sandra Brooks, Field Manager, BLM, SUMMARY: 5,711,296 and 5,785,998 and allowing This is notice, in accordance Billings Field Office, PO BOX 36800, with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR appropriate licensees the right to 5001 Southgate Drive, Billings, 404.7(a)(1)(i), that the National practice these patent rights worldwide. Montana, 59107 or 406–896–5013. Institutes of Health, Department of The prospective co-exclusive license Health and Human Services, is may be granted unless within sixty (60) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority contemplating the grant of a co- days from the date of this published for this action is outlined in sections exclusive license to practice the notice, the NIH receives written 302, 303 and 310 of the Federal Land inventions embodied in U.S. Patent evidence and argument that establish Policy and Mangement Act of October Application S/N 08/645,887 entitled, that the grant of the license would not 21, 1976, (43 U.S.C. 1716) and Title 43 be consistent with the requirements of ‘‘Ultra Thin Walled Wire Reinforced Code of Federal Regulations Subject 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Endotracheal Tubing’’ filed on May 15, 8364 (43 CFR 8364.1). Any person who Properly filed competing applications 1996 and now U.S. Patent 5,722,395 fails to comply with this closure is which issued on March 3, 1998 to for a license filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to subject to arrest and a fine up to $1000 Mallinckrodt, Inc. of St. Louis, MO. The or imprisonment not to exceed 12 patent rights in these inventions have the contemplated license. Comments months, or both. These restrictions been assigned to the United States of and objections submitted to this notice apply to all persons except persons America. will not be made available for public authorized by the Bureau of Land The prospective co-exclusive license inspection and, to the extent permitted territory will be for the United States. by law, will not be released under the Management. DATES: Only written comments and/or Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Dated: June 1, 2000. application for a license which are 552. Sandra S. Brooks, received by the NIH Office of Dated: May 30, 2000. Field Manager. Technology Transfer on or before Jack Spiegel, [FR Doc. 00–14268 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] August 7, 2000 will be considered. Director, Division of Technology Development BILLING CODE 4310±$$±U ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer. patent, inquiries, comments and other [FR Doc. 00–14341 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] materials relating to the contemplated BILLING CODE 4140±01±M

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36160 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR T. 34 S., R. 33 E., Congress has provided for such Sec. 2, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and S1⁄2N1⁄2; determinations in local courts. Bureau of Land Management Sec. 4, N1⁄2NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, Sylvia V. Baca, N1⁄2SE1⁄4, and SE1⁄4SE1⁄4; [OR±958±6333±ET; GPO±0083; (OR±9041A] Sec. 35, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4. Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Public Land Order No. 7452; Partial T. 20 S., R. 331⁄2 E., [FR Doc. 00–14289 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Revocation of the Executive Order Sec. 7, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4; BILLING CODE 4310±33±P Dated April 17, 1926; Oregon Sec. 21, S1⁄2; Sec. 25, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 and NW1⁄4SW1⁄4. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, T. 39 S., R. 34 E., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Interior. Sec. 8, N1⁄2NW1⁄4SE1⁄4 and NE1⁄4SE1⁄4; 1 1 Bureau of Land Management ACTION: Public land order. Sec. 9, NW ⁄4SW ⁄4. T. 19 S., R. 35 E., [UTU 011167] SUMMARY 1 1 1 1 : This order partially revokes Sec. 33, NW ⁄4NE ⁄4, NW ⁄4SE ⁄4, and an Executive order insofar as it affects SE1⁄4SE1⁄4; Public Land Order No. 7451; Partial 4,231.09 acres of public lands Sec. 34, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4. Revocation of Bureau of Reclamation withdrawn for the Bureau of Land T. 40 S., R. 38 E., Order Dated December 17, 1954; Utah Management’s Public Water Reserve No. Sec. 9, NW1⁄4NW1⁄4. 107. The lands do not qualify for a AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, public water reserve and the revocation (b) Private Surface/Federal Minerals Interior. is needed to permit several land T. 27 S., R. 24 E., ACTION: Public land order. disposals. This action will open the Sec. 11, S1⁄2NE1⁄4, and S1⁄2; lands to surface entry and non- Sec. 12, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, SW1⁄4, and SUMMARY: This order partially revokes a metalliferous mining, unless included NW1⁄4SE1⁄4. Bureau of Reclamation order insofar as in other segregations of record. All of T. 19 S., R. 331⁄2 E., it affects 5,274 acres of lands withdrawn the lands have been and will remain Sec. 22, E1⁄2NW1⁄4 and SW1⁄4NW1⁄4. for the Central Utah Project. The lands open to metalliferous mining and The areas described in (a) and (b) aggregate are no longer needed for the purpose for mineral leasing, unless included in 4,231.09 acres in Harney County. which they were withdrawn. This other segregations of record. action returns 2,484 acres to Bureau of 2. At 8:30 a.m. on July 7, 2000, the EFFECTIVE DATE: July 7, 2000. Land Management administration and lands described in paragraph 1(a) will opens them to surface entry but not to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be opened to the operation of the public Allison O’Brien, BLM Oregon/ mining, and returns 2,790 acres to Washington State Office, P.O. Box 2965, land laws generally, subject to valid National Forest administration and Portland, Oregon 97208–2965, 503–952– existing rights, the provisions of existing opens them to mining and to such forms 6171. withdrawals, other segregations of of disposition as may by law be made By virtue of the authority vested in record and the requirements of of National Forest System lands. All of the Secretary of the Interior by section applicable law. All valid applications the lands have been and will remain 204 of the Federal Land Policy and received at or prior to 8:30 a.m. on July open to mineral leasing. Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 7, 2000, shall be considered as EFFECTIVE DATE: July 7, 2000. 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: simultaneously filed at that time. Those FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. The Executive Order dated April received thereafter shall be considered Rhonda Flynn, BLM Utah State Office 17, 1926, which established Public in the order of filing. (UT–942), 324 South State Street, Salt Water Reserve No. 107, is hereby 3. At 8:30 a.m. on July 7, 2000, the Lake City, Utah 84111–2303, 801–539– revoked insofar as it affect the following lands described in paragraph 1(a) and 4132. described lands: 1(b) will be opened to location and By virtue of the authority vested in Willamette Meridian entry under the United States mining the Secretary of the Interior by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and laws for non-metalliferous minerals, (a) Federal Lands and Minerals Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. subject to valid existing rights, the T. 22 S., R. 27 E., 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: provisions of existing withdrawals, Sec. 23; 1. The Bureau of Reclamation Order 1 1 1 1 1 Sec. 26, NE ⁄4, NW ⁄4NW ⁄4, S ⁄2NW ⁄4, and other segregations of record, and the dated December 17, 1954, which S1⁄2. requirements of applicable law. withdrew lands for the Central Utah T. 26 S., R. 27 E., Appropriation of lands described in this 1 1 1 1 1 Project, is hereby revoked insofar as it Sec. 13, NW ⁄4NE ⁄4, N ⁄2N ⁄2NW ⁄4, and order under the general mining laws for SE1⁄4NW1⁄4. affects the following described lands: non-metalliferous minerals prior to the T. 21 S., R. 29 E., Salt Lake Meridian Sec. 15, W1⁄2SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 and E1⁄2SE1⁄4SE1⁄4. date and time of restoration is T. 29 S., R. 30 E., unauthorized. Any such attempted (a) Public Lands Sec. 29, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 and SW1⁄4SE1⁄4; appropriation, including attempted T. 2 S., R. 6 E., Sec. 32, S1⁄2NW1⁄4NE1⁄4. adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38 Sec. 30, lot 4 and SE1⁄4SW1⁄4. T. 21 S., R. 31 E., (1994), shall vest no rights against the T. 3 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 32, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4. Sec. 23, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4; United States. Acts required to establish T. 22 S., R. 31 E., Sec. 27, lots 1 and 2, E1⁄2NE1⁄4, NW1⁄4NE1⁄4, Sec. 5, lot 4. a location and to initiate a right of and NW1⁄4; T. 21 S., R 33 E., possession are governed by State law Sec. 33, lots 1 and 2, NE1⁄4, and N1⁄2SE1⁄4; Sec. 3, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4. where not in conflict with Federal law. Sec. 34, lot 4 and NW1⁄4NW1⁄4. T. 33 S., R. 33 E., The Bureau of Land Management will T. 4 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 3, S1⁄2SE1⁄4NE1⁄4; not intervene in disputes between rival Sec. 3, N1⁄2N1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4; 1 1 1 1 Sec. 4, lots 3 and 4, S ⁄2NW ⁄4, and N ⁄2S ⁄2; locators over possessory rights since Sec. 4, lots 2 and 3. Sec. 35, W1⁄2E1⁄2SW1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4SW1⁄4, T. 5 S., R. 1 W., SW1⁄4SW1⁄4, and E1⁄2SE1⁄4. Sec. 24, lots 2 and 4.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36161

T. 5 S., R. 4 E., as may by law be made of National purpose, but is needed by the Bureau of Sec. 3, NE1⁄4SE1⁄4. Forest System lands, including location Land Management for the expansion of T. 7 S., R. 2 E., and entry under the United States the Ridgecrest Regional Wild Horse and Sec. 15, lot 1; 1 1 mining laws, subject to valid existing Burro corrals. Sec. 25, lots 2 and 3, and SE ⁄4SW ⁄4; Pursuant to section 808(b) of the Sec. 26, lots 1 to 4, inclusive; rights, the provisions of existing Sec. 27, lot 1. withdrawals, other segregations of California Desert Protection Act of 1994, T. 9 S., R. 2 E., record, and the requirements of the Navy has stated that the land was Sec. 31, lot 7. applicable law. Appropriation of lands not contaminated and that no T. 9 S., R. 3 E., described in this order under the decontamination measures were Sec. 15, E1⁄2. general mining laws prior to the date required. T. 9 S., R. 4 E., and time of restoration is unauthorized. The Navy’s notice will be processed Sec. 9, lot 2. Any such attempted appropriation, in accordance with section 204 of the T. 10 S., R. 1 W., including attempted adverse possession Federal Land Policy and Management Sec. 35, S1⁄2S1⁄2; under 30 U.S.C. 38 (1994), shall vest no Act of 1976, section 808 of the Sec. 36, lots 13 and 14. California Desert Protection Act of 1994, T. 11 S., R. 1 W., rights against the United States. Acts and the regulations set forth in 43 CFR Sec. 1, lots 3 and 4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, SW1⁄4, and required to establish a location and to SW1⁄4SE1⁄4; initiate a right of possession are 2370. Sec. 12, N1⁄2NE1⁄4, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, N1⁄2NW1⁄4, governed by State law where not in Dated: June 1, 2000. 1 1 and SE ⁄4NW ⁄4. conflict with Federal law. The Bureau of David McIlnay, The areas described aggregate Land Management will not intervene in Chief, Branch of Lands. approximately 2,484 acres in Uintah, Juab, disputes between rival locators over [FR Doc. 00–14269 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Summit, Utah, and Wasatch Counties. possessory rights since Congress has (b) Uinta National Forest provided for such determinations in BILLING CODE 4310±40±P T. 6 S., R. 5 E., local courts. 1 1 Sec. 7, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E ⁄2E ⁄2; Dated: May 22, 2000. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR secs. 8 and 17; 1 1 Sylvia V. Baca, Sec.18, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E ⁄2E ⁄2. National Park Service T. 8 S., R. 4 E., Assistant Secretary of the Interior. 1 1 Sec. 35, SE ⁄4NW ⁄4. [FR Doc. 00–14290 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] 60-Day Notice of Intention to Request T. 9 S., R. 2 E., BILLING CODE 4310±MN±P Clearance of Information CollectionÐ Sec. 28, W1⁄2NW1⁄4; Sec. 31, lot 8. Opportunity for Public Comment T. 9 S., R. 4 E., DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AGENCY: Department of the Interior, Sec. 9, lot 1, NW1⁄4NE1⁄4, NW1⁄4, National Park Service, National N1⁄2NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, and 1 1 Bureau of Land Management Underground Railroad Network to NW ⁄4SW ⁄4. T. 10 S., R. 1 E., [CA±650±1430-ET; CACA 42078] Freedom Program. Sec. 12, SE1⁄4SE1⁄4; ACTION: Notice and request for Sec. 13, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, E1⁄2SW1⁄4, Notice of Intention to Relinquish; comments. NE1⁄4SE1⁄4, and W1⁄2SE1⁄4. California T. 10 S., R. 2 E., SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Sec. 5, lot 4; AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Sec. 6, lots 8, 11, 12, and 13, and Interior. (Public Law, 104–13, 44 U.S.C. 3507) SE1⁄4NW1⁄4. ACTION: Notice. and 5 CFR part 1320, Reporting and T. 12 S., R. 1 E., Recordkeeping Requirements, the Sec. 16, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4; SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy National Park Service invites public Sec. 21, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4. has submitted to the Bureau of Land comments on a proposed information The areas described aggregate Management a notice of intention to collection. Comments are invited on: (1) approximately 2,790 acres in Juab, relinquish the withdrawn status of 42.3 The need for the information including Summit, and Wasatch Counties. acres of public land in San Bernardino whether the information has practical 2. At 10 a.m. on July 7, 2000, the County, California, that was withdrawn utility; (2) the accuracy of the reporting lands described in paragraph 1(a) will for military purposes by the California burden estimate; (3) ways to enhance be opened to the operation of the public Desert Protection Act of 1994. the quality, utility, and clarity of the land laws generally, subject to valid DATES: Effective June 7, 2000. information to be collected on existing rights, the provisions of existing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: respondents, including use of withdrawals, other segregations of Duane Marti, (CA–931.4), California automated collection techniques or record, and the requirements of State Office, Bureau of Land other forms of information technology. applicable law. All valid applications Management, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite Public Law 105–203 authorizes the received at or prior to 10 a.m. on July W–1834, Sacramento, California 95825– National Railroad Network to Freedom 7, 2000, shall be considered as 1886; 916–978–4675. Program (NURNFP) to develop and simultaneously filed at that time. Those SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is administer the Network to Freedom, a received thereafter shall be considered hereby given that the Department of the nationwide collection of governmental in the order of filing. Navy has submitted, to the Bureau of and nongovernmental properties, 3. The lands described in paragraph Land Management, a notice of intention facilities, and programs associated with 1(a) will not be opened to mining until to relinquish the withdrawn status of the historic Underground Railroad appropriate land use planning is 42.3 acres of public land in San movement. The NURNFP is developing completed. Bernardino County, California, that was an application process through which 4. At 10 a.m. on July 7, 2000, the withdrawn for military purposes by the associated elements can be included in lands described in paragraph 1(b) shall California Desert Protection Act of 1994. the Network to Freedom. The be opened to such forms of disposition The land is no longer needed for that information collected will:

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36162 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

(a) Verify associations to the Estimated average number of 36103, telephone 334–353–3744 or 334– Underground Railroad, respondents: 100. 727–6390. (b) Measure minimum levels of Estimated average number of Lee Edwards, standards for inclusion in the Network, responses: 100. Trail Superintendent. and Estimated average burden hours per (c) Identify general needs for technical response: 10 hours. [FR Doc. 00–14349 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] assistance. Estimated frequency of response: BILLING CODE 4310±70±P DATES: Public Comments on the Once per respondent. proposed ICR will be accepted on or Estimated annual reporting burden: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR before August 7, 2000. 1000 hours. ADDRESSES: Send comments to Diane Dated: May 30, 2000. Bureau of Reclamation Miller, National Coordinator, National William W. Schenk, Underground Railroad Network to Information Collection Activities Under Freedom Program, National Park Regional Director, Midwest Region. OMB Review Service, Midwest Regional Office, 1709 [FR Doc. 00–14350 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Jackson Street, Omaha, Nebraska, 68102. BILLING CODE 4310±70±M AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, All responses to this notice will be Interior. summarized and included in the ACTION: Notice of data collection requests for Office and Management and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR submission. Budget (OMB) approval. All comments SUMMARY: In compliance with the will become a matter of public record. National Park Service Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Copies of the proposed ICR can be Selma to Montgomery National Historic 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that obtained from Diane Miller, National Trail Advisory Council; Notice of the Information Collection Request (ICR) Coordinator, National Underground Meeting abstracted below has been forwarded to Railroad Network to Freedom Program, the Office of Management and Budget National Park Service, Midwest Notice is hereby given in accordance (OMB) for review and comment. The Regional Office, 1709 Jackson Street, with the Federal Advisory Committee ICR described the nature of the Omaha, Nebraska, 68102. Act, Public Law 92–463, that a meeting information collection and its expected FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of the Selma to Montgomery National cost and burden. Diane Miller, 402–221–3749 or Aaron Historic Trail Advisory Council will be DATES: Comments must be submitted on Mahr, 956–541–2785, ext. 3. held June 12, 2000 at 9:00 am, at the or before July 7, 2000. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: town hall in Whitehall, Alabama. ADDRESSES: Comments on this Nomination Form to Underground The Selma to Montgomery National information collection should be Railroad Network to Freedom. Historic Trail Advisory Council was submitted to the Office of Information Bureau Form Number: To be established pursuant to Public Law 100– and Regulatory Affairs, Office of requested. 192 establishing the Selma to Management and Budget, Attention: OMB Number: To be requested. Montgomery National Historic Trail. Desk Officer for the Department of the Expiration date: To be requested. This law was put in place to advise the Interior, 725 17th Street, NW., Type of request: Request for new National Park Service on such issues as clearance. Washington D.C. 20503. A copy of your preservation of trail routes and features, comments should also be directed to the Description of need: The National public use, standards for posting and Underground Railroad Network to Bureau of Reclamation, Attention Ms. maintaining trail markers, and Nancy Purdy, Contract and Repayment Freedom Program is identifying administrative matters. guidelines and criteria for associated Specialist, Lower Colorado Dams The matters to be discussed include: elements to enter the Network to Facilities Office, P.O. Box 60400, A. Update on status of Cultural Freedom. The Nomination Form Boulder City, NV 89006. documents properties, programs, and Resource Inventory Our practice is to make comments, facilities, and demonstrates that they B. Update of High priority projects including names and home addresses of meet the criteria established for C. Further define high priority respondents, available for public inclusion. The documentation will be projects as input to ALDOT application review. Individual respondents may incorporated into a database that will be for FY 2001 Scenic Byways funds. The request that we withhold their home available to the general public for application is due June 2000. address from public disclosure, which information purposes. D. Update on Welcome Center at the we will honor to the extent allowable by Automated data collection: Tent city Site. law. There also may be circumstances in Respondents must verify associations The meeting will be open to the which we would withhold a and characteristics through descriptive public. However, facilities and space for respondent’s identity from public texts that are the result of historical accommodating members of the public disclosure, as allowable by law. If you research. Evaluations are based on are limited and persons will be wish us to withhold your name and/or subjective analysis of the information accommodated on first come, first serve address, you must state this provided. At the present time there is no basis. Any member of the public may prominently at the beginning of your automated way to gather this file a written statement concerning the comment. We will make all submissions information. matters to be discussed with Lee from organizations or businesses, and Description of respondents: The Edwards, Trail Superintendent. from individuals identifying themselves affected public are state, tribal, and local Persons wishing further information as representatives of officials of governments, federal agencies, concerning this meeting, or who wish to organizations or businesses, available businesses, non-profit organizations, submit written statements may contact for public disclosure in their entirety. and individuals, throughout the United Lee Edwards, Trail Superintendent, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For States. Nominations to the Network to Selma to Montgomery National Historic further information or a copy of the Freedom are voluntary. Trail, P.O. Box 5690, Montgomery, Al proposed collection of information,

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36163 contact Ms. Nancy Purdy at (702) 293– display a valid OMB control number on DATES: To be assured of consideration, 8533. the forms. The Federal Register notice written comments must be received on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments with a 60-day comment period soliciting or before July 7, 2000. are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed comments on this collection of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: collection of information is necessary information was published on February Copies of the forms and supporting for the proper performance of the 15, 2000 (65 FR 7562). Reclamation did documents are posted on the functions of Reclamation, including not receive any comments on this Commission’s World Wide Web site at whether the information shall have collection of information during the http://www.usitc.gov or may be practical use; (b) the accuracy of comment period. obtained from Lynn I. Levine, Office of Reclamation’s estimated burden of the OMB has up to 60 days to approve or Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. proposed collection of information; (c) disapprove this information collection, International Trade Commission, 500 E ways to enhance the quality, use, and but may respond after 30 days, Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, clarity of the information to be therefore, public comment should be telephone, 202–205–2560. Comments collected; and (d) ways to minimize the submitted to OMB within 30 days in about the proposals should be directed burden of the collection of information order to assure maximum consideration. to the Office of Management and on those who are to respond, including Murlin Coffey, Budget, Office of Information and through the use of automated collection Manager, Property and Office Services, Regulatory Affairs, Room 10102, Washington, DC 20503, ATTENTION: techniques or other forms of information [FR Doc. 00–14270 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] technology. Desk Officer for the International Trade BILLING CODE 4310±94±M Title: Diversons, Return Flow, and Commission. All comments should be Consumptive Use of Colorado River specific, indicating which part of the Water in the Lower Colorado River survey is objectionable, describing the INTERNATIONAL TRADE Basin. concern in detail, and including specific COMMISSION OMB No.: 1006–0015. suggested revisions or language changes. Abstract: Reclamation delivers Agency Form Submitted to OMB for Copies of any comments should be Colorado River water to water users for Review provided to Robert Rogowsky, Director, diversion and beneficial consumptive Office of Operations, U.S. International use in the States of Arizona, California, AGENCY: International Trade Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., and Nevada. Under Supreme Court Commission. Washington, DC 20436, who is the order, the United States is required, at ACTION: In accordance with the Commission’s designated Senior Official least annually, to prepare and maintain provisions of the Paperwork Reduction under the Paperwork Reduction Act. complete, detailed, and accurate records Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Hearing impaired individuals are of diversions of water, return flow, and Commission has submitted a request for advised that information on this matter consumptive use. This information is approval of surveys to the Office of can be obtained by contacting our TDD needed to ensure that a State or a water Management and Budget for review. terminal (telephone no. 202–205–1810). user within a State does not exceed its General information concerning the authorized use of Colorado River water. PURPOSE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION: Commission may also be obtained by Water users are obligated to provide The forms are for use by the accessing its Internet server (http:// information on diversions and return Commission in connection with www.usitc.gov). flows to Reclamation by provisions in analysis of the effectiveness of section Issued: June 2, 2000. their water delivery contracts. 337 remedial exclusion orders, By order of the Commission. instituted under the authority of section Reclamation determines the Donna R. Koehnke, 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. consumptive use by subtracting return Secretary. flow from diversions or by other 1337). [FR Doc. 00–14320 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] engineering means. Without the Summary of Proposal information collected, Reclamation BILLING CODE 7020±02±P could not comply with the order of the (1) Number of forms submitted: Two. (2) Title of form: USITC Survey United States Supreme Court to prepare Regarding Outstanding § 337 Exclusion INTERNATIONAL TRADE and maintain detailed and accurate Orders. COMMISSION records of diversions, return flow, and (3) Type of request: New. [Investigation No. 731±TA±677 (Review)] consumptive use. (4) Frequency of use: survey, single Description of respondents: The data gathering, scheduled for 2000. Coumarin From China Lower Basin States (Arizona, California, (5) Description of responding firms: and Nevada), local and tribal entities, Complainants that obtained exclusion Determination water districts, and individuals that use orders from the Commission following On the basis of the record 1 developed Colorado River water. an investigation under Section 337 that in the subject five-year review, the Frequency: Annually, or otherwise as remains in effect at the time of the United States International Trade determined by the Secretary of the survey. Commission determines, pursuant to Interior. (6) Estimated number of responding section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 Estimated completion time: An firms: 37. (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), that revocation of average of 6 hours per respondent. (7) Estimated total number of hours to the antidumping duty order on Annual responses: 54 respondents. complete the forms: 37. coumarin from China would be likely to Annual burden hours: 290. (8) Information obtained from the firm lead to continuation or recurrence of An Agency may not conduct or that qualifies as confidential business material injury to an industry in the sponsor, and a person is not required to information will be so treated by the respond to, a collection of information Commission and not disclosed in a 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the unless it displays a currently valid OMB manner that would reveal the individual Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 control number. Reclamation will operations of a firm. C.F.R. § 207.2(f)).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36164 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

United States within a reasonably a party identifies subjects to be would be likely to lead to continuation foreseeable time. discussed during a closed session and or recurrence of material injury to an justifies the need for such a session. 19 Background industry in the United States within a CFR 207.24(d). Respondents did not reasonably foreseeable time. The Commission instituted this indicate the subjects on which they review on December 30, 1999 (64 FR intended to present testimony during Background 73576, December 30, 1999) and the closed session, and merely stated The Commission instituted this determined on April 6, 2000 that it that during a closed session information review on June 1, 1999,5 and would conduct an expedited review (65 covered by the administrative protective FR 24504, April 26, 2000). The order could be addressed as necessary. determined on September 3, 1999, that 6 Commission transmitted its Absent any identification of the subjects it would conduct a full review. Notice determination in this review to the to be discussed and an adequate of the scheduling of the Commission’s Secretary of Commerce on May 30, justification of the need for a closed review and of a public hearing to be 2000. The views of the Commission are session, the Commission finds no reason held in connection therewith was given contained in USITC Publication 3305 to depart from its ordinary practice of by posting copies of the notice in the (May 2000), entitled Coumarin From holding fully open hearings. The Office of the Secretary, U.S. China: Investigation No. 731–TA–677 Commission has determined that the International Trade Commission, (Review). public interest would be best served by Washington, DC, and by publishing the Issued: May 31, 2000. a hearing that is entirely open to the notice in the Federal Register on 7 By order of the Commission. public. See 19 CFR 201.36(c)(1). November 15, 1999. The hearing was Donna R. Koehnke, Authority: This notice is provided held in Washington, DC, on April 4, Secretary. pursuant to Commission Rule 201.35(b) (19 2000, and all persons who requested the CFR 201.35(b)). opportunity were permitted to appear in [FR Doc. 00–14316 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Issued: May 30, 2000. person or by counsel. BILLING CODE 7020±02±P By order of the Commission. The Commission transmitted its Donna R. Koehnke, determination in this review to the INTERNATIONAL TRADE Secretary. Secretary of Commerce on May 26, COMMISSION [FR Doc. 00–14317 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] 2000. The views of the Commission are [Investigations Nos. 701±TA±309±A±B BILLING CODE 7020±02±P contained in USITC Publication 3304 (Review) and 731±TA±528 (Review)] (May 2000), entitled Mechanical Transfer Presses from Japan: In the Matter of Magnesium From INTERNATIONAL TRADE Investigation No. 731–TA–429 (Review). Canada; Notice of Commission COMMISSION Issued: June 1, 2000. Determination Not To Conduct a [Investigation No. 731±TA±429 (Review)] Portion of the Hearing in Camera By order of the Commission. Mechanical Transfer Presses From Donna R. Koehnke, AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. Japan Secretary. [FR Doc. 00–14319 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] ACTION: Commission determination not Determination BILLING CODE 7020±02±P to close any part of the hearing to the On the basis of the record 1 developed public. in the subject five-year review, the SUMMARY: The Commission has United States International Trade determined to deny the request of Commission determines,2 pursuant to ´  respondents Gouvernement du Quebec section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930 ´ 3 (‘‘Quebec’’) and Norsk Hydro Canada, (the Act), that revocation of the Inc. (‘‘NHCI’’), to conduct a portion of antidumping duty order on mechanical its hearing in the above-captioned transfer presses (MTPs) 4 from Japan scope of the order (59 FR 8910, February 24, 1994); reviews scheduled for May 31, 2000, in and (5) certain mechanical transfer press parts camera. See Commission rules 201.13 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the exported from Japan are outside the scope of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 order (62 FR 9176, February 28, 1997). and 201.36(b)(4) (19 CFR 201.13 and CFR § 207.2(f)). Commerce’s scope identifies the Harmonized 201.36(b)(4)). 2 Commissioner Thelma J. Askey dissenting. Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 3 19 U.S.C. 1675(c). statistical reporting numbers for MTPs as 4 Andrea C. Casson, Office of General For purposes of this review, the term 8462.99.0035, mechanical transfer presses, and ‘‘mechanical transfer press’’ (MTP) refers to Counsel, U.S. International Trade 8466.94.5040, parts of mechanical transfer presses. automatic metal-forming machine tools with However, these numbers were replaced by multiple die stations in which the workpiece is Commission, telephone 202–205–3115, statistical reporting numbers 8462.99.8035, moved from station to station by a transfer e-mail [email protected]. Hearing- 8466.94.6040, and 8466.94.8040 on January 1, 1994. impaired individuals are advised that mechanism designed as an integral part of the press and synchronized with the press action, whether Subsequently, on July 1, 1997, statistical reporting information on this matter may be imported as machines or parts suitable for use numbers 8466.94.6040 and 8466.94.8040 were obtained by contacting the solely or principally with these machines. These replaced by statistical reporting numbers Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– presses may be assembled or unassembled. 8466.94.6540 and 8466.94.8540. For a further 205–1810. Commerce published in the Federal Register explanation of these changes, see the U.S. Tariff several Notices of Scope Rulings with respect to Treatment section presented later in this report. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MTPs from Japan and determined that: (1) spare HTS numbers are provided for convenience and Commission’s policy and practice is to and replacement parts are outside the scope of the customs purposes. The written description remains conduct its hearings in public except in order (57 FR 19602, May 7, 1992); (2) a destack dispositive. sheet feeder designed to be used with a mechanical 5 64 FR 29347, June 1, 1999. limited circumstances. See 19 CFR transfer press is an accessory and, therefore, is not 201.36. The Commission’s Rules within the scope of the order (57 FR 32973, July 24, 6 64 FR 50107, September 15, 1999. provide for it to close hearings in where 1992); (3) the FMX cold-forging press is within the 7 64 FR 61938, November 15, 1999.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36165

INTERNATIONAL TRADE all persons who requested the should notify the Juvenile Justice COMMISSION opportunity were permitted to appear in Resource Center at the number listed person or by counsel. above by 5 p.m., ET, on Friday, June 16, [Investigation No. 731±TA±841 (Final)] The Commission transmitted its 2000. For security purposes, picture Certain Non-Frozen Concentrated determination in this investigation to identification will be required. Apple Juice From China the Secretary of Commerce on May 30, Dated: June 2, 2000. 2000. The views of the Commission are John J. Wilson, Determination contained in USITC Publication 3303 Acting Administrator, Office of Juvenile 1 (May 2000), entitled Certain Non-Frozen On the basis of the record developed Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Concentrated Apple Juice from China: in the subject investigation, the United [FR Doc. 00–14360 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] States International Trade Commission Investigation No. 731–TA–841 (Final). BILLING CODE 4410±18±P determines,2 pursuant to section 735(b) Issued: June 1, 2000. of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. By order of the Commission. 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in Donna R. Koehnke, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the United States is materially injured Secretary. by reason of imports from China of [FR Doc. 00–14318 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Office of the Chief Financial Officer: certain non-frozen concentrated apple Proposed Collection; Comment 3 BILLING CODE 7020±02±P juice, provided for in subheadings Request 2009.70.00 and 2106.90.52 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the ACTION: Notice. United States, that have been found by DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE the Department of Commerce to be sold SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as Office of Juvenile Justice and in the United States at less than fair part of its continuing effort to reduce value (LTFV). Delinquency Prevention paperwork and respondent burden [OJP (OJJDP)Ð1280] conducts a preclearance consultation Background program to provide the general public The Commission instituted this Meeting of the Coordinating Council and Federal agencies with an investigation effective June 7, 1999, on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency opportunity to comment on proposed following receipt of a petition filed with Prevention and/or continuing collections of the Commission and the Department of information in accordance with the AGENCY: Commerce by Coloma Frozen Foods, Office of Justice Programs, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Inc.; Coloma, MI; Green Valley Apples Office of Juvenile Justice and (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This of California, Los Angeles, CA; Knouse Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), program helps to ensure that requested Foods Cooperative, Inc., Peach Glen, Justice. data can be provided in the desired PA; Mason County Fruit Packers ACTION: Notice of meeting. format, reporting burden (time and Cooperative, Ludington, MI; and Tree financial resources) is minimized, SUMMARY: Announcement of the Top, Inc., Selah, WA. The final phase of collection instruments are clearly Coordinating Council on Juvenile the investigation was scheduled by the understood, and the impact of collection Justice and Delinquency Prevention Commission following notification of a requirements on respondents can be meeting. preliminary determination by the properly assessed. Currently, the Office Department of Commerce that imports DATES: A meeting of the advisory of the Chief Financial Officer is of certain non-frozen concentrated apple committee, chartered as the soliciting comments concerning the juice from China were being sold at Coordinating Council on Juvenile proposed extension of Department of LTFV within the meaning of section Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Labor regulations implementing the 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). will take place in the District of Salary Offset provision of the Debt Notice of the scheduling of the Columbia, beginning at 1 p.m. on Collection Act of 1982. Commission’s investigation and of a Monday, June 26, 2000, and ending at DATES: Written comments must be public hearing to be held in connection 3 p.m., ET. submitted to the office listed in the therewith was given by posting copies ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place addressee section below on or before of the notice in the Office of the at the U.S. Department of Justice, Office August 7, 2000. Secretary, U.S. International Trade of Justice Programs, Main Conference ADDRESSES: Comments are to be Commission, Washington, DC, and by Room, 3rd Floor, 810 Seventh Street, submitted in writing to Mark Wolkow, publishing the notice in the Federal NW., Washington, DC 20531. Department of Labor, Office of the Chief Register of January 20, 2000 (65 FR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Financial Officer, Room S–4502 Frances 3247). The hearing was held in Altman, Program Manager, Juvenile Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Ave. Washington, DC, on April 10, 2000, and Justice Resource Center at (301) 519– NW, Washington, DC 20210; via fax to 5721. [This is not a toll-free number.] 202–219–4975; or via email to wolkow- 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The [email protected]. CFR 207.2(f)). Coordinating Council, established FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2 Chairman Lynn M. Bragg not participating. pursuant to section 3(2)A of the Federal Mark Wolkow, Division of Policy and 3 ‘‘Certain non-frozen concentrated apple juice’’ Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. Internal Control at 202–219–8184 x127, consists of all non-frozen concentrated apple juice with a Brix scale of 40 or greater, whether or not 2), will meet to carry out its advisory or via email at [email protected]. containing added sugar or other sweetening matter, functions under Section 206 of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and whether or not fortified with vitamins or Juvenile Justice and Delinquency minerals. Excluded from the scope of the Prevention Act of 1974, as amended (42 I. Background investigation are frozen concentrated apple juice; non-frozen concentrated apple juice that has been U.S.C. 5601 et seq.). This meeting will The Debt Collection Act of 1982 and fermented; and non-frozen concentrated apple juice be open to the public. Members of the the Office of Personnel Management to which spirits have been added. public who wish to attend the meeting salary offset regulations, as

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36166 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices implemented in the Department by 29 electronic, mechanical, or other Dated: May 23, 2000. CFR part 20, require Federal agencies to technological collection techniques or Kenneth Bresnahan, afford debtors the opportunity to other forms of information technology, Chief Financial Officer. exercise certain rights before the agency e.g., permitting electronic submissions [FR Doc. 00–14291 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] makes a salary offset to collect a debt. of responses. BILLING CODE 4510±23±P In the exercise of these rights, the debtor III. Current Actions may be asked to provide a written explanation of the basis for disputing Failure of the agency to request the the amount or existence of a debt information described would either MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION alleged owed the agency. A debtor may violate the debtor’s rights under the BOARD also be required to provide asset, Debt Collection Act of 1982 or limit the income, liability, or other information agency’s ability to collect outstanding Privacy Act of 1974; Deletion of necessary for the agency to determine debts. Privacy Act System of Records the debtor’s ability to repay the debt, If a debtor wishes to appeal an agency including any interest, penalties and action based on undue financial AGENCY: Merit Systems Protection administrative costs assessed. hardship, he/she may be asked to Board. Information provided by the debtor submit information on his/her assets, ACTION: Notice of intent to delete and will be evaluated by an independent income, liabilities, or other information existing system of records. hearing official in order to reconsider considered necessary by the hearing the responsible agency official’s official for evaluating the appeal. Use of SUMMARY: The Merit Systems Protection decision with regard to the existence or the information will be explained to the Board (MSPB) publishes this document amount of the debt. Information debtor when it is requested; consent to pursuant to the requirements of the concerning the debtor’s assets, income, use the information for the specified Privacy Act of 1974 at 5 U.S.C. 552a to liabilities, etc., will be used by the purpose will be implied from the inform the public that it will no longer independent hearing official to debtor’s submission of the information. maintain records in the system formerly determine whether the agency’s action Type of Review: Extension of a known as MSPB/Internal-4 by the name with regard to salary would create currently approved collection. or personal identifier of the record undue financial hardship for the debtor, Agency: Office of the Chief Financial subject. Names and personal identifiers or to determine whether the agency Officer. will be deleted for all existing and should accept the debtor’s proposed future documents maintained in the Title: Salary Offset. repayment schedule. OAC Decision Data Base. OMB Number: 1225–0038. If a debtor disputes or asks for EFFECTIVE DATE: June 7, 2000. reconsideration of the agency’s Agency Form Number: N/A. determination concerning the debt, the Affected Public: Federal employees. ADDRESS: Office of the Clerk of the debtor will be required to provide the Cite/Reference/Form/etc: It is Board, U.S. Merit Systems Protection information or documentation necessary estimated that 25% of the individuals Board, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., to state his/her case. While much or all indebted to the Department will contest Washington, DC 20419. of this information might be available in the proposed collection action and will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: agency records, it would only be request a review and/or appeal an action Michael H. Hoxie, (202) 653–7200. appropriate to offer the debtor the based on undue financial hardship. In SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By opportunity to supply any information some cases the debtor will make one Federal Register Notice of July 2, 1996 deemed relevant to his/her case. request, but not the other. However, in (61 FR 34448) the Board announced a Information concerning the debtor’s most cases, it is expected that the debtor new system of records, Office of assets, income, liabilities, etc., would will request both actions—first, review Appeals Counsel Decision Data Base, typically not be available to the agency of the determination of indebtedness, MSPB/Internal-4. The categories of unless submitted by the debtor. and second, relief because of undue records to be maintained in the system II. Desired Focus of Comments financial hardship. included advisory memoranda prepared Annual burden was estimated based by the Office of Appeals Counsel for the The Department of Labor is on a review of debtor responses to particularly interested in comments Board of individual members of the similar requests for information. Debtors Board and instructions from members of which: typically respond in 1–2 page letters, • Evaluate whether the proposed the Board regarding the preparation of supplemented by copies of documents. collection of information is necessary decisions for Board issuance. These Letters are most often typewritten. for the proper performance of the records were to contain individual Annual burden is based on a 11⁄4 hour functions of the agency, including appellant’s names, and could also time allotment to prepare and type a whether the information will have contain social security numbers, home letter. Debtors will not be asked to practical utility; addresses, veterans status, race, sex, respond on a form. • Evaluate the accuracy of the national origin and disability status agency’s estimate of the burden of the Estimated Total Burden Hours: 375. data. proposed collection of information, Total Annualized Costs: Capital/ The Board hereby announces its including the validity of the startup costs: $0; operating/maintaining intention to delete all names and methodology and assumptions used; systems or purchasing services: $0. personal identifiers from the records • Enhance the quality, utility, and Comments submitted in response to now maintained in this data base, and clarity of the information to be this comment request will be from any future records placed in the collected; and summarized and/or included in the data base. Henceforth, the records in • Minimize the burden of the request for Office of Management and this data base will be retrieved by legal collection of information on those who Budget approval of the information or factual issues. No personal are to respond, including through the collection request; they will also information associated with any use of appropriate automated, become a matter of public record. individual will be maintained.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36167

Dated: June 1, 2000. schedule, and must provide a mailing includes information about the records. Robert E. Taylor, address. Those who desire appraisal Further information about the Clerk of the Board. reports should so indicate in their disposition process is available on [FR Doc. 00–14310 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] request. request. BILLING CODE 7400±01±M FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Schedules Pending Marie Allen, Director, Life Cycle 1. Department of the Army, Agency- Management Division (NWML), wide (N1–AU–00–7, 2 items, 2 National Archives and Records NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS temporary items). Records relating to Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, ADMINISTRATION the monitoring of information systems College Park, MD 20740–6001. and telecommunications. Included are Records Schedules; Availability and Telephone: (301) 713–7110. E-mail: requests, approvals, notifications, Request for Comments [email protected]. certifications of notification procedures, AGENCY: National Archives and Records SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year and information pertaining to the use of Administration (NARA). Federal agencies create billions of monitoring products. Also included are records on paper, film, magnetic tape, ACTION: Notice of availability of electronic copies of documents created and other media. To control this using electronic mail and word proposed records schedules; request for accumulation, agency records managers comments. processing. prepare schedules proposing retention 2. Department of the Army, Agency- SUMMARY: The National Archives and periods for records and submit these wide (N1–AU–98–8, 2 items, 2 Records Administration (NARA) schedules for NARA’s approval, using temporary items). Documents relating to publishes notice at least once monthly the Standard Form (SF) 115, Request for individual travel charge cards of Army of certain Federal agency requests for Records Disposition Authority. These military personnel and civilian records disposition authority (records schedules provide for the timely transfer employees. Included are travel schedules). Once approved by NARA, into the National Archives of authorizations, vouchers, charge card records schedules provide mandatory historically valuable records and applications, charge card receipts, terms instructions on what happens to records authorize the disposal of all other and conditions for the use of charge when no longer needed for current records after the agency no longer needs cards, and transaction reports. Also Government business. They authorize them to conduct its business. Some included are electronic copies of the preservation of records of schedules are comprehensive and cover documents created using electronic mail continuing value in the National all the records of an agency or one of its and word processing. Archives of the United States and the major subdivisions. Most schedules, 3. Department of the Army, Agency- destruction, after a specified period, of however, cover records of only one wide (N1–AU–00–9, 2 items, 1 records lacking administrative, legal, office or program or a few series of temporary item). Electronic copies of research, or other value. Notice is records. Many of these update documents created using electronic mail published for records schedules in previously approved schedules, and and word processing that pertain to which agencies propose to destroy some include records proposed as security assistance activities provided records not previously authorized for permanent. under the International Security No Federal records are authorized for disposal or reduce the retention period Assistance Act and the Arms Export destruction without the approval of the of records already authorized for Control Act. This schedule also Archivist of the United States. This disposal. NARA invites public proposes minor changes in the approval is granted only after a comments on such records schedules, as disposition instructions for thorough consideration of their required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a). recordkeeping copies of these files, administrative use by the agency of which were previously approved for DATES: Requests for copies must be origin, the rights of the Government and permanent retention. received in writing on or before July 24, of private persons directly affected by 4. Department of the Army, Agency- 2000. Once the appraisal of the records the Government’s activities, and wide (N1–AU–00–10, 3 items, 3 is completed, NARA will send a copy of whether or not they have historical or temporary items). Respiratory protection the schedule. NARA staff usually other value. program files relating to general prepare appraisal memorandums that Besides identifying the Federal program administration, training, and contain additional information agencies and any subdivisions the results of fit and leak testing of concerning the records covered by a requesting disposition authority, this respiratory protection devices. Included proposed schedule. These, too, may be public notice lists the organizational are electronic copies of records created requested and will be provided once the unit(s) accumulating the records or using electronic mail and word appraisal is completed. Requesters will indicates agency-wide applicability in processing. be given 30 days to submit comments. the case of schedules that cover records 5. Department of the Army, Agency- ADDRESSES: To request a copy of any that may be accumulated throughout an wide (N1–AU–00–11, 2 items, 2 records schedule identified in this agency. This notice provides the control temporary items). Records relating to notice, write to the Life Cycle number assigned to each schedule, the inventories and examinations of test Management Division (NWML), total number of schedule items, and the booklets, scoring keys, and all other National Archives and Records number of temporary items (the records accountable test materials. Included are Administration (NARA), 8601 Adelphi proposed for destruction). It also electronic copies of records created Road, College Park, MD 20740–6001. includes a brief description of the using electronic mail and word Requests also may be transmitted by temporary records. The records processing. FAX to 301–713–6852 or by e-mail to schedule itself contains a full 6. Department of Defense, Office of [email protected]. Requesters description of the records at the file unit the Secretary (N1–330–00–2, 5 items, 5 must cite the control number, which level as well as their disposition. If temporary items). Records relating to appears in parentheses after the name of NARA staff has prepared an appraisal the adjudication of security clearances, the agency which submitted the memorandum for the schedule, it, too, including electronic copies of

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36168 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices documents created using electronic mail letters of complaint and commendation materials. Also included are electronic and word processing. and reports, plans, and other files copies of documents created using 7. Department of Housing and Urban relating to customer service focus electronic mail and word processing. Development, Office of Federal Housing groups and surveys. Also included are 18. Department of Justice, Federal Enterprise Oversight (N1–543–00–3, 2 electronic copies of records created Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–26, 3 items, 2 temporary items). Assessment using electronic mail and word items, 3 temporary items). Records of calculation files relating to semi-annual processing. the Commercial Law Branch, including assessments of government-sponsored 12. Department of the Interior, U.S. jurisdiction files and subject files. Also enterprises for funds appropriated to the Geological Survey (N1–57–97–3, 2 included are electronic copies of agency from Congress. Included are items, 1 temporary item). Manuscripts documents created using electronic mail electronic copies of documents created and other background papers relating to and word processing. using electronic mail and word agency publications. This schedule 19. Department of Justice, Federal processing. Notice of this schedule was reduces the retention period for these Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–27, 5 previously published in the Federal records, which were previously items, 5 temporary items). Records of Register of March 22, 2000. It is being approved for disposal. It also modifies the Labor Law Branch, including re-published due to minor changes the transfer instructions for controlled correspondence and Merit occasioned by an agency reorganization. publications, which were previously Systems Protection Board, Federal Labor 8. Department of Housing and Urban scheduled for permanent retention. Relations Authority, and Office of Development, Office of Federal Housing 13. Department of Justice, Federal Special Counsel case files. Also Enterprise Oversight (N1–543–00–4, 11 Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–21, 11 included are electronic copies of items, 9 temporary items). Records items, 9 temporary items). Records of documents created using electronic mail accumulated by the Office of Policy the Office of Assistant Director and and word processing. Analysis and Research relating to the General Counsel, including such records 20. Department of Labor, Employment compensation received by government- as chronological files, Director’s and Training Administration (N1–369– supported enterprise executives and to working files, executive staff meeting 99–1, 16 items, 16 temporary items). requests for information concerning reports, files on foreign travel and Records relating to programs to provide agency Notices of Proposed Rulemaking. speeches, meetings files, miscellaneous assistance for workers whose jobs have Also included are selected subject files and quarterly reports, and tracked been or will be impacted by increased and electronic copies of documents correspondence. Also included are imports. Included are such records as created using electronic mail and word electronic copies of documents created petitions, company information, processing. Recordkeeping copies of using electronic mail and word correspondence, public inspection files, selected subject files and quarterly processing. An inmate issues file and funding requests, and program reports to the Department of Housing subject files are proposed for permanent regulations. Also included are electronic and Urban Development are proposed retention. copies of documents created using for permanent retention. Notice of this 14. Department of Justice, Federal electronic mail and word processing. schedule was previously published in Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–22, 4 21. Department of Labor, Mine Safety the Federal Register of March 22, 2000. items, 4 temporary items). Records of and Health Administration (N1–433– It is being re-published due to minor the Litigation Branch, including 98–1, 3 items, 2 temporary items). changes occasioned by an agency representation requests, reference files, Electronic copies of documents created reorganization. and tracked correspondence. Also using electronic mail and word 9. Department of Housing and Urban included are electronic copies of processing that relate to reports and Development, Office of Federal Housing documents created using electronic mail other records pertaining to the Enterprise Oversight (N1–543–00–8, 7 and word processing. investigation of fatal mine accidents. items, 6 temporary items). Project 15. Department of Justice, Federal Extra copies of final reports are also tracking reports, records relating to Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–23, 5 included. In addition, this schedule trips, and selected chronological files items, 5 temporary items). Records of revises the series description and accumulated by the Office of the the Legislative and Correctional Issues retirement instructions for Director. Also included are electronic Branch, including compassionate recordkeeping copies of investigation copies of documents created using release files, legislative files, subject files, which were previously approved electronic mail and word processing. files, and correspondence files. Also for permanent retention. Recordkeeping copies of selected included are electronic copies of 22. Department of Veterans Affairs, chronological files from the Director’s documents created using electronic mail Veterans Health Administration (N1– Office are proposed for permanent and word processing. 15–99–2, 28 items, 28 temporary items). retention, including files of the Deputy 16. Department of Justice, Federal Anatomic pathology, blood transfusion, Director and several staff assistants. Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–24, 2 and clinical pathology services records. 10. Department of the Interior, Bureau items, 2 temporary items). Records of Included are such files as laboratory test of Land Management (N1–49–00–1, 2 the Legal Administrative Branch, reports, test procedures records, items, 2 temporary items). Records in all including program statement pathology test reports, proficiency tests, media, including databases, that pertain background files and electronic copies logs, instrument maintenance records, to list servers, discussion groups, and of documents created using electronic quality control records, and other news groups maintained on internal mail and word processing. documents relating to patient care and agency electronic communication and 17. Department of Justice, Federal laboratory procedures and certification. information sharing applications. Bureau of Prisons (N1–129–00–25, 6 Also included are electronic copies of 11. Department of the Interior, Bureau items, 6 temporary items). Records of records created using electronic mail of Land Management (N1–49–00–2, 3 the Administrative Complaints and and word processing. Reports that relate items, 3 temporary items). Records Ethics Branch, including ethics to individual patient care are filed in the relating to solicited and unsolicited opinions, outside employment and patient’s medical folder, which was public commendations, complaints, and outside travel requests, controlled previously approved for disposal 75 comments. Included are such records as correspondence, and ethics reference years after last episode of care.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36169

23. Consumer Product Safety Dated: May 26, 2000. Meeting) (‘‘The Green’’ Plaza Area) Commission, Agency-wide (N1–424– Michael J. Kurtz, 1:30 p.m. 00–1, 3 items, 2 temporary items). Assistant Archivist for Record Services— All Employees Meeting (Public Records relating to the production of Washington, DC. Meeting) (‘‘The Green’’ Plaza Area) posters, including production materials, [FR Doc. 00–14275 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Week of June 26—Tentative negatives, routine artwork, layouts, and BILLING CODE 7515±01±P There are no meetings scheduled for preparatory graphic material. Also the Week of June 26. included are posters pertaining to events and subjects not related to the NUCLEAR REGULATORY Week of July 3—Tentative agency’s mission. Posters relating to the COMMISSION There are no meetings scheduled for agency’s mission and operations are the Week of July 3. proposed for permanent retention. Sunshine Act Meetings Week of July 10—Tentative 24. Federal Retirement Thrift AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear Investment Board, Agency-wide (N1– Regulatory Commission. Tuesday, July 11 474–00–2, 3 items, 3 temporary items). DATES: Weeks of June 5, 12, 19, 26, and 9:25 a.m. Copies of Office of Administration July 3, and 10, 2000. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) internal directives accumulated by PLACE: Commissioner’s Conference (If necessary.) *The schedule for Commission agency program offices. Electronic Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, meetings is subject to change on short copies created using word processing Maryland. are also included. notice. To verify the status of meetings STATUS: Public and Closed. call (recording) (301) 415–1292. Contact 25. Federal Home Loan Bank Board MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Person for more information: Bill Hill (N1–195–00–1, 3 items, 2 temporary Week of June 5 (301) 415–1661. items). Older records, accumulated The NRC Commission Meeting between 1932 and 1971, consisting of There are no meetings scheduled for Schedule can be found on the Internet bills and receipts for legal fees, the Week of June 5. at: http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/ miscellaneous case files, and savings Week of June 12—Tentative schedule.htm and loan associations’ applications for This notice is distributed by mail to membership in the Federal Home Loan Tuesday, June 13 several hundred subscribers; if you no Bank system and other actions, such as 9:25 a.m. longer wish to receive it, or would like relocation and the establishment of Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) to be added to it, please contact the branch offices. Records include a: Final Rule—Clarification of Office of the Secretary, Attn: Operations financial statements, audits, transcripts Regulations to Explicitly Limit Branch, Washington, DC 20555 (401– of hearings, maps, photographs, and Which Types of Applications Must 415–1661). In addition, distribution of publicity materials. The agency’s Include Antitrust Information this meeting notice over the Internet Central Subject File, 1934–1969, is 9:30 a.m. system is available. If you are interested proposed for permanent retention. Meeting with Organization of in receiving this Commission meeting Agreement States (OAS) and schedule electronically, please send an 26. Tennessee Valley Authority, Chief electronic message to [email protected] or Administrative Officer (N1–142–00–3, 4 Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD) (Public [email protected]. items, 2 temporary items). Paper copies Meeting) (Contact: Paul Lohaus, Dated: June 2, 2000. of records of the Chief Administrative 301–415–3340) Officer for which optical images have William M. Hill, Jr., 1:00 p.m. been created. Also included are SECY Tracking Officer, Office of the Meeting with Korean Peninsula Secretary. electronic copies of documents created Energy Development Organization using word processing and electronic [FR Doc. 00–14467 Filed 6–5–00; 1:20 pm] (KEDO) and State Department BILLING CODE 7590±01±M mail. Information that has been (Public Meeting) (Contact: Donna converted to optical image format is Chaney, 301–415–2644) proposed for permanent retention and Week of June 19—Tentative NUCLEAR REGULATORY will be transferred to the National COMMISSION Archives in a medium and format that Tuesday, June 20, 2000 meets the requirements for archival State of Oklahoma: NRC Staff 9:25 a.m. records in effect at the time of transfer. Assessment of a Proposed Agreement Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) Between the Nuclear Regulatory Paper records that pre-date November 1, (If needed) Commission and the State of 1999, and will not be scanned, are also 9:30 a.m. Oklahoma proposed for permanent retention. Briefing on Final Rule—Part 70— 27. Tennessee Valley Authority, Regulating Fuel Cycle Facilities AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Information Services (N1–142–00–4, 2 (Public Meeting) (Contact: Theodore Commission. items, 2 temporary items). Sherr, 301–415–7218) ACTION: Notice of a proposed Agreement Correspondence, reports, and 1:30 p.m. with the State of Oklahoma. presentations pertaining to the Briefing on Risk-Informed Part 50, management of the Y2K program. Also Option 3 (Public Meeting) (Contact: SUMMARY: This notice is announcing included are electronic copies created Mary Drouin, 301–415–6675) that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received a request from using electronic mail and word Wednesday, June 21, 2000 processing. Governor Frank Keating of Oklahoma 10:30 a.m. that the NRC consider entering into an All Employees Meeting (Public Agreement with the State as authorized

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36170 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices by section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since provided for in regulations or orders of of 1954, as amended (Act). Section 274 section 274 of the Act was added in the Commission. of the Act contains provisions for the 1959, the Commission has entered into (b) The proposed Agreement contains Commission to enter into agreements Agreements with 31 States. The articles that: with the Governor of any State Agreement States currently regulate —Specify the materials and activities providing for the discontinuance of the approximately 16,000 agreement over which authority is transferred; material licenses, while NRC regulates regulatory authority of the Commission. —Specify the activities over which the approximately 5800 licenses. Under the Under the proposed Agreement, Commission will retain regulatory proposed Agreement, approximately submitted December 28, 1999, the authority; Commission would discontinue and 220 NRC licenses will transfer to —Continue the authority of the Oklahoma would take over portions of Oklahoma. NRC periodically reviews Commission to safeguard nuclear the Commission’s regulatory authority the performance of the Agreement States materials and restricted data; over radioactive material covered under to assure compliance with the the Act within the State of Oklahoma. provisions of section 274. Section 274e —Commit the State of Oklahoma and In accordance with 10 CFR 150.10, requires that the terms of the proposed NRC to exchange information as persons, who possess or use certain Agreement be published in the Federal necessary to maintain coordinated radioactive materials in Oklahoma, Register for public comment once each and compatible programs; would be released (exempted) from week for four consecutive weeks. This —Provide for the reciprocal recognition portions of the Commission’s regulatory notice is being published in fulfillment of licenses; authority under the proposed of the requirement. —Provide for the suspension or termination of the Agreement; Agreement. The Act requires that NRC I. Background publish those exemptions. Notice is —Specify the effective date of the hereby given that the pertinent (a) Section 274d of the Act provides proposed Agreement. The exemptions have been previously the mechanism for a State to assume Commission reserves the option to published in the Federal Register and regulatory authority, from the NRC, over modify the terms of the proposed are codified in the Commission’s certain radioactive materials 1 and Agreement in response to comments, regulations as 10 CFR part 150. NRC is activities that involve use of the to correct errors, and to make editorial publishing the proposed Agreement for materials. In a letter dated December 28, changes. The final text of the public comment, as required by the Act. 1999, Governor Keating certified that Agreement, with the effective date, NRC is also publishing the summary of the State of Oklahoma has a program for will be published after the Agreement an assessment conducted by the NRC the control of radiation hazards that is is approved by the Commission, and staff of the proposed Oklahoma adequate to protect public health and signed by the Chairman of the byproduct material regulatory program. safety within Oklahoma for the Commission and the Governor of Comments are invited on (a) the materials and activities specified in the Oklahoma. proposed Agreement, especially its proposed Agreement, and that the State (c) Oklahoma currently regulates the effect on public health and safety, and desires to assume regulatory users of naturally-occurring and (b) the NRC staff assessment. responsibility for these materials and accelerator-produced radioactive activities. Included with the letter was materials (NARM). The regulatory DATES: The comment period expires July the text of the proposed Agreement, 7, 2000. Comments received after this program is authorized by law in the which is included as Appendix A to this Oklahoma Environmental Quality Act at date will be considered if it is practical notice. to do so, but the Commission cannot Okla. Stat. tit. 27A § 1–3–101(B)(11) and The radioactive material and activities the Oklahoma Radiation Management assure consideration of comments (which together are usually referred to received after the expiration date. Act at 27A § 2–9–103(A). Section 2–9– as the ‘‘categories of material’’) which 103(C) of the Act provides the authority ADDRESSES: Written comments may be the State of Oklahoma requests for the Governor to enter into an submitted to Mr. David L. Meyer, Chief, authority over are: (1) The possession Agreement with the Commission. and use of byproduct materials as Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Oklahoma law contains provisions for defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; (2) Administrative Services, Office of the orderly transfer of regulatory the possession and use of special Administration, Washington, DC 20555– authority over affected licensees from nuclear material in quantities not 0001. Copies of comments received by NRC to the State. Oklahoma law sufficient to form a critical mass; (3) the NRC may be examined at the NRC provides that any person who possesses regulation of the land disposal of Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, an existing NRC license shall be deemed byproduct source or special nuclear NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. to possess a like license issued under material received from other persons; Copies of the proposed Agreement, the Oklahoma Radiation Management and (4) source material used to take copies of the request for an Agreement Act. After the effective date of the advantage of its density and high mass by the Governor of Oklahoma including Agreement, licenses issued by NRC properties where the use of the all information and documentation would continue in effect until the specifically licensed source material is submitted in support of the request, and license expiration specified in the subordinate to the primary specifically copies of the full text of the NRC staff existing NRC license. DEQ will notify licensed use of either 11e.(1) byproduct assessment are also available for public affected licensees of the transfer of material or special nuclear material, as inspection in the NRC’s Public regulatory authority within fifteen (15) Document Room. days after the effective date of the 1 The radioactive materials, sometimes referred to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: as agreement materials, are: (a) byproduct materials signed agreement. Patricia M. Larkins, Office of State and as defined in section 11e.(1) of the Act; (b) (d) The NRC staff assessment finds Tribal Programs, U.S. Nuclear byproduct materials as defined in Section 11e.(2) of that the Oklahoma program is adequate the Act; (c) source materials as defined in Section Regulatory Commission, Washington, 11z. of the Act; and (d) special nuclear materials as to protect public health and safety, and DC 20555–0001. Telephone (301) 415– defined in Section 11a. of the Act, restricted to is compatible with the NRC program for 2309 or e-mail [email protected]. quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass. the regulation of agreement materials.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36171

II. Summary of the NRC Staff manager and two senior technical staff qualified staff members and that the Assessment of the Oklahoma Program have 10 years of regulatory experience technical staff identified by the State to for the Control of Agreement Materials with DEQ and 6, 6, and 3 years participate in the Agreement materials NRC staff has examined the Oklahoma respectively in the RAM program as program are fully trained, and qualified request for an Agreement with respect to well as several years of prior experience in accordance with the DEQ plans, have the ability of the radiation control working with radioactive material, sufficient knowledge and experience in program to regulate agreement radiation protection, or hazardous radiation protection, the use of materials. The examination was based waste. radioactive materials, the standards for A third senior staff member has three on the Commission’s policy statement the evaluation of applications for years of industry experience and three ‘‘Criteria for Guidance of States and licensing, and the techniques of years with the DEQ RAM program. One NRC in Discontinuance of NRC inspecting licensed users of agreement junior staff member has three years Regulatory Authority and Assumption materials to satisfy the criterion. experience as a laboratory technician (b) Legislation and Regulations. The Thereof by States Through Agreement’’ using radionuclides for labeling and two Oklahoma DEQ is designated by law in (referred to herein as the ‘‘NRC criteria’’) years with the DEQ RAM program. the Oklahoma Radiation Management (46 FR 7540; January 23, 1981, as Three other staff members, currently in Act at Okla. Stat. Tit. 27A § 2–9–103 as amended). training, have between 3 and 9 years the radiation control agency. The law (a) Organization and Personnel. The experience, primarily in the provides the DEQ the authority to issue agreement byproduct material program environmental regulatory area. One has licenses, issue orders, conduct will be located within the existing completed one year related experience inspections, and to enforce compliance Radiation Management Section (RAM) with DEQ RAM, one has 3.5 years of with regulations, license conditions, of the Waste Management Division, an related nuclear power plant experience and orders. Licensees are required to organizational unit of the Oklahoma as a health physicist decontamination provide access to inspectors. The Department of Environmental Quality technician, and one has six years related Environmental Quality Board is (DEQ). The RAM Section currently has experience as a well logging engineer. authorized to promulgate regulations. responsibility for directing and Based on information provided in the The law requires the Environmental managing a formal registration program staffing analysis, the manager, three Quality Board to adopt rules that are begun in 1993, that includes inspections senior technical staff, and one junior compatible with the equivalent NRC and fees for radioactive material that staff member will conduct the licensing regulations and that are equally occur naturally or are produced by and inspection activities. These staff stringent to, or to the extent practicable particle accelerators, and industrial x- members have attended nearly all of the more stringent than, the equivalent NRC ray machines. The DEQ also has available relevant NRC training courses, regulations. The DEQ has adopted, by responsibility for regulation of machine including the 5-week Applied Health reference, the NRC regulations in Title produced radiation, and non-ionizing Physics course, inspection and licensing 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. radiation. The regulatory authority over courses, and the majority of use-specific The adoption by reference is contained the use of sources of radiation by courses. In addition, staff members have in Title 252 Chapter 410 of the diagnostic medical x-ray remains with accompanied NRC inspectors and Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC). the Oklahoma Department of Health. worked with NRC licensing staff to Oklahoma rule 252:410–10–2 specifies Based on discussions with the RAM obtain additional on-the-job experience. that references to the NRC will be program manager, the DEQ plans to The DEQ has adopted a written construed as references to the Director implement a licensing program for program for the training and of the DEQ. radioactive materials that occur qualification of staff members, which The NRC staff review verified that the naturally in the future after the State covers both new staff members and the Oklahoma rules contain all of the assumes regulatory authority under the continuing qualification of existing staff. provisions that are necessary in order to Agreement. The program will be NRC staff notes that the Oklahoma be compatible with the regulations of responsible for all regulatory activities agreement materials program will be the NRC on the effective date of the related to the proposed Agreement. evaluated under the Commission’s Agreement between the State and the The educational requirements for the Integrated Materials Performance Commission. The adoption of the NRC DEQ staff members are specified in the Evaluation Program (IMPEP). One regulations by reference assures that the Oklahoma State personnel position IMPEP criterion addresses staff training standards will be uniform. descriptions, and meet the NRC criteria and qualifications, and includes a (c) Storage and Disposal. Oklahoma with respect to formal education or specific criterion which addresses has also adopted, by reference, the NRC combined education and experience training and qualification plans. NRC requirements for the storage of requirements. Each current staff member staff reviewed the plan, and concludes radioactive material, and for the has at least a bachelors’ degree or that it satisfies the IMPEP criterion disposal of radioactive material as equivalents in physical/life sciences or element. waste. The waste disposal requirements engineering, with one exception. One The DEQ provided copies of cover both the disposal of waste staff member trainee has a degree in memoranda authorizing full generated by the licensee and the Education. Several staff members hold qualification to three senior staff, and disposal of waste generated by and advanced degrees. Most staff members limited interim qualification to one received from other persons. were hired from other environmental junior staff member, in accordance with (d) Transportation of Radioactive programs in the DEQ with considerable Oklahoma’s Formal Qualification Plan. Material. Oklahoma has adopted the experience in a variety of environmental All four staff are designated to provide NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 71 by program areas. The program staff has technical support to the program at the reference. Part 71 contains the considerable experience in related time the Agreement is signed. requirements licensees must follow regulatory program implementation Based upon review of the information when preparing packages containing including air pollution, hazardous provided in the staffing analysis, NRC radioactive material for transport. Part waste, solid waste, sewage treatment, staff concludes that overall the program 71 also contains requirements related to and water use issues. The program has an adequate number of technically the licensing of packaging for use in

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36172 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices transporting radioactive materials. ‘‘timely renewal.’’ This provision IV. Small Business Regulatory Oklahoma will not attempt to enforce affords the continuance of licenses for Enforcement Fairness Act portions of the regulation related to which an application for renewal has In accordance with the Small activities, such as approving packaging been filed more than 30 days prior to Business Regulatory Enforcement designs, which are reserved to NRC. the date of expiration of the license. Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has (e) Record Keeping and Incident NRC licenses transferred while in timely Reporting. Oklahoma has adopted, by determined that this action is not a renewal are included under the major rule and has verified this reference, the sections of the NRC continuation provision. The OAC regulations which specify requirements determination with the Office of provides exemptions from the State’s Information and Regulatory Affairs of for licensees to keep records, and to requirements for licensing of sources of report incidents or accidents involving the Office of Management and Budget radiation for NRC and the U.S. materials. (OMB). Department of Energy contractors or (f) Evaluation of License Applications. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day Oklahoma has adopted, by reference, subcontractors. of June, 2000. the NRC regulations that specify the The proposed Agreement commits For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. requirements which a person must meet Oklahoma to use its best efforts to Paul H. Lohaus, in order to get a license to possess or use cooperate with the NRC and the other Director, Office of State and Tribal Programs. radioactive materials. Oklahoma has Agreement States in the formulation of also developed a licensing procedure standards and regulatory programs for An Agreement Between the United manual, along with the accompanying the protection against hazards of States Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulatory guides, which are adapted radiation and to assure that Oklahoma’s and the State of Oklahoma for the from similar NRC documents and program will continue to be compatible Discontinuance of Certain Commission contain guidance for the program staff with the Commission’s program for the Regulatory Authority and Responsibility Within the State when evaluating license applications. regulation of Agreement materials. The Pursuant to Section 274 of the Atomic (g) Inspections and Enforcement. The proposed Agreement stipulates the Oklahoma radiation control program has Energy Act of 1954, as Amended desirability of reciprocal recognition of adopted a schedule providing for the licenses, and commits the Commission Whereas, The United States Nuclear inspection of licensees as frequently as, and Oklahoma to use their best efforts Regulatory Commission (hereinafter or more frequently than, the inspection referred to as the Commission) is schedule used by NRC. The program has to accord such reciprocity. authorized under Section 274 of the adopted procedures for conducting III. Staff Conclusion Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended inspections, reporting inspection (hereinafter referred to as the Act), to findings, and reporting inspection Subsection 274d of the Act provides enter into agreements with the Governor results to the licensees from similar that the Commission will enter into an of any State providing for NRC documents. The program has also Agreement under subsection 274b with discontinuance of the regulatory adopted, by rule in the OAC, procedures any State if: authority of the Commission within the for the enforcement of regulatory (a) The Governor of the State certifies State under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and requirements. that the State has a program for the (h) Regulatory Administration. The Section 161 of the Act with respect to control of radiation hazards adequate to Oklahoma DEQ is bound by byproduct materials as defined in protect public health and safety with requirements specified in State law for Sections 11e.(1) and (2) of the Act, rulemaking, issuing licenses, and taking respect to the agreement materials source materials, and special nuclear enforcement actions. The program has within the State, and that the State materials in quantities not sufficient to also adopted administrative procedures desires to assume regulatory form a critical mass; and, to assure fair and impartial treatment of responsibility for the agreement Whereas, The Governor of the State of license applicants. Oklahoma law materials; and Oklahoma is authorized under Section prescribes standards of ethical conduct (b) The Commission finds that the 2–9–103(c) of the Radiation for State employees. State program is in accordance with the Management Act (27A O.S. Supp. 1998 (i) Cooperation with Other Agencies. requirements of Subsection 274o, and in § 2–9–101 et seq.) to enter into this Oklahoma law deems the holder of an all other respects compatible with the Agreement with the Commission; and, NRC license on the effective date of the Commission’s program for the Whereas, The Governor of the State of proposed Agreement to possess a like regulation of materials, and that the Oklahoma certified on December 28, license issued by Oklahoma under the State program is adequate to protect 1999 that the State of Oklahoma (hereinafter referred to as the State) has Oklahoma Radiation Management Act. public health and safety with respect to a program for the control of radiation Such license will expire on the date of the materials covered by the proposed hazards adequate to protect the health expiration specified in the existing NRC Agreement. license. Oklahoma will retain the NRC and safety with respect to materials license numbers of existing licenses On the basis of its assessment, the within the State covered by this until they expire under DEQ NRC staff concludes that the State of Agreement, and that the State desires to jurisdiction. As of the effective date of Oklahoma meets the requirements of the assume regulatory responsibility for the Agreement, any pending or new Act. The State’s program, as defined by such materials; and, license applications and renewals will its statutes, regulations, personnel, Whereas, The Commission found on be transferred to DEQ. DEQ will notify licensing, inspection, and (date to be determined) that the program affected licensees of the transfer of administrative procedures, is of the State for the regulation of the regulatory authority within fifteen (15) compatible with the program of the materials covered by this Agreement is days after the effective date of the Commission and adequate to protect compatible with the Commission’s signed agreement. public health and safety with respect to program for the regulation of such Oklahoma’s Administrative the materials covered by the proposed materials and is adequate to protect Procedures Act also provides for Agreement. public health and safety; and,

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36173

Whereas, The State and the D. The regulation of the disposal of hazards of radiation and to assure that Commission recognize the desirability such other byproduct, source, or special Commission and State programs for and importance of cooperation between nuclear material as the Commission protection against hazards of radiation the Commission and the State in the from time to time determines by will be coordinated and compatible. The formulation of standards for protection regulation or order should, because of State agrees to cooperate with the against hazards of radiation and in the hazards or potential hazards thereof, Commission and other Agreement States assuring that State and Commission not be so disposed without a license in the formulation of standards and programs for protection against hazards from the Commission. regulatory programs of the State and the of radiation will be coordinated and E. The evaluation of radiation safety Commission for protection against compatible; and, information on sealed sources or hazards of radiation and to assure that Whereas, The Commission and the devices containing byproduct, source, or the State’s program will continue to be State recognize the desirability of special nuclear materials and the compatible with the program of the reciprocal recognition of licenses, and of registration of the sealed sources or Commission for the regulation of the granting of limited exemptions from devices for distribution, as provided for byproduct material covered by this licensing of those materials subject to in regulations or orders of the Agreement. this Agreement; and, Commission; The State and the Commission agree Whereas, This Agreement is entered F. Byproduct material as defined in to keep each other informed of proposed into pursuant to the provisions of the Section 11e.(2) of the Act; changes in their respective rules and Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; G. Source material except for source regulations, and to provide each other Now Therefore, It is hereby agreed material used to take advantage of the the opportunity for early and between the Commission and the density and high-mass property for the substantive contribution to the proposed Governor of the State of Oklahoma, use of the specifically licensed source changes. acting in behalf of the State, as follows: material is subordinate to the primary The State and the Commission agree specifically licensed use of either Article I to keep each other informed of events, 11e.(1) byproduct material or special accidents, and licensee performance Subject to the exceptions provided in nuclear material; that may have generic implication or Articles II, IV, and V, the Commission otherwise be of regulatory interest. shall discontinue, as of the effective Article III date of this Agreement, the regulatory With the exception of those activities Article VII authority of the Commission in the State identified in Article II, paragraph A The Commission and the State agree under Chapters 6, 7, and 8, and Section through D, this Agreement may be that it is desirable to provide reciprocal 161 of the Act with respect to the amended, upon application by the State recognition of licenses for the materials following materials: and approval by the Commission, to listed in Article I licensed by the other A. Byproduct material as defined in include one or more of the additional party or by any other Agreement State. Section 11e.(1) of the Act; activities specified in Article II, Accordingly, the Commission and the B. Source material used to take paragraphs E through G, whereby the State agree to develop appropriate rules, advantage of the density and high-mass State may then exert regulatory regulations, and procedures by which property for the use of the specifically authority and responsibility with such reciprocity will be accorded. licensed source material is subordinate respect to those activities. to the primary specifically licensed use Article VIII of either 11e.(1) byproduct material or Article IV special nuclear material; Notwithstanding this Agreement, the The Commission, upon its own C. Special nuclear materials in Commission may from time to time by initiative after reasonable notice and quantities not sufficient to form a rule, regulation, or order, require that opportunity for hearing to the State, or critical mass; the manufacturer, processor, or upon request of the Governor of the D. The regulation of the land disposal producer of any equipment, device, State, may terminate or suspend all or of byproduct source or special nuclear commodity, or other product containing part of this Agreement and reassert the waste material received from other source, byproduct, or special nuclear licensing and regulatory authority persons. material shall not transfer possession or vested in it under the Act if the control of such product except pursuant Commission finds that (1) such Article II to a license or an exemption from termination or suspension is required to This Agreement does not provide for licensing issued by the Commission. protect public health and safety, or (2) discontinuance of any authority and the the State has not complied with one or Commission shall retain authority and Article V more of the requirements of Section 274 responsibility with respect to: This Agreement shall not affect the of the Act. The Commission may also, A. The regulation of the construction authority of the Commission under pursuant to Section 274j(2) of the Act, and operation of any production or Subsection 161b or 161i of the Act to temporarily suspend all or part of this utilization facility or any uranium issue rules, regulations, or orders to Agreement if, in the judgement of the enrichment facility; protect the common defense and Commission, an emergency situation B. The regulation of the export from security, to protect restricted data, or to exists requiring immediate action to or import into the United States of guard against the loss or diversion of protect public health and safety and the byproduct, source, or special nuclear special nuclear material. State has failed to take necessary steps. material, or of any production or The Commission shall periodically utilization facility; Article VI review actions taken by the State under C. The regulation of the disposal into The Commission will cooperate with this Agreement to ensure compliance the ocean or sea of byproduct, source, or the State and other Agreement States in with Section 274 of the Act which special nuclear waste material as the formulation of standards and requires a State program to be adequate defined in the regulations or orders of regulatory programs of the State and the to protect public health and safety with the Commission; Commission for protection against respect to the materials covered by this

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36174 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Agreement and to be compatible with estimated average burden hours for adopting or continuing a rule 12b–1 the Commission’s program. compliance with Commission rules and plan. forms should be directed to Michael E. The board and shareholder approval Article IX Bartell, Associate Director, Office of requirements of rule 12b–1 are designed This Agreement shall become Information Technology, Securities and to ensure that fund shareholders and effective on [TBA], and shall remain in Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, directors receive adequate information effect unless and until such time as it is NW., Washington, DC 20549, and Desk to evaluate and approve a rule 12b–1 terminated pursuant to Article VIII. Office for the Securities and Exchange plan. The requirement of quarterly Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this Commission, Office of Information and reporting to the board is designed to lth day of llllll, 2000. Regulatory Affairs, Office of ensure that the 12b–1 plan continues to FOR THE UNITED STATES Management and Budget, New benefit the fund and its shareholders. NUCLEAR REGULATORY Executive Office Building, Washington, The recordkeeping requirements of the COMMISSION. DC 20503. Comments must be submitted rule are necessary to enable Commission Chairman to OMB within 30 days of this notice. staff to oversee compliance with the Dated at Oklahoma City, Oklahoma rule. this lth day of llllll, 2000. Dated: May 25, 2000. Based on information filed with the FOR THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA Margaret H. McFarland, Commission by funds, Commission staff Governor Deputy Secretary. estimates that there are 4,500 mutual [FR Doc. 00–14286 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 00–14244 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] funds with the 12b–1 plans. As BILLING CODE 8010±01±M BILLING CODE 7590±01±P discussed above, 12b–1 requires the board of each fund with a 12b–1 plan to (i) review quarterly reports of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE amounts spent under the plan and (ii) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION annually consider the plan’s COMMISSION continuation (which generally is Request Under Review by Office of combined with the foruth quarterly Submission for OMB Review; Management and Budget Comment Request review). This results in a total number Upon Written Request, Copies Available of annual responses per fund of four and Upon Written Request, Copies From: Securities and Exchange Commission, an estimated total number of industry Available From: Securities and Office of Filings and Information Services, responses of 18,000 (4,500 funds × 4 Exchange Commission, Office of Filings Washington, DC 20549. annual responses per fund = 18,000 and Information Services, Washington, Extension: Rule 12b–1; SEC File No. 270– resonses). DC 20549. 188; OMB Control No. 3235–0212. Based on conversations with fund Extension: Form ADV–E; SEC File No. industry representatives, Commission 270–318; OMB Control No. 3235–0361. Notice is hereby given that under the staff estimates that for each of the 4,500 Notice is hereby given that pursuant Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 mutual funds that currently have a 12b– to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 U.S.C. 3501[, the Securities and 1 plan, the average annual burden of (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities Exchange Commission (the ‘‘SEC’’) has complying with the rule if 50 hours to and Exchange Commission submitted to the Office of Management maintain the plan. This estimate takes (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the and Budget (‘‘OMB’’), a request for into account the time needed to prepare Office of Management and Budget a extension of OMB approval for rule quarterly reports to the board of request for extension of the previously 12b–1 [17 CFR 270.12b–1] under the directors, the board’s consideration of approved collection of information on Investment Company Act of 1940 [15 those reports, and the board’s annual the following form: U.S.C. 80a] (the ‘‘Act’’). consideration of the plan’s continuation. Form ADV–E is the cover sheet for Rule 12b–1 permits a registered open- Commission staff therefore estimates accountant examination certificates end investment company (‘‘mutual that the total burden of the rule’s filed pursuant to rule 206(4)–2 under fund’’) to distribute its own shares and paperwork requirements is 225,000 the Investment Advisers Act by pay expenses of distribution provided, hours (4,500 funds x 50 hours per fund investment advisers retaining custody of among other things, that the mutual = 225,000 hours). client securities or funds. The annual fund adopts a written plan (‘‘rule 12b– The estimate of burden hours is made burden is approximately three minutes 1 plan’’) and has in writing any solely for the purpose of the Paperwork per respondent. agreements relating to the Reduction Act. The estimate is not The estimate of burden hours set forth implementation of the rule 12b–1 plan. derived form a comprehensive or even above is made solely for the purposes of The rule in part requires that (i) the a representative survey or study of the Paperwork Reduction Act and is not adoption or material amendment of a Commission rules. derived from a comprehensive or even rule 12b–1 plan be approved by the If a currently operating fund seeks to representative survey or study of the mutual fund’s directors and (i) adopt a new rule 12b–1 plan or (ii) cost of SEC rules and forms. shareholders; (ii) the board review materially increase the amount it spends Any agency may not conduct or quarterly reports of amounts spend for distribution under its rule 12b–1 sponsor, and a person is not required to under the rule 12b–1 plan; and (iii) the plan, rule 12b–1 requires that the fund respond to, a collection of information board consider continuation of the rule obtain shareholder approval. As a unless it displays a currently valid 12b–1 plan at least annually. Rule 12b– consequence, the fund will incur the control number. 1 also requires funds relying on the rule cost of a proxy. Commission staff General comments regarding the to preserve for six years, the first two estimates that four funds per year estimated burden hours should be years in an easily accessible place, prepare a proxy in connection with the directed to the Desk Officer for the copies of the rule 12b–1 plan, related adoption or material amendment of a Securities and Exchange Commission at agreements and reports, as well as rule 12b–1 plan. Commission staff the address below. Any comments minutes of board meetings that describe further estimates that the cost of each concerning the accuracy of the the factors considered and the basis for fund’s proxy is $15,000. Thus the total

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36175 annualized cost burden of rule 12b–1 to hearing by writing to the Commission’s investment adviser to three open-end the fund industry is $60,000 (4 funds Secretary and serving applicants with a management investment companies requiring a proxy × $15,000 per proxy). copy of the request, personally or by registered under the Act, consisting of The collections of information mail. Hearing requests should be nine portfolios (‘‘WAM Funds’’), with required by rule 12b–1 are necessary to received by the Commission by 5:30 aggregate assets of approximately $12 obtain the benefits of the rule. Notices p.m. on June 26, 2000 and should be billion. TDIM, a Canadian corporation to the Commission will not be kept accompanied by proof of service on and a wholly-owned subsidiary of TD confidential. An agency may not applicants in the form of an affidavit or, Bank, was formed in 1999 and is conduct or sponsor, and a person is not for lawyers, a certificate of service. registered under the Advisers Act. TDIM required to respond to, a collection of Hearing requests should state the nature currently does not provide any services information unless it displays a of the writer’s interest, the reason for the to registered investment companies currently valid control number. request, and the issues contested. (‘‘funds’’). Please direct general comments Persons who wish to be notified of a 3. On September 12, 1989, the U.S. regarding the information above to: (i) hearing may request notification by District Court for the Southern District Desk Officer for the Securities and writing to the Commission’s Secretary. of New York (‘‘District Court’’), entered Exchange Commission, Office of An order granting the application will a Final Judgment of Permanent Information and Regulatory Affairs, be issued unless the Commission orders Injunction and Other Equitable Relief in Office of Management and Budget, New a hearing or extends the temporary a matter brought by the Commission Executive Office Building, Washington, exemption. (‘‘1989 Injunction’’).1 The Commission DC 20503; and (ii) Michael Bartell, alleged that, in connection with certain Associate Executive Director, Office of ADDRESSES: so-called ‘‘free riding’’ transactions by Information Technology, Securities and Secretary, Securities and Exchange certain securities clearance customers, Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW, TD Bank violated the margin lending NW., Washington, DC 20549. Comments Washington, DC 20549–0609 requirements of Regulation U must be submitted to OMB within 30 TD Bank, P.O. Box 1, Toronto Dominion promulgated by the Board of Governors days of this notice. Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5K 1A2 of the Federal Reserve Board, under Dated: May 30, 2000. TDIM, 10th Floor, TD Tower, 55 King section 7(d) of the Securities Exchange Margaret H. McFarland, Street West, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Act of 1934. In consenting to the 1989 Deputy Secretary. M5K 1A2: Injunction, TD Bank undertook, among [FR Doc. 00–14245 Filed 6–06–00; 8:45 am] TD Securities (USA) Inc., 31 West 52nd other things, to implement and maintain BILLING CODE 8010±01±M Street, New York, NY 10019; certain policies, procedures and training WAM and TD Waterhouse Investor programs designed to detect and prevent Services, Inc., 100 Wall Street, New future violations of the margin SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE York, NY 10005; and regulations. Under the terms of the 1989 COMMISSION CT Investment Counsel (U.S.), Inc., 110 Injunction, TD Bank also hired an [Investment Company Act Release No. Yong Street, 10th Floor, Toronto, independent outside consultant to 24486; 812±12122] Ontario, Canada M5C 1T4. conduct an audit of TD Bank’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: compliance policies and procedures and The Toronto Dominion Bank et al.; Nadya B. Roytbalt, Assistant Director, at to report its findings to the Commission. Temporary and Notice of Application (202) 942–0610, Division of Investment 4. Applicants state that, in 1996, in connection with the acquisition by TD May 31, 2000. Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation. Bank of Waterhouse, at the request of AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The TD Bank, the Commission supported a following is a temporary order and a motion by TD Bank to the District Court ACTION: Temporary order and notice of summary of the application. The for the issuance of an order modifying application for permanent order under the 1989 Induction to enable section 9(c) of the Investment Company complete application is available for a Waterhouse to continue to provide Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’). fee from the Commission’s Public Reference Branch, 450 Fifth Street NW, securities clearance services. The SUMMARY: Applicants have received a Washington, DC 20549–0102; tel: (202) modification to the 1989 Injunction was temporary order exempting them from 942–8090. issued in 1996.2 section 9(a) of the Act, with respect to 5. Applicants also state that, at the Applicant’s Representations a securities-related injunction entered time of TD Bank’s acquisition of into in 1989, until the Commission takes 1. TD Bank is the fifth largest Waterhouse in 1996, WAM already was final action on the application for a chartered bank in Canada. Directly and registered under the Advisers Act. permanent order or, if earlier, July 31, through its subsidiaries, TD Bank Applicants further state that, following 2000. Applicants also have requested a provides a range of financial services to TD Bank’s acquisition of Waterhouse, permanent order. individuals, corporate and commercial on November 27, 1996, WAM filed an Applicants: The Toronto Dominion enterprises, financial institutions and amended Form ADV that disclosed the Bank ‘‘TD Bank’’, TD Investment governments. 1989 Injunction. Applicants also state Managewment Inc. (‘‘TDIM’’), TD 2. WAM, a Delaware corporation, is that TDIM disclosed the 1989 Injunction Securities (USA) Inc., TD Waterhouse an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Asset Management, Inc. (‘‘WAM’’), TD TD Bank and is an investment adviser 1 SEC v. Jury Matt Hansen, et al., Final Judgment Waterhouse Investor Services, Inc., and registered under the Investment of Permanent Injunction and Equitable Relief as to CT Investment Counsel (U.S.), Inc. Advisers Act of 1940 (‘‘Advisers Act’’). The Toronto-Dominion Bank and the Toronto- Filing Date: The application was filed WAM was acquired by TD Bank in 1996 Dominion Bank Trust Company, 89 Civ. 5242 (RO) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 12, 1989). on May 31, 2000. when TD Bank purchased its parent 2 SEC v. Jury Matt Hansen, et al., Stipulation & Hearing or Notification of Hearing: company, Waterhouse Investor Services, Order, 89 Civic. 5242 (RO) (S.D.N.Y. filed July 29, Interested persons may request a Inc. (‘‘Waterhouse’’). WAM serves as 1996).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36176 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices on its initial Form ADV filed in counsel also has attested that he has Applicants’ Condition December 1999. reviewed TD Bank’s compliance 6. Applicants state that they did not policies and procedures relating to Applicants agree that the requested seek an order under section 9(c) around compliance with section 9(a); that he order is subject to the following the time of the 1989 Injunction because reasonably believes that the policies and condition: TD Bank did not begin to engage in any procedures have been fully Any temporary exemption granted fund-related activities until 1996 implemented; and that the policies and pursuant to the application shall be following the acquisition of Waterhouse. procedures are designed reasonably to without prejudice to, and shall not limit Applicants also state that they did not prevent violations of section 9(a) by TD the Commission’s rights in any manner become aware of the section 9(a) bank and its affiliated persons. with respect to, any Commission violation until late December 1999. 7. Since the 1989 Injunction, several 5. Applicants state that the investigation of, or administrative of TD Bank’s subsidiaries—but not TD prohibitions of section 9(a) as applied to proceedings involving or against, Bank, WAM or TDIM—have been them would be unduly and applicants, including without involved in several administrative disproportionately severe. Applicants limitation, the consideration by the proceedings with state securities law assert that WAM’s inability to act as an Commission of a permanent exemption administrators and self-regulatory investment adviser to the WAM Funds from section 9(a) of the Act requested organizations. Applicants state that would result in the WAM Funds and pursuant to the application or the none of these administrative their shareholders facing potentially revocation or removal of any temporary proceedings, all of which are listed in severe hardships. Applicants state that, exemptions granted under the Act in the application, involved investment at a special meeting of the boards of connection with the application. advisory or fund-related activities. directors of the WAM Funds on Temporary Order Applicants’ Legal Analysis February 10, 2000, the directors were The Division has considered the 1. Section 9(a) of the Act, in relevant apprised, among other things, of the part, prohibits a person who has been circumstances surrounding the 1989 matter and, without necessarily agreeing enjoined from engaging in or continuing Injunction and the directors’ fiduciary with all of the facts represented or all of any conduct or practice in connection responsibilities in these circumstances. the arguments asserted by applicants, with the purchase or sale of a security The boards found that the alleged finds, in accordance with 17 CFR from acting, among other things, as a misconduct underlying the 1989 200.30–5(a)(7), that it appears that: (i) principal underwriter or investment Injunction does not adversely affect The prohibitions of section 9(a), as adviser for a registered investment WAM’s continuing ability to provide applied to applicants, may be unduly or company. Applicants state that, as a investment advisory services to the disproportionately severe; (ii) result of the 1989 Injunction, TD Bank Funds or diminish the value of the applicants’ conduct has been such as and its affiliates may be prohibited by services already provided. The boards not make it against the public interest or section 9(a) from serving as an unanimously voted to continue the the protection of investors to grant the investment adviser to funds. Funds’ current investment advisory temporary exemption; and (iii) granting 2. Section 9(c) of the Act provides that contracts with WAM. the temporary exemption would protect the Commission shall grant an the interests of the investment 6. Applicants assert that if WAM were application for an exemption from the companies served by applicants by prohibited from providing services to disqualification provisions of section allowing time for the orderly the WAM Funds, the effect on WAM’s 9(a) if it is established that these consideration of the application for business and employees would be provisions, as applied to the applicant, permanent relief. are unduly or disproportionately severe severe. Applicants state that WAM has or that the conduct of applicant has committed substantial resources over Accordingly, It is hereby ordered, been such as not to make it against the the past five years to establishing under section 9(c), that applicants are public interest or the protection of expertise in advising registered granted a temporary exemption from the investors to grant the application. investment companies. provisions of section 9(a), effective 3. Applicants seek temporary and 7. Applicants also assert that their forthwith, solely with respect to the permanent orders under section 9(c) conduct has been such as not to make 1989 Injunction, subject to the condition with respect to the 1989 Injunction to it against the public interest or the in the application, until the Commission permit TD Bank and its affiliates to protection of investors to grant the takes final action on the application for serve an investment advisers to funds, exemption from section 9(a). Applicants a permanent order or, if earlier, July 31, including the WAM Funds, and in the note that over 10 years have passed 2000. future to provide other services to funds since the 1989 Injunction. Applicants For the Commission, by the Division of that might be prohibited by section 9(a). Investment Management, pursuant to As noted above, applicants state that also note that the 1989 Injunction did delegated authority. they did not seek an order under section not in any way involve fund-related 9(c) around the time of the 1989 activities. Applicants state that all of the Margaret H. McFarland, Injunction because TD Bank did not employees, including senior Deputy Secretary. begin to engage in any fund-related management, involved in the matters [FR Doc. 00–14246 Filed 6–6–00 8:45 am] activities until 1996. Applicants also underlying the 1989 Injunction are no BILLING CODE 8010±01±M state that they did not become aware of longer employed at TB Bank or any of the section 9(a) violation until late its affiliates. Applicants further state December 1999. that since the 1989 Injunction, neither 4. TD Bank has undertaken to develop TD Bank nor any affiliated person of TD procedures designed to prevent Bank has engaged in conduct that would violations of section 9(a) by it and its result in disqualification under section affiliated persons. TD Bank’s general 9(a) of the Act.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36177

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ‘‘Acquiring Fund’’ and collectively, the registered under the Act as an open-end COMMISSION ‘‘Acquiring Funds’’) (the Acquired management investment company. Funds and the Acquiring Funds [Investment Company Act Release No. 2. AEFC, a Delaware corporation, is 24487; 812±12024] collectively, the ‘‘Funds’’); and registered under the Investment American Express Financial Advisers Act of 1940 and serves as the Strategist Growth Fund, Inc., et al.; Corporation (‘‘AEFC’’). investment for each Master Fund and as Notice of Application Filing Dates: The application was the administrator for each Fund. AEFC filed on March 14, 2000 and amended is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the June 1, 2000. on May 5, 2000. Applicants have agreed American Express Company. Currently, AGENCY: Securities and Exchange to file an amendment during the notice AEFC or American Express Company Commission (‘‘Commission’’). period, the substance of which is owns, for its own account, more than ACTION: Notice of an application under reflected in this notice. 25% of the outstanding shares of each section 17(b) of the Investment Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An Acquired Fund and one of the Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’) for an order granting the requested relief will Acquiring Funds. exemption from section 17(a) of the Act. be issued unless the Commission orders 3. On March 8, and 9, 2000 and March a hearing. Interested persons may SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants 10, 2000, the boards of directors of the request an order to permit certain series request a hearing by writing to the Acquiring Funds and the Acquired of a registered open-end management Commissions’s Secretary and serving Funds (the ‘‘Boards’’), respectively, investment company to acquire all of applicants with a copy of the request, including all of the directors who are the assets and stated liabilities of certain personally or by mail. Hearing request not interested persons of the Funds, as series of another registered open-end should be received by the Commission defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act management investment company. by 5:30 p.m. on June 26, 2000 and (‘‘Independent Directors’’) approved an Because of certain affiliations, should be accompanied by proof of Agreement and Plan or Reorganization applicants may not rely on rule 17a–8 service on applicants, in the form of an (the ‘‘Agreement’’). Under the under the Act. affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of Agreement, each Acquiring Fund will Applicants: Strategist Growth Fund, service. Hearing requests should state acquire all of the assets and assume the Inc. on behalf of its underlying series: the nature of the writer’s interest, the stated liabilities of its corresponding Strategist Growth Fund, Strategist reason for the request, and the issues Acquired Fund in exchange for class A Growth Trends Fund and Strategist contested. Persons may request shares of the Acquiring Fund (the Special Growth Fund; Strategist Growth notification of a hearing by writing to ‘‘Reorganiation’’). Pursuant to the and Income Fund, Inc. on behalf of its the Commission’s Secretary. Agreement, each shareholder of an underlying series: Strategist Balanced ADDRESSES: Acquired Fund will receive class A Fund, Strategist Equity Fund, Strategist Secretary, Commission, 450 5th Street Shares of the corresponding Acquiring Equity Income Fund and Strategist Total NW, Washington, DC 20549–0609 Fund having an aggregate net asset Return Fund; Strategist Income Fund, Acquired Funds and AEFC, c/o Eileen J. value equal to the aggregate net asset Inc. on behalf of its underlying series: Newhouse, American Express value of the Acquired Fund shares held Strategist Government Income Fund, Financial Corporation, IDS Tower 10, by that shareholder, determined as of Strategist High Yield Fund and T27/52, Minneapolis, MN 55440– the close of regular trading on the New Strategist Quality Income Fund; 0010 York Stock Exchange on the day of the Strategist Tax-Fee Income Fund, Inc. on Acquiring Funds, c/o Leslie L. Ogg, closing, which is expected to be on or behalf of its underlying series, Strategist American Express Funds, 901 about July 14, 2000 (‘‘Closing Date’’). Tax-Free High Yield Fund; Strategist Marquette Avenue South, Suite 2810, The valuation will be made in World Fund, Inc. on behalf of its Minneapolis, MN 55402–3268. accordance with the procedure set forth underlying series; Strategist Emerging in the then-current prospectus and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Markets Fund, Strategist World Growth statement of additional information for Deepak T. Pai, Senior Counsel, at (202) Fund, Strategist World Income Fund, the Funds. Or or as soon as practicable 942–0574; or Nadya B. Roytblat, and Strategist World Technologies Fund after the Closing Date, the class A shares Assistant Director, at (202) 942–0564 (Each series individually an ‘‘Acquired of the Acquiring Fund received by the (Division of Investment Management, Fund’’ and collectively, the ‘‘Acquired Acquired Fund will be distributed pro Office of Investment Company Funds’’); AXP Extra Income Fund, Inc.; rata to the shareholders of the Acquired Regulation). AXP Federal Income Fund, Inc.; AXP Fund and the Acquired Fund will be Global Series, Inc. on behalf of its SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The liquidated. underlying series: AXP Emerging following is a summary of the 4. Each of the Acquired Funds has Markets Fund, AXP Global Bond Fund, application. The complete application investment objectives, policies, and AXP Global Growth Fund, and AXP may be obtained for a fee at the restrictions that are identical to those of Innovations Fund; AXP Growth Series, Commission’s Public Reference Branch, its corresponding Acquiring Fund and Inc. on behalf of its underlying series; 450 5th Street NW, Washington, DC to those of its Master Fund. The AXP Growth Fund and AXP Research 20549–0102 (tel. 202–942–8090). Acquired Funds have only one class of Opportunities Fund; AXP High Yield Applicants’ Representations shares and are sold without a sales Tax-Exempt Fund, Inc.; AXP Investment charge.1 Class A shares of the Acquiring Series, Inc. on behalf of its underlying 1. The Funds are registered under the Funds are sold with a 5% front-end series; AXP Diversified Equity Income Act as open-end management sales charge and a .25% 12b–1 fee. No Fund and AXP Mutual; AXP Managed investment companies. Each of the sales charge will be assessed in Series, Inc. on behalf of its underlying Funds is a feeder fund in a master/ connection with the Reorganization. series, AXP Managed Allocation Fund; feeder structure. Each Acquired Fund AXP New Dimensions Fund, Inc.; AXP and its corresponding Acquiring Fund 1 Each of the Acquired Funds ceased offering Stock Fund, Inc.; AXP Selective Fund, invest in the same master fund (the shares to new investors and terminated its .25% Inc. (each series individually an ‘‘Master Funds’’). Each Master Fund is 12b–1 plan on October 4, 1999.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36178 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

AEFC will pay the expenses of the company. Section 2(a)(3) of the Act Reorganization satisfies the standards of Reorganization. defines an ‘‘affiliated person’’ of another section 17(b) of the Act. Applicants state 5. The Boards, including a majority of person to include: (a) Any person that the terms of the proposed the Independent Directors, determined directly or indirectly owning, Reorganization are fair and reasonable that participation in the Reorganization controlling, or holding with power to and do not involve overreaching and is in the best interests of each Fund, and vote 5% or more of the other person; (b) that the Funds have identical that the interests of existing any person 5% or more of whose investment objectives and policies. shareholders of each Fund will not be securities are directly or indirectly or Applicants also state that the Boards, diluted as a result of the Reorganization. indirectly owned, controlled, or held including a majority of the Independent In assessing the Reorganization, the with power to vote by the other person; Directors, have found that participation Boards considered a number of factors, (c) any person directly or indirectly in the Reorganization is in the best including: (a) The terms and conditions controlling, controlled by, or under interests of each Fund, and that the of the Reorganization; (b) the tax-free common control with the other person; interests of the existing shareholders nature of the Reorganization; (c) the and (d) if the other person is an will not be diluted as a result of the identical investment objectives, investment company, any investment Reorganization. In addition, applicants policies, and restrictions of the adviser of that company. Applicants state the Reorganization will be based Acquired Funds and the Acquiring state that the Funds may be deemed on the Funds’ relative net asset values. Funds; (d) that the shareholders of the affiliated persons and thus the For the Commission, by the Division of Acquired Funds will be able to make Reorganization may be prohibited by Investment Management, under delegated future purchases of shares of the section 17(a). authority. Acquiring Funds on a no-load basis; (e) 2. Rule 17a–8 under the Act exempts Margaret H. McFarland, that the expense ratio for each from the prohibitions of section 17(a) Deputy Secretary. Acquiring Fund will be lower than the mergers, considations, purchases or [FR Doc. 00–14279 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] expense ratio of each Acquired Fund; sales of substantially all of the assets of and (f) the costs of the Reorganization registered investment companies that BILLING CODE 8010±01±M will be borne by AEFC. are affiliated persons, or affiliated 6. The Reorganization is subject to a persons of an affiliated person, solely by SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE number of conditions precedent, reason of having a common investment COMMISSION including that: (a) The shareholders of adviser, common directors, and/or the Acquired Funds will have approved common officers, provided that certain [Rel. No. IC±24485; File 812±11666] the Agreement; (b) the Funds will have conditions set forth in the rule are received an opinion of tax counsel that satisfied. Applicants state that they may Nationwide Life Insurance Company, et the proposed Reorganization will be tax- not rely on rule 17a–8 because the al. free for the Funds and their Funds may be deemed to be affiliated May 31, 2000. shareholders; (c) applicants will have for reasons other than those set forth in AGENCY: The Securities and Exchange received from the Commission any the rule. Applicants state that AEFC or Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’). exemption necessary to carry out the American Express Company owns more ACTION: Notice of Application for an Reorganization; and (d) a registration than 25% of the outstanding shares of Order of Approval pursuant to Section statement on Form N–14 will have been each of the Acquired Funds and one of 26(b) of the Investment Company Act of filed with the Commission and declared the Acquiring Funds and each of these 1940 (the ‘‘1940 Act’’). effective for each of the Acquired Funds is an affiliated person of AEFC. Funds. The Agreement and the AEFC is an affiliated person of the Summary of the Applicant: Reorganization may be terminated and Funds because of its role as investment Applicants seek an Order approving the abandoned by resolutions of the Boards adviser to the Master Funds. Thus, each proposed substitution of the American at any time prior to the Closing Date. of the Acquired funds might be deemed Century VP Balanced Portfolio (‘‘VP The Agreement may be terminated in to be an affiliated person of an affiliated Balanced’’), a series fund of American the event that a material condition is not person of an Acquiring Fund, other than Century Variable Portfolios, Inc. fulfilled, a material covenant is not by virtue of a common investment (‘‘ACVP, Inc.’’), for another fund of fulfilled, or there is a material breach of adviser. ACVP, Inc., the American Century VP the Agreement. Applicants agree not to 3. Section 17(b) of the Act provides, Advantage Portfolio (‘‘VP Advantage’’), make any material changes to the in relevant part, that the Commission currently held in the separate accounts. Agreement without prior Commission may exempt a transaction from the Applicants: Nationwide Life approval. provisions of section 17(a) if the Insurance Company (‘‘NWL’’) and 7. A prospectus/proxy statement was evidence establishes that the terms of Nationwide Life and Annuity Insurance filed with the Commission on March 13, the proposed transaction, including the Company (‘‘NWLAIC’’) (collectively the 2000 and was mailed to the Acquired consideration to be paid or received, are ‘‘Companies’’); Nationwide Multi-Flex Funds shareholders the week of April reasonable and fair and do not involve Variable Account, Nationwide VA 17, 2000. The shareholders of the overreaching on the part of any person Separate Account-A, Nationwide Acquired Funds considered and concerned, and that the proposed Variable Account-5, Nationwide VL approved the Agreement on May 9, transaction is consistent with the policy Separate Account-A, Nationwide VLI 2000. of each registered investment company Separate Account-3 (collectively the concerned and with the general ‘‘Separate Accounts’’); and Nationwide Applicants’ Legal Analysis purposes of the Act. Advisory Services, Inc. (NAS) (all 1. Section 17(a) of the Act generally 4. Applicants request an order under collectively the ‘‘Applicants’’). prohibits an affiliated person of a section 17(b) of the Act exemption them Filing Date: The application was filed registered investment company, or an from section 17(a) of the Act to the on June 18, 1999, and was amended on affiliated person of such a person, acting extent necessary to permit applicants to March 30, 2000. as principal, from selling any security complete the proposed Reorganization. Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An to, or purchasing any security from, the Applicants submit that the Order granting the Application will be

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36179 issued unless the Commission orders a Nationwide VA Separate Account-A and 7. Within 45 days of receiving the hearing. Interested persons may request Nationwide VL Separate Account-A. Order of Approval requested by the a hearing by writing to the Secretary of 3. Each of the Separate Accounts is application, Applicants propose to the Commission and serving Applicants registered under the 1940 Act as a unit substitute shares of VP Balanced for with a copy of the request, personally or investment trust (File Nos. 811–3338, shares of VP Advantage. On the date by mail. Hearing requests should be 811–8692, 811–6140, 811–5606 and that the substitution is effected (the received by the Commission by 5:30 811–6137). Nationwide Multi-Flex ‘‘Exchange Date’’), all shares held by the p.m. on June 26, 2000, and should be Variable Account, Nationwide Variable Separate Accounts in VP Advantage will accompanied by proof of service on Account-5 and Nationwide VA Separate be redeemed and, contemporaneously Applicants in the form of an affidavit, Account-A issue flexible premium with the redemption, the Separate or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. variable annuity contracts that are Accounts will purchase shares in VP Hearing requests should state the nature registered under the Securities Act of Balanced. All shares will be purchased of the requester’s interest, the reason for 1933 (the ‘‘1933 Act’’) on Form N–4 and redeemed at prices based on the the request, and the issues contested. (File Nos. 2–75174, 33–71440 and 33– current net asset values per share in a Persons may request notification of a 22940). Nationwide VL Separate manner consistent with Rule 22c–1 hearing by writing to the Secretary of Account-3 and Nationwide VL Separate under the 1940 Act. the Commission. Account-A issue flexible premium and 8. The investment objective of VP ADDRESSES: single premium variable life insurance Advantage is to seek long-term growth Secretary, Securities and Exchange contracts. Nationwide VL Separate and current income. The fund achieves Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW, Account-A also issues multiple payment its objective by investing approximately Washington, DC 20549–0609. variable life insurance contracts. The 40% of its assets in equity securities, Applicants, Elizabeth A. Davin, contracts issued by both separate 40% in fixed income securities and the Nationwide Life Insurance Company, accounts are registered under the 1933 remaining 20% in cash and cash One Nationwide Plaza, 1–35–10, Act on Form S–6 (File Nos. 33–44296, equivalents. Columbus, OH 43215. 33–44790, 33–44300, 33–44792 and 33– 9. The investment objective of VP 35775). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Balanced is to seek long-term growth 4. Each Separate Account maintains Lorna MacLeod, Senior Attorney, or and current income. The fund achieves multiple sub-accounts each of which Keith Carpenter, Branch Chief, Office of its objectives by investing invests exclusively in the shares of a Insurance Products, Division of approximately 60% of its assets in single portfolio that is a series of an Investment Management, at (202) 942– equity securities and the remainder in 0670. open-end management investment bonds and other fixed income securities. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following company registered on Form N–1A. All Separate Accounts maintain sub- 10. American Century Investment is a summary of the Application; the Management, Inc., the adviser VP complete Application is available for a accounts that invest in shares of VP Advantage and VP Balanced. The two Advantage and VP Balanced, has fee from the Public Reference Branch of informed Applicants that its wishes to the Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW, sub-accounts are included among the investment options available under all halt all management and operations Washington, DC 20549–0102 (tel. (202) associated with VP Advantage because 942–8090). contracts issued by any of the Separate Accounts (the ‘‘Contracts’’). the fund, since its inception on June 4, Applicants’ Representations 5. The Contracts reserve to NWL and 1987, has not attracted sufficient assets 1. NWL, a stock life insurance NWLAIC, as relevant, the right, subject to grow to an efficient size. company organized under Ohio law, is to Commission approval, to substitute Furthermore, because VP Advantage is a wholly owned subsidiary of shares of another open-end management not being actively marketed, it is not Nationwide Financial Services, Inc. investment company for the shares of an expected to attain economies of scale. (‘‘NFS’’). NFS is ultimately controlled open-end management investment American Century Investment by Nationwide Mutual Insurance company held by any sub-account. The Management, Inc. has informed Company (95.24%) and Nationwide reservation is disclosed in the Applicants that as of January 10, 2000, Mutual Fire Insurance Company prospectus for the Contracts. VP Advantage had assets totaling (4.76%). NWL is the depositor and 6. Although the Contracts reserve to $21,832,751.26. As of the same date, VP sponsor of the Nationwide Multi-Flex Nationwide the right to restrict transfer Balanced had assets of $281,394,733.05. Variable Account, Nationwide Variable privileges, Contract Owners currently 11. The following table shows the Account-5 and Nationwide VLI Separate may make transfers among the sub- average annual total returns for VP Account-3. accounts once per business day without Advantage and VP Balanced for periods 2. NWLAIC, a stock life insurance the imposition of any transfer charge. of one, three and five years and since company organized under Ohio law, is The substitution will not count as a inception as well as expense ratios for a wholly owned subsidiary of NWL. transfer among the sub-accounts for the the funds for the year ended December NWLAIC is the depositor and sponsor of purpose of the daily transfer limit. 31, 1999.

Average annual total returns (performance) 1 Manage- Other ex- ment fees penses Since 1 year 3 year 5 year inception

VP Advantage (in percent)(inception: 8/1/91) ...... 1.00 0.00 14.5 12.3 12.0 9.4 VP Balanced 2 (in percent) (inception: 5/1/91) ...... 0.99 0.00 11.4 12.4 13.3 10.8 1 Performance as of September 30, 1999. 2 With expense reimbursement, the management fees and other expenses were 0.97% and 0.00% respectively.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36180 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

12. On September 27, 1999, Applicants’ Legal Analysis SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Nationwide supplemented the separate COMMISSION account prospectuses informing all 1. Section 26(b) of the 1940 Act requires the depositor of a registered [Release No. 34±42849; File No. SR±OPRA± existing and prospective Contract 00±05] Owners that it is the process of applying unit investment trust holding the for approval from the Commission to securities of a single issuer to obtain Options Price Reporting Authority; effect a substitution of VP Balanced for Commission approval before Notice of Filing and Order Granting VP Advantage. In addition, the substitution of the securities held by the Accelerated Effectiveness of prospectus supplements state that trust. The section further provides that Amendment to OPRA Plan Adopting a Nationwide will not exercise any right the Commission shall issue an order Temporary Capacity Allocation Plan reserved by it under the Contracts to approving such substitution if the impose an restriction or fee on transfers evidence establishes that the May 26, 2000. until at least 30 days after the proposed substitution is consistent with the Pursuant to Rule 11Aa3–2 under the substitutions. protection of investors and the purposes Securities Exchange Act of 1934 13. All Contract Owners have fairly intended by the policies and (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on received a copy of the prospectus for VP provisions of the 1940 Act. May 18, 2000, the Options Price Balanced because the portfolio is Reporting Authority (‘‘OPRA’’) 2 2. Applicants assert that the proposed currently offered as an investment submitted to the Securities and option under all contracts issued substitution meets the standards that the Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or through the Separate Accounts. Commission has applied to past ‘‘Commission’’) an amendment to the 14. Following the establishment of the substitutions. Plan for Reporting of Consolidated Exchange Date, Contract Owners with 3. Applicants assert that the Options Last Sale Reports and interests remaining VP Advantage will investment objectives and policies of VP Quotation Information (‘‘OPRA Plan’’). be advised that the fund will be Advantage and VP Balanced are The proposed OPRA Plan amendment replaced on the Exchanged Date and sufficiently comparable that the would modify the current temporary that they are free to make any allocation investment strategies currently capacity allocation plan for peak usage change changes among the available employed by Contract Owners may be periods, which minimize the likelihood investment options in advance of the maintained after the substitution. Both that during this period the total number Exchange Date. funds seek to provide investors with the of messages generated by the OPRA 15. Within five days of the Exchange benefits of a balanced portfolio of fixed participant exchanges will exceed the Date, all Contract Owners affected by income and equity securities that serves processor’s (i.e., Securities Industry Automation Corporation (‘‘SIAC’’)) the substitution will receive a written as a more conservative alternative to aggregate message handling capacity. confirmation of the substitution. The traditional growth funds and as a more confirmation will state that Contract The Commission is publishing this aggressive alternative to traditional notice and order to solicit comments Owners may transfer all cash value in bond funds. the affected sub-account to any other from interested persons on the proposed available sub-account(s). The 4. Applicants further assert that OPRA Plan amendment and to grant confirmation will reiterate that Contract Owners will benefit from the accelerated approval to the proposed Nationwide will not exercise any right proposed substitution because VP OPRA Plan amendment. Balanced has greater assets than VP reserved by it under the Contracts to I. Description and Purpose of the impose any restriction or fee on Advantage. Accordingly, VP Balanced Amendment transfers until at least 30 days after the should continue to have lower expenses proposed substitution. as a percentage of net asset than does VP OPRA proposes to modify the most 16. The proposed substitution will Advantage, creating the opportunity for recent amendment allocating the take place at relative net asset value better performance. message handling capacity of its with no increase or decrease in the processor among the participant Conclusion 3 amount of any Contract Owner’s policy exchanges. This modification will value. The substitution will not result in Applicants assert, for the reasons 1 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. any additional fees for Contract Owners stated above, that the proposed 2 OPRA is a National Market System Plan nor will current charges increased. substitution is consistent with the approved by the Commission pursuant to Section Contract Owners will not bear any protection of investors and the purposes 11A of the Act and Rule 11Aa3–2 thereunder. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 17638 (Mar. added cost or expense, including any fairly intended by the policy and additional brokerage costs or expenses, 18, 1981). provisions of the 1940 Act and the The OPRA Plan provides for the collection and associated with the proposed requested order approving the dissemination of last sale and quotation information substitution. None of the contractual substitution should be granted. on options that are traded on the member obligations currently assumed by exchanges. The six exchanges that are participants Nationwide will in any way be abridged For the Commission, by the Division of to the OPRA Plan are the American Stock Exchange Investment Management, pursuant to (‘‘AMEX’’); the Chicago Board Options Exchange or modified as a result of the (‘‘CBOE’’); the International Securities Exchange substitution. The proposed substitution delegated authority. (‘‘ISE’’); the New York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’); will in no way alter a Contract Owner’s Margaret H. McFarland, the Pacific Exchange (‘‘PCX’’); and the Philadelphia right to surrender the contract at any Stock Exchange (‘‘PHLX’’). Deputy Secretary. 3 The current temporary allocation program is time prior to or after the substitution in [FR Doc. 00–14247 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] embodied in an amendment to the OPRA Plan accordance with the terms of the BILLING CODE 8010±01±M proposed by OPRA and approved by the contract. Finally, the substitution Commission. Securities Exchange Act Release No. should in no way affect whatever tax 42779 (May 12, 2000), 65 FR 31950 (May 19, 2000) (order approving File No. SR–OPRA–00–04). As benefits Contract Owners currently proposed by OPRA, that program was to expire by enjoy and will not engender any adverse its terms on May 25, 2000. However, in its approval tax consequences. order the Commission modified the OPRA Plan

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36181 commence on May 26, 2000, which is to it in the proposed amendment to be IV. Commission’s Findings and Order the day when ISE is scheduled to acceptable. Granting Accelerated Approval of commence trading, and will continue Prosed Plan Amendment II. Implementation of the Plan until the earlier of the date when OPRA Amendment After careful review, the Commission implements a system upgrade that will finds that the proposed OPRA Plan increase its maximum message handling OPRA believes the proposed amendment is consistent with the capacity from the current 3,540 modification of the temporary capacity requirements of the Act and the rules messages per second (‘‘mps’’) to 8,000 allocation program is necessary and and regulations thereunder.8 mps 4 or August 24, 2000. During the appropriate to avoid delays and queues Specifically, the Commission believes modification provided for in this in the dissemination of options market that the proposed amendment, which amendment, the current allocation will information, which in tern helps to allocates the limited capacity of the continue in effect: from May 26, 2000, achieve the objectives of Section OPRA system among the options through June 22, 2000, ISE will be 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii),6 including assuring the markets during peak usage periods, is allocated 55 mps; from June 23, 2000, availability to brokers, dealers and consistent with Rule 11Aa3–2 under the 9 through July 27, 2000, ISE will be investors of information with respect to Act in that it will contribute to the allocated 110 mps; and from July 28, quotations for and transactions in maintenance of fair and orderly markets 2000, through August 24, 2000, ISE will securities. Accordingly, OPRA requests and remove impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a national market be allocated 165 mps. Each of the the Commission permit the modification system. The Commission notes that the foregoing allocations to ISE is subject to of the proposed allocation program be aggregate message traffic generated by being reduced if, on or before the third put into effect summarily upon the options exchanges is rapidly day preceding the first day preceding publication of notice of this filing, the first day of an allocation period, ISE approaching the outside limit of, and at pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) of Rule times surpasses, OPRA’s systems notifies OPRA that it does not need its 11Aa3–2 7 of the Act, based on a finding full share of capacity for the ensuing capacity. OPRA estimates that its by the Commission that such action is current plans to expand OPRA systems allocation period and agrees to accept a necessary or appropriate in the public specified reduced capacity share. Any capacity will not be completed until interest, for the protection of investors July 17, 2000. Consequently, the reduction in capacity share that may be or the maintenance of fair and orderly agreed to by ISE will be reallocated Commission is concerned that, absent a markets, to remove impediments to, and proportionately to the other exchanges, program to allocate systems capacity perfect the mechanisms of, a national among the options markets, systems and will not affect the capacity share to market system, or is otherwise in queuing of options quotes may be the which ISE is entitled during the next furtherance of the purposes of the Act. norm, to the detriment of all investors allocation period. and other participants in the options OPRA has filed this proposed III. Solicitation of Comments markets. The Commission believes that modification of its temporary capacity Interested persons are invited to the agreed-upon allocation plan is a allocation program as an amendment to submit written data, views, and reasonable means for addressing its national market system plan, and arguments concerning the foregoing, potential strains on capacity. accordingly, is filing the proposed including whether the proposed OPRA The Commission notes that the amendment for Commission review and Plan amendment is consistent with the anticipated enhancements to the OPRA approval pursuant to paragraph (b) of system should increase systems capacity Act. Persons making written Rule 11Aa3–2 under the Act.5 ISE has from 3,540 mps to 8,000 mps. The submissions should file six copies represented to OPRA that it finds the Commission does not, however, believe thereof with the Secretary, Securities capacity share proposed to be allocated that the enhancement will end the need and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth for a capacity allocation 10 as the Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549– amendment as filed by OPRA by extending the imminent move to decimalization and duration of the temporary allocation program for an 0609. Copies of the submission, all the dissemination of quotations with additional 120 days from the date of the order, and subsequent amendments, and all written size will continue to strain OPRA further modified the program by providing an statements with respect to the proposed allocation of OPRA’s capacity to ISE during this systems capacity. For the above reasons, extended period. In its order, the Commission OPRA Plan amendment that are filed among others, the Commission modified stated that any OPRA Plan amendment with the Commission, and all written the temporary allocation proposed by subsequently proposed by OPRA and found to be communications relating to the OPRA to extend its capacity consistent with the Act would supersede the proposed OPRA Plan amendment 11 Commission’s order. OPRA questions the authority allocation. of the Commission to impose such modifications to between the Commission and any the OPRA Plan by order, as opposed to acting by person, other than those withheld from 8 In approving this proposed OPRA Plan rule, which is the procedure established in Rule the public in accordance with the amendment, the Commission has considered its 11Aa3–2(c)(2) for national market system plan impact on efficiency, competition, and capital amendments initiated by the Commission. Because provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). the OPRA Plan amendment proposed in this filing available for inspection and copying in 9 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. would extend the temporary allocation program the Commission’s Public Reference 10 Consequently, the Commission recently until the earlier of August 24, 2000, or the Room. Copies of the filing also will be solicited comment on a proposed amendment to the expansion of OPRA’s capacity to the point where OPRA Plan to adopt an objective capacity allocation the allocation program is no longer needed, and available at the principal offices of formula. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. because it would also provide an appropriate OPRA. All submissions should refer to 42755 (May 4, 2000), 65 FR 30148 (May 10, 2000) allocation of capacity to ISE during this period, File No. SR–OPRA–00–05 and should (File No. 4–434). The comment period on this OPRA believes that the approval of this amendment be submitted by June 28, 2000. proposal expires on June 9, 2000. will obviate the need to resolve the issue of the 11 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42779 Commission’s authority to impose modifications to (May 12, 2000), 65 FR 31950 (May 19, 2000) (‘‘May the OPRA Plan in its May 12 order. 12 order’’). The Commission has authority to 4 OPRA expects this upgrade to go into modify by order an amendment to a national market production on July 17, 2000. 6 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C)(iii). system plan submitted by plan participants as it did 5 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. 7 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. in the May 12 order. Rule 11a3–2(c)(2).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36182 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

The Commission believes that the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE A. Self-Regulatory Organizations’ proposed amendment to the OPRA Plan COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and is consistent with the Act and has Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule determined to substitute the provisions [Release No. 34±42853; File No. SR±AMEX± Change of this proposal for the modifications 00±19] 1. Purpose made by the Commission to OPRA’s previous capacity allocation Self-Regulatory organizations; Notice Active Exchange seats are assigned to a person not a firm. Consequently, when amendment. 12 Therefore, OPRA of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by a person to whom a seat is assigned is capacity should be allocated according the American Stock Exchange LLC to the terms of the capacity allocation absent from the trading floor, the seat Relating to the Establishment of an cannot be used to participate in trading set forth in this amendment. Interim Seat Allocation Program activities on the floor. In effect, at any The Commission finds good cause to May 30, 2000. given time, some measurable percentage accelerate the proposed OPRA Plan of one of the Exchange’s most valuable amendment prior to the date of Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the assets lies dormant and unavailable for publication in the Federal Register. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 use. Therefore, the Exchange is Commission notes that the proposed (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 proposing an Interim Seat Allocation OPRA Plan amendment is intended to notice is hereby given that on April 14, Program which would allow an active mitigate potential disruption to the 2000, the American Stock Exchange LLC member (i.e. the person to whom the orderly dissemination of options market (‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the seat has been assigned and who actively information caused by the inability of Securities and Exchange Commission participates in securities transactions on the OPRA system to handle the (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule the floor of the Exchange) temporarily to anticipated quote message traffic. The change as described in items I, II, and allocate the membership to an interim Commission believes that approving the III, below, which Items have been member when the active member is amendment will provide the options prepared by the Exchange. The absent from the trading floor. The active exchanges and OPRA with an Commission is publishing this notice to member would pay an interim member immediate, short-term solution to a solicit comments on the proposed rule status annual fee of $1,500 and a flat fee of $250 for each allocation. A temporary pressing problem, while giving the change from interested persons. Commission and the options markets allocation may be for a minimum of one additional time to evaluate, and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s day to a maximum of one year. possibly implement, other quote Statement of the Terms of Substance of The interim member would have to be mitigation strategies. In addition, the the Proposed Rule Change approved for membership in accordance with the Constitution and Rules of the limited time frame of this capacity Amex is filing with the Commission Exchange. Once approved, and upon allocation program provides the a proposed rule change to establish an payment of the flat allocation fee and Commission and the options exchanges Interim Seat Allocation Program that submission of the appropriate from to with greater flexibility to modify the would allow a member or member the Exchange’s Membership Services program, as necessary, to ensure the Department, an interim member could fairness of the allocation process to all organization designate one or more iterim members. Thereafter, the member be allocated the membership held by the of the options markets going forward. active member. Contracts made on the The Commission finds, therefore, that or member organization would be permitted to allocate temporarily its trading floor of the Exchange by an granting accelerated approval of the interim member would be considered proposed OPRA Plan amendment is membership, with certain restrictions, to the interim member whenever the contracts made by the active member. appropriate and consistent with Section The active member would also be 13 member or member organization’s active 11A of the Act. responsible for all obligations to the member or nominee is absent from the V. Conclusion Exchange and all obligations to other trading floor. The text of the proposed members resulting from Exchange It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to rule change is available for inspection at transactions or transactions in other Rule 11Aa3–2 of the Act,14 that the the places specified in item IV below. securities conducted by the interim proposed OPRA Plan amendment (SR- II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s member. The Exchange would require OPRA-00-05) is approved on an Statement of the Purpose of, and prior approval of the interim members accelerated basis until the earlier of the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule by lessor. The owner of the membership, rather date when OPRA implements a system Change upgrade that will increase its maximum than the interim member, would be message handling capacity to 8,000 mps In its filing with the Commission, deemed to be the member of the or August 24, 2000. Amex included statements concerning Exchange for purposes of participating in any distribution of the assets and For the Commission, by the Division of the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any funds of the Exchange in the event of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated any voluntary or involuntary final 15 comments it received on the proposed authority. liquidation, dissolution, or winding up Margaret H. McFarland, rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified of the Exchange’s affairs. The owner of Deputy Secretary. the membership or active member, as in Item IV below. Amex has prepared [FR Doc. 00–14262 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the case may be, rather than the interim summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, member, would be the Participant in the BILLING CODE 8010±01±M and C below, of the most significant Exchange’s Gratuity Fund and entitled aspects of such statements. 12 See note 11 supra. to the benefits described in Article IX of 13 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. the Exchange Constitution. In addition, 14 17 CFR 240.11Aa3–2. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). an interim member will not be 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(29). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. permitted to vote the active member’s

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36183 seat or serve on an Exchange committee III. Date of Effectiveness of the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE in the place of the active member.3 Proposed Rule Change and Timing for COMMISSION If an interim member is not allocated Commission Action [Release No. 34±42834; File No. SR±Amex± the membership held by the active Within 35 days of the date of 00±07] member within one year of approval by publication of this notice in the Federal the Exchange’s Membership Services Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice Register or within such longer period (i) Department, the individual’s eligibility of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by as the Commission may designate up to for interim membership would be the American Stock Exchange LLC 90 days of such date if it finds such terminated. To become eligible again for Relating to the Amendment of Rule 126 longer period to be appropriate and interim member status, the individual on a Pilot Program Basis publishes its reasons for so finding, or would have to requalify for membership May 26, 2000. pursuant to Article IV of the Exchange (ii) as to which Amex consents, the Commission will: Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Constitution by repaying all fees, Securities Exchange Act of 1934,1 and passing the test, and updating the (A) by order approve such proposed Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is application. rule change, or hereby given that on February 3, 2000, The Exchange believes that a (B) institute proceedings to determine the American Stock Exchange LLC confluence of competitive factors, such whether the proposed rule change (‘‘Amex’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the as the advent of the International should be disapproved. Securities and Exchange Commission Securities Exchange and the multiple the proposed rule change as described listing of options, coupled with rising IV. Solicitation of Comments in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. seat prices, make it critical for Exchange Interested persons are invited to members to maximize their use of The Commission is publishing this submit written data, views, and notice to solicit comments on the personnel and capital resources. This arguments concerning the foregoing, Interim Seat Allocation Program is an proposed rule change from interested including whether the proposed rule persons. effort by the Exchange to assist its change is consistent with the Act. members in accomplishing that goal. Persons making written submissions I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 2. Statutory Basis should file six copies thereof with the Statement of the Terms of Substance of Secretary, Securities and Exchange the Proposed Rule Change Amex believes that the proposed rule Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., The Exchange proposes to amend change would be consistent with the Washington, D.C. 20549–0609. Copies of Amex Rule 126 on a six month pilot 4 provisions of section 6(b) of the Act in the submission, all subsequent program basis by adding a new general and would further the objectives amendments, all written statements Commentary .03 to implement a 5 of section 6(b)(5) in particular, because with respect to the proposed rule program for processing electronically it is designed to prevent fraudulent and change that are filed with the transmitted orders for the common stock manipulative acts and practices, to Commission, and all written of business corporations admitted to promote just and equitable principles of dealings on the Exchange communications relating to the trade, to remove impediments to and (‘‘eQPrioritysm’’). Below is the text of the proposed rule change between the perfect the mechanism of a free and proposed rule change, which is entirely Commission and any person, other than open market and a national market new. those that may be withheld from the system, and, in general, to protect * * * * * public in accordance with the investors and the public interest; and is .03. Orders Delivered Electronically to not designed to permit unfair provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the Specialist. At all times other than an discrimination between customers, available for inspection and copying in opening or a reopening (Rule 108) or a issuers, brokers, and dealers. the Commission’s Public Reference block sold at a ‘‘clean-up’’ price (Rule Room. Copies of such filing will also be 155), a round lot, regular way order for B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available for inspection and copying at the common stock of a business Statement on Burden on Competition the principal office of the Exchange. All corporation admitted to dealings on the submissions should refer to File No. The Exchange does not believe that Exchange that is sent to the specialist SR–AMEX–00–19 and should be the proposed rule change would result electronically and is executable in any burden on competition that is not submitted by June 28, 2000. according to its terms in whole or in necessary or appropriate in furtherance For the Commission, by the Division of part shall be handled in the following of the purposes of the Act. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated manner. Upon receipt of the electronic authority. 6 order by the specialist’s order book, the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s specialist shall announce the order to Margaret H. McFarland, Statement on Comments on the the crowd and the order shall establish Proposed Rule Change Received from Deputy Secretary. priority with respect to all other bids Members, Participants, or Others [FR Doc. 00–14255 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] and offers. Once the specialist has BILLING CODE 8010±01±M announced the order, members who Written comments were neither have bids or offers incorporated in the solicited nor received. Amex Published quote (‘‘APQ’’ shall not be permitted to withdraw or modify 3 Telephone conversation between Ivonne T. their interest except to provide price Lugo, Assistant General Counsel, Legal and improvement (i.e., an execution between Regulatory Division, Amex, and Michael Gaw, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation, the APQ) to the incoming order. Commission, on May 22, 2000. 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36184 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Following the announcement of the announces the order up to the depth of specialist receives an electronic order to order, the specialist and members in the the quote, or (ii) at an improved price.4 buy 3,000 shares at the market. Once the crowd shall have a brief opportunity to Specifically, the proposed rule change specialist announces the order, no one provide price improvement to the would require that members may not would be permitted to withdraw his or incoming order. In the event that the withdraw or modify their bids and her interest from the APQ except to incoming order is price improved but offers incorporated into the APQ during provide price improvement to the not entirely filled at the improved price, the processing of electronically incoming electronic order. In this the sale shall not remove all bids and delivered orders except to provide price example, the specialist would announce offers, and the incoming order shall improvement. The proposed rule change to the crowd that there are 3,000 shares retain priority over other bids and offers also provides that an incoming to buy. Both the specialist and the up to the full size of the APQ that was electronic order retains priority over broker working the sell order each could displayed at the time of the other bids and offers on the Floor until sell, 1,500 shares to the incoming announcement of the order less any the exhaustion of the APQ displayed at electronic order at an improved price of interest that provided price the time the specialist announces the 201⁄6.6 If, however, the broker in the improvement to the order. In the event electronic order. 5 crowd were unwilling to price improve that the incoming order is larger than An example best illustrates how the the order, and the specialist were the size displayed in the APQ, the order program will work. Assume the APQ is willing to sell, 3,000 at 201⁄16, then the shall be executed according to these 20 to 201⁄8, 3,000 by 3,000 and that the electronic order would buy 3,000 at procedures and any unfilled balance of bid consists of a broker in the crowd 201⁄16 from the specialist. If neither the the order shall be handled according to working a buy order (3,000 shares specialist nor the broker in the crowd the Exchange’s customary auction reflected in the APQ). Assume that the were willing to price improve the order, market processes. offer consists of a customer limit order it would be filled at 201⁄8 against the This Commentary .03 will expire six (1,000 shares) and the specialist as customer limit order and the specialist’s months from the date the SEC approval. principal (2,000 shares). (There is also a offer. The electronic order would have The SEC approved this rule change on broker in the crowd working a sell order priority over all other purchasers at the (insert date of Approval Order when who has chosen not to reflect any of his Amex until the APQ displayed at the known). interest in the APQ.) Assume that the time it is announced is exhausted. * * * * * The Exchange’s proposed eQPriority President, Laurence McDonald, Managing Director, program is not limited to institutional II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Lauren Brophy, Vice President, Amex, and Joshua size orders. In addition, the Exchange’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Kans, Special Counsel, Madge Hamilton, Special program is available with respect to all Counsel, Division of Market Regulation Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule interest displayed in the APQ at the Change (‘‘Division’’), Commission, April 5, 2000. 4 Current practices do not guarantee that an time the order is announced. The In its filing with the Commission, the incoming electronic order will interact against the Exchange believes that eQPriority will Exchange included statements APQ. When an electronic order arrives on the provide investors with the optimal Exchange, the specialist in the security will combination of price improvement concerning the purpose of and basis for announce a crossing market in an attempt to the proposed rule change and discussed provide price improvement to the order. For possibilities together with speed and any comments it received on the example, if an electronic market order to buy certainty of execution. proposed rule change. The text of these arrives on the Exchange, the specialist will The eQPriority program only will announce a bid at a minimal fractional variation apply to the common stock of business statements may be examined at the away from the APQ ask price, and the specialist places specified in Item IV below. The will announce an offer at the APQ ask price. This corporations admitted to dealings. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set gives floor brokers an opportunity to price improve Exchange believes that it would be forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the order by selling to the bid. This method of inappropriate to apply eQPriority to crossing, however, may also permit a floor broker options and equity derivatives because the most significant aspects of such to take the offer despite the presence of the statements. electronic order. If an electronic market order to sell the Amex is not the price discovery arrives, a floor broker similarly has the opportunity market for these securities and the value A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to sell to the bid first. of the underlying instruments may Statement of the Purpose of, and Also, if an electronic order is filled in part at an change very rapidly. The Exchange also Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule improved price, current practice allows floor believes that the program should not Change brokers to interact with the APQ on parity with the remainder of the electronic order. This is because apply to openings and reopenings. 1. Purpose Amex Rules 126(e)(3) and 126(f) provide that each Openings involve a balancing of supply sale cancels all bids and offers. In that case, Amex and demand to reach a consensus price Order execution has become Rules 126(e)(2) and 126(f) require the bids or offers that, by definition, is the best execution. increasingly automated and on parity to be filled as equally as practicable. Conversations between Bill Floyd-Jones, Assistant The program also will not apply to competitive. To encourage investors and ‘‘clean-up’’ sales of blocks. The order flow providers to send orders to General Counsel, Arne Michelson, Senior Vice President, Laurence McDonald, Managing Director, Exchange believes that the current the Exchange, the Amex is proposing to Lauren Brophy, Vice President, Amex and Joshua Kans, Special Counsel Madge Hamilton, Special add a new Commentary .03 to Amex 6 This example presumes that the floor broker and Rule 126. Commentary .03 would be Counsel, Division, Commission, March 31, 2000 the specialist simultaneously sell to the bid. In that effective for a six months pilot period. and April 5, 2000. situation, Amex Rules 126(e)(2) and 126(f) provide 5 The proposed rule change further provides that The commentary is intended to assure that all such bids and offers are on parity and any once the specialist announces the order, the securities to be sold in execution of bush bids or investors who send equity orders to the specialist and members of the crowd will have a offers are divided as equally as practicable between Exchange that their orders will be filled brief opportunity to provide price improvement. If the specialist and the brokers, except when the either (i) at the Amex Published Quote part of the order is filled at an improved price, the specialist has an accumulation of orders on his 3 sale would not remove bids and offers, and the book representing a substantial amount of the (‘‘APO’’) at the time the specialist incoming order retains priority over other bids and security at the same price. Conversation between offers up to the full size of the APQ less any interest Bill Floyd-Jones, Assistant General Counsel, Arne 3 The APQ is the best bid or offer that Amex that provided price improvement. If the incoming Michelson, Senior Vice President, Laurence conveys to the Consolidated Quotation System. order is larger than the size displayed in the APQ, McDonald Managing Director, Amex, and Joshua Conversation between Bill Floyd-Jones, Assistant the unfilled portion will be handled according to Kans, Special Counsel, Madge Hamilton, Special General Counsel, Arne Michelson, Senior Vice the customary auction market procedures. Counsel, Division, Commission, March 31, 2000.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36185 procedure for affecting a clean-up sale at Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of solicit comments on the proposed rule a single price outside the APQ is fairest the submission, all subsequent change from interested persons and to to all parties and, accordingly, does not amendments, all written statements approve the proposal on an accelerated propose to amend this process. with respect to the proposed rule basis. The Exchange is proposing to adopt change that are filed with the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s eQPriority on a six-month pilot program Commission, and all written Statement of the Terms of Substance of basis to assess its benefits and costs. communications relating to the proposed rule change between the the Proposed Rule Change 2. Statutory Basis Commission and any person, other than The CBOE proposes to amend its rules The proposed rule change is those that may be withheld from the governing the settlement procedures for consistent with section 6(b) of the Act public in accordance with the its index options in certain unusual in general and furthers the objectives of provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be circumstances. The text of the proposed section 6(b)(5) in particular in that it is available for inspection and copying in rule change is available at the CBOE and designed to prevent fraudulent and the Commission’s Public Reference at the Commission’s Public Reference manipulative acts and practices, to Room in Washington, D.C. Copies of Room. promote just and equitable principles of such filing will also be available for trade, to remove impediments to and inspection and copying at the principal II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s perfect the mechanism of a free and office of the Amex. All submissions Statement of the Purpose of, and open market and a national market should refer to File No. SR–Amex–00– Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule system, and, in general, to protect 07 and should be submitted June 28, Change investors and the public interest; and is 2000. In its filing with the Commission, the not designed to permit unfair For the Commission by the Division of CBOE included statements concerning discrimination between customers, Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated the purpose of and basis for the issuers, brokers and dealers. authority. proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Margaret H. McFarland, rule change. The CBOE has prepared Statement on Burden on Competition Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 00–14259 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, The proposed rule change will impose BILLING CODE 8010±01±M and C below, of the most significant no burden on competition not necessary aspects of such statements. or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement of the Purpose of, and C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s COMMISSION Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Statement on Comments on the [Release No. 34±42857; File No. SR±CBOE± Change Proposed Rule Change Received from 00±02] Members, Participants or Others 1. Purpose Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice No written comments were solicited Based on recent events, the Exchange of Filing and Order Granting or received with respect to the proposed proposes to change settlement Accelerated Approval of Proposed rule change. procedures for index options when a Rule Change by the Chicago Board primary market for underlying stocks in III. Date of Effectiveness of the Options Exchange, Inc. Governing the an index does not open on the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Final Settlement Value of Index scheduled settlement day. Under such Commission Action Options in the Event of a Primary circumstances, the proposed rule Within 35 days of the date of Market Closure change will allow the use of the next available opening prices for the affected publication of this notice in the Federal May 30, 2000. underlying securities to calculate the Register or within such longer period (i) Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the settlement value of the index options. as the Commission may designate up to Securities Exchange Act of 1934 On Thursday, September 16, 1999, it 90 days of such date if it finds such (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, 2 was feared that the New York Stock longer period to be appropriate and notice is hereby given that on February Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NYSE’’) would not publishes its reasons for so finding or 15, 2000, the Chicago Board Options open for business the next day as (ii) as to which the self-regulatory Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) Hurricane Floyd traveled up the Eastern organization consents, the Commission filed with the Securities and Exchange seaboard. In the event that the NYSE will: Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the had not opened on Friday, September (A) By order approve such proposed proposed rule change as described in 17, an expiration Friday, the settlement rule change, or Items I, II, and III below, which Items of index options and futures contracts (B) Institute proceedings to determine have been prepared by the Exchange. would have been affected. A review of whether the proposed rule change On February 25, 2000, the CBOE this situation demonstrates the critical should be disapproved. submitted Amendment No. 1 to the need for this rule change. proposed rule change. 3 The IV. Solicitation of Comments Current CBOE index option Commission is publishing this notice to Interested persons are invited to settlement rules do not expressly submit written data, views and 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). address a situation when an entire arguments concerning the foregoing, 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. primary market, such as the NYSE, fails including whether the proposed rule 3 In Amendment No. 1, the CBOE corrected the to open for business. The closest change is consistent with the Act. filing number, changing it from SR–CBOE–99–02. applicable rules, such as CBOE Rule Persons making written submissions See letter from Christopher R. Hill, Attorney, Office 24.9(a)(4), provide that a specific of Enforcement, CBOE, to Nancy Sanow, Assistant should file six copies thereof with the Director, Division of Market Regulation, underlying security in an index does not Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, dated February 24 (‘‘Amendment No. open, the last reported sale price of such Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., 1’’). a security will be used to determine the

VerDate 112000 21:25 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36186 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices settlement price of index options. Thus, CME’s settlement rules for the S&P 500 Friday. Even if the NYSE had been if Hurricane Floyd had prevented the future are forward-focused. If a primary closed that day, they could have simply NYSE from opening on Friday, market for a component stock in the exited their stock positions with September 17, the final settlement value S&P 500 Index does not open on the day confidence on Monday simply by of September index options would have scheduled for determination of the Final entering ‘‘Market on Open’’ orders for been established by looking backward to Settlement price of the S&P 500 future, all affected stocks. Further, a forward- the previous day’s closing prices for then the price of that stock is focused settlement rule in cases of NYSE stocks (i.e., the closing prices on determined, for the purposes of primary market closure would also have Thursday, September 16.) calculating the Final Settlement Price of assured convergence at settlement This ‘backward focus’ of the CBOE the future, based on the opening price between the value of index options and index option settlement rules threatened of that stock on the next day that its index futures. to cause severe difficulties during the primary market is open for trading.4 For all the above reasons, there is a Hurricane Floyd situation, both for Thus, if Hurricane Floyd had strong consensus among market investors who traded stock index prevented the NYSE from opening on participants consulted by the Exchange options against the underlying stocks as Friday, September 17, the final that the Exchange should change its well as those who traded the index settlement value of the September S&P index option settlement rules to be options against index futures. Both 500 futures would have been forward-focused, and this proposed rule groups of investors rely upon the final established under CME rules according change achieves that in its amendment settlement value of index options to to the opening price that following of CBOE Rule 24.9(a)(4) and its addition converge with the corresponding values Monday, September 20, of those stocks of the new CBOE Rule 24.7(e). The of the underlying stock index or stock which had not traded on Friday. At the provision set forth in the proposed new index future. For both groups, however, same time, the final settlement value of Rule 24.7(e) would apply to all index the backward focus of the CBOE index the SPX options would have been options traded on the Exchange. In the option settlement rules threatened to established under CBOE rules according event that a primary market for one or prevent this convergence in September. to the closing price of those stocks on more securities underlying a current Many public customers and market Thursday, September 16. In other index does not open for trading on a makers use stock index options to hedge words, the final settlement values of the given day, the price of such securities ‘‘cash’’ positions they hold in the stocks September SPX options and the shall be determined, for purposes of which make up the index. Because September S&P 500 futures would most calculating the current index value at current CBOE settlement rules would likely have differed, rather than expiration, by reference to the opening have looked backwards to the Thursday, converged. price of those securities on the next day September 16, closing prices of NYSE Had this occurred, the Exchange that their primary market reopens for stocks to determine the final settlement believes that it would have affected a trading. value of September stock index options significant number of SPX traders (both This provision also recognizes the if the NYSE had not opened on Friday, public customers and market makers) September 17, investors who wished to authority of the Options Clearing because a lot of them hedge their option Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) to establish a final make sure their stock position positions with S&P 500 futures converged with their option position in settlement value for index options in the contracts. Had the S&P futures and the event of a primary market closure the event of a Friday NYSE closure SPX not converged at expiration on would have had to exit their NYSE stock pursuant to its Rules and By-Laws. The Friday, September 17, these traders proposed rule change makes clear that positions that Thursday. could have faced significant unexpected Obviously, however, no investor such action by the OCC would take exposure to market risk. could know for certain on Thursday precedence in determining any final The problems detailed above can be whether weather conditions on Friday index settlement value. prevented if the CBOE changes its index would prevent the opening of the NYSE. option settlement rules to be forward- 2. Statutory Basis Thus, the backward focus of the current focused. If such a rule had been in place CBOE settlement rule forced investors CBOE believes that the proposed for SPX options on Thursday, who wished to stay hedged to guess changes to CBOE Rules 24.7 and September 16, no public customer or about the future. If they guessed that 24.9(a)(4) are consistent with and in market maker would have been forced Hurricane Floyd would keep the NYSE furtherance of the provisions of section closed on Friday, they would have to to guess on Thursday about the impact 6(b)(5) 5 of the Act. By establishing a exit their stock positions on Thursday. of Hurricane Floyd on Friday. If weather CBOE Rule which defines current index If they guessed that Floyd would not had shut the NYSE down until Monday, option settlement values in the event of close the NYSE, they would hold their September 20, the final settlement value a primary market closure, and does so stock positions until Friday. Either way, of the September SPX options would be with a forward rather than a backward if they guessed wrong, their stock and calculated using the Monday opening focus, this filing will help public option positions would not converge at prices of the NYSE stocks. Any investor customers and market makers alike to be expiration, and they would be exposed using SPX options to hedge stock better able to use stock index options to to the very market risk they had sought positions in the S&P 500 Index could predictably hedge their transactions in to use options to avoid. have held their stock positions until stock index futures and/or the Public customers and market makers they knew what was going to happen on underlying stocks themselves. The that trade index options against stock Exchange believes that this will improve 4 See CME Rule 4003.A. In part, CME Rule 4003.A the efficiency of, remove impediments index futures faced similar difficulties. states, ‘‘If the primary market for a component stock For example, numerous investors trade in the index does not open on the day scheduled to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free the SPX (the index option based on the for determination of the Final Settlement Price, and open market and a national market S&P 500 Stock Index) against the S&P then the price of that stock shall be determined, for system, thus better protecting investors the purposes of calculating the Final Settlement and the public interest. 500 future, which trades at the Chicago Price, based on the opening price of that stock on Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CME’’). the next day that its primary market is open for Unlike CBOE’s settlement rules, the trading.’’ 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36187

3. Statutory Basis requires, among other things, that the It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to 11 The CBOE believes the proposed rule rules of an exchange be designed to section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the change is consistent with and furthers promote just and equitable principles of proposed rule change (SR–CBOE–00– the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 6 of the trade and to protect investors and the 02), as amended, is hereby approved on Act in that it is designed to remove public interest. an accelerated basis. impediments to a free and open market The Commission believes that the For the Commission, by the Division of and to protect investors and the public proposal promotes just and equitable Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 12 interest. principles of trade. In particular, the authority. Margaret H. McFarland, B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposal clarifies index settlement Statement on Burden on Competition procedures in the unusual situation Deputy Secretary. when a primary market where [FR Doc. 00–14257 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] The CBOE does not believe that the component stocks trade is closed on the BILLING CODE 8010±01±M proposed rule change will impose any index settlement day. By way of burden on competition. example, the CBOE discusses a situation C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s in the fall of 1999 when some people SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Statement on Comments on the thought the NYSE would be closed on COMMISSION Proposed Rule Change Received from the settlement day. This closure would [Release No. 34±42850; File No. SR±CBOE± Member, Participants, or Others have affected many index options 00±06] No written comments were solicited traded on CBOE, including S&P 500 or received with respect to the proposed index options. If the market did not Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice rule change. open, CBOE’s settlement rules would of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness have required the Exchange and the of Proposed Rule Change by the III. Solicitation of Comments OCC to look at the previous closing Chicago Board Options Exchange, Interested persons are invited to prices for component stocks that traded Incorporated Relating to Exchange submit written data, views, and on the NYSE. This procedure varied Fees arguments concerning the foregoing, from the settlement procedures of a May 30, 2000. including whether the proposed rule is futures exchange that traded futures on consistent with the Act. Persons making the S&P 500 index. Moreover, the Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the written submissions should file six settlement procedure also placed Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1 2 copies thereof with the Secretary, investors in S&P 500 index options in (‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, Securities and Exchange Commission, the unusual situation of having to guess notice is hereby given that on March 3, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC as to whether the NYSE would open on 2000, the Chicago Board Options 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, the settlement day. By relying on the Exchange, Incorporated (‘‘CBOE’’ or all subsequent amendments, all written opening price of a security on the next ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission statements with respect to the proposed day the primary market is open, the (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed rule change that are filed with the proposal helps clarify CBOE index rule change as described in Items I, II, Commission, and all written settlement procedures and also makes and III below, which Items have been communications relating to the these procedures conform to industry prepared by the CBOE. On April 12, proposed rule change between the practice in the futures markets. Further, 2000, the Exchange submitted Commission and any person, other than the proposal helps reduce investor those that may be withheld from the Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule confusion by implementing rules that public in accordance with the change.3 The Commission is publishing foster investor certainty in the unusual provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be this notice to solicit comments on the situation when a primary market where available for inspection and copying in proposed rule change from interested the Commission’s Public Reference component stocks trade is closed on the persons. index settlement day. Room. Copies of such filing will also be I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s available for inspection and copying at The Commission finds good cause for Statement of the Terms of Substance of the principal office of the CBOE. All approving the proposed rule change the Proposed Rule Change submissions should refer to File No. prior to the thirtieth day after the date SR–CBOE–00–02 and should be of publication of notice thereof in the The Exchange proposes to make submitted by June 28, 2000. Federal Register. A virtually identical certain changes to its fee schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is IV. Commission’s Findings and Order proposal, SR–OCC–00–01, was available at the Office of the Secretary, Granting Accelerated Approval of published in the Federal Register for CBOE and at the Commission. Proposed Rule Change the full 21-day comment period and the Commission received no public After careful review, the Commission comments.9 The current proposal 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). finds that the proposal is consistent mirrors the changes that were proposed 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 7 1 with the requirements of the Act. In by the OCC in SR–OCC–00–01. The 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. particular, the Commission finds the Commission believes, therefore, that proposal is consistent with section 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange corrected granting accelerated approval to the 6(b)(5) 8 of the Act. Section 6(b)(5) the Schedule of Dues and Fees contained in proposed rule change is appropriate and Appendix A to reflect what the Exchange’s fee consistent with section 6 of the Act.10 schedule stated with respect to equity option 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). customer order fees and trade match fees before the 7 In addition, pursuant to section 3(f) of the Act, proposed rule change was filed. See Letter from the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s 9 See Release No. 34–42769 (May 9, 2000), 65 FR Angelo Evangelou, Attorney, Legal Division, CBOE, impact on efficiency, competition, and capital 31036 (May 15, 2000) (order approving SR–OCC– to Jennifer Colihan, Attorney, Division of Market formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 00–01.) Regulation, SEC, dated April 11, 2000 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 10 15 U.S.C. 78f. (‘‘Amendment No. 1’’).

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36188 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s any inappropriate or unnecessary For the Commission by the Division of Statement of the Purpose of, and burden on competition. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule authority.9 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Change Margaret H. McFarland, Statement on Comments on the Deputy Secretary. In its filing with the Commission, the Proposed Rule Change Received from [FR Doc. 00–14260 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] CBOE included statements concerning Members, Participants, or Others the purpose of and basis for the BILLING CODE 8010±01±M proposed rule change and discussed any Written comments were neither comments it received on the proposed solicited nor received with respect to SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE rule change. The text of these statements the proposed rule change. COMMISSION may be examined at the places specified III. Date of Effectiveness of the in Item IV below. The CBOE has Proposed Rule Change and Timing for [Release No. 34±42865; International Series prepared summaries, set forth in Commission Action Release No. 1225; File No. SR±DTC±00±07] sections A, B, and C below, of the most The foregoing rule change establishes significant aspects of such statements. Self-Regulatory Organizations; The or changes a due, fee or charged Depository Trust Company; Notice of A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s imposed by the Exchange and, therefore, Filing and Order Granting Accelerated, Statement of the Purpose of and has become effective upon filing Temporary Approval of a Proposed Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Rule Change Relating to the 6 Change Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule Admission of Non-U.S. Entities as 19b–4 7 thereunder.8 1. Purpose Direct Depository Participants At any time within 60 days of the The Exchange is proposing to rescind filing of the proposed rule change, the May 30, 2000. certain customer equity options fees. Commission may summarily abrogate Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the The foregoing fee changes are being the rule change if it appears to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 implemented by the Exchange pursuant Commission that such action is (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on to CBOE Rule 2.22 and will be in effect necessary or appropriate in the public May 18, 2000, The Depository Trust as of March 1, 2000. interest, for the protection of investors, Company (‘‘DTC’’) filed with the The Exchange proposes to rescind or otherwise in furtherance of the Securities and Exchange Commission transaction fees for public customer purpose of the Act.7 (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule equity option orders routed through change as described in Items I and II IV. Solicitation of Comments CBOE’s electronic Order Routing below, which Items have been prepared System (‘‘ORS’’). The Exchange further Interested persons are invited to primarily by DTC. The Commission is proposes to eliminate the trade match submit written data, views, and publishing this notice and order to fee for public customer equity option arguments concerning the foregoing, solicit comments from interested orders routed through ORS. An including whether the proposed rule persons and to grant accelerated, overwhelming majority of CBOE change is consistent with the Act. temporary approval of the proposed rule customer orders are routed via ORS. The Persons making written submissions change through May 31, 2001. Exchange, therefore, believes this fee should file six copies thereof with the change will generate significant savings Secretary, Securities and Exchange I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s for its customers. Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Statement of the Terms of Substance of Manually executed public customer Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of the Proposed Rule Change orders will retain the current $0.09 the submission, all subsequent The purpose of the proposed rule transaction fee and $0.05 trade match amendments, all written statements change is to extend the Commission’s fee. Orders entered into ORS via the with respect to the proposed rule temporary approval of DTC’s admission Exchange’s Booth Entry and Routing change that are filed with the criteria for entities that are organized in System (BERS) after a manual execution Commission, and all written a country other than the United States will also be subject to the current $0.09 communications relating to the (‘‘non-U.S. entities’’). transaction fee and $0.05 trade match proposed rule change between the fee, and shall not be eligible for the fee Commission and any person, other than II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s reduction proposed herein. those that may be withheld from the Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 2. Statutory Basis public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Change The Exchange represents that the available for inspection and copying in In its filing with the Commission, proposed rule change is consistent with the Commission’s Public Reference DTC included statements concerning section 6(b) 4 of the Act in general and Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW, the purpose of and basis for the furthers the objectives of section Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such proposed rule change and discussed any 6(b)(4) 5 in particular because it filing will also be available for comments it received on the proposed provides for the equitable allocation of inspection and copying at the principal rule change. The text of these statements reasonable dues, fees and other charges office of the CBOE.8 may be examined at the places specified among CBOE members. All submissions should refer to the in Item IV below. DTC has prepared B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s file number in the caption above and summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), Statement on Burden on Competition should be submitted by June 28, 2000. and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.2 The Exchange does not believe that 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). the proposed rule change will impose 7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 8 In reviewing this proposal, the Commission has 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). considered its impact on efficiency, competition, 2 The Commission has modified the text of the 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). summaries prepared by DTC.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36189

(A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Solicitation of Comments Statement of the Purpose of, and Statement on Burden on Competition Interested persons are invited to Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule While DTC acknowledges that the submit written data, views, and Change proposed additional admissions criteria arguments concerning the foregoing, The purpose of the proposed rule applicable to non-U.S. entities may including whether the proposed rule change is to extend the Commission’s impose some additional burden, for the change is consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions temporary approval of DTC’s admission reasons stated above, DTC believes that should file six copies thereof with the criteria for non-U.S. entities as direct any such burden necessary and appropriate in furtherance of the Secretary, Securities and Exchange DTC participants. On May 9, 1997, the purposes of the Act. Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Commission originally granted Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of temporary approval through May 31, (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s the submission, all subsequent 3 Statement on Comments on the 1998. The admission criteria are amendments, all written statements Proposed Rule Change Received From designed to permit well-qualified, non- with respect to the proposed rule Members, Participants or Others U.S. entities to obtain direct access to change that are filed with the DTC’s services without requiring the DTC has not sought or received Commission, and all written non-U.S. entities to obtain financial comments on the proposed rule change. communications relating to the guarantees from another DTC III. Date of Effectiveness of the proposed rule change between the participant. According to DTC, DTC Commission and any person, other than established the program for admission Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action those that may be withheld from the of non-U.S. entities in response to public in accordance with the requests it received from certain Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be participants. These participants requires that the rules of a clearing available for inspection and copying in requested that DTC consider changes in agency be designed to assure the the Commission’s Public Reference its admissions policy that would allow safeguarding of securities and funds Room, 450 Fifth Street, NW., non-U.S. affiliates of U.S. participants to which are in the custody or control of Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such become direct participants without the clearing agency or for which it is filing will also be available for having to obtain financial guarantees responsible.5 The Commission finds inspection and copying at the principal from their U.S. affiliates that are DTC that the rule change is consistent with office of the DTC. All submissions participants. The Commission has this obligation because DTC’s admission should refer to file number SR–DTC– subsequently extended its original criteria for non-U.S. entities has been 00–07 and should be submitted by June temporary approval through May 31, designed in a manner that takes into 28, 2000. 2000.4 account jurisdiction differences in It is therefore ordered, pursuant to In November 1999, DTC admitted one regulatory structure and in business section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the operations of non-U.S. entities with non-U.S. entity as a direct participant proposed rule change (File No. SR– respect to DTC’s risk control and under the standards for admission of DTC–00–07) be, and hereby is, management. Furthermore, DTC non-U.S. entities. DTC has received temporarily approved on an accelerated admission criteria should bind non-U.S. several inquiries from other non-U.S. basis through May 31, 2001. entities to DTC’s rules and procedures entities and expects to admit several For the Commission, by the Division of in a manner similar to domestic non-U.S. entities under its standards for Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated participants and should lesson or authority.6 the admission of non-U.S. entities. DTC eliminate the negative effects that is seeking an extension of the temporary Margaret H. McFarland, jurisdictional issues could have on Deputy Secretary. approval so it can complete the DTC’s exercise of its rights against non- [FR Doc. 00–14254 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] admission of these non-U.S. entities and U.S. entities. Therefore, the Commission gain further experience with the finds that the admissions criteria will BILLING CODE 8010±01±M admission standards for non-U.S. assist DTC in assuring the safeguarding entities and with the unique risks posed of securities and funds which are in its by the activities of non-U.S. entities as SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE custody, control, or for which it is COMMISSION direct DTC participants. responsible. DTC believes that the proposed rule DTC has requested that the [Release No. 34±42830; File No. SR±MSRB± change is consistent with the Commission find good cause for 00±7] approving the proposed rule change requirements of section 17A(b)(3)(F) of Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice prior to the thirtieth day after the Act and the rules and regulations of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness publication of the notice of the filing. promulgated because the admission of Proposed Rule Change by the The Commission finds good cause for criteria takes into account the unique Municipal Securities Rulemaking approving the proposed rule change risks to DTC raised by the admission of Board Consisting of Technical prior to the thirtieth day after non-U.S. entities while not unfairly Amendments to Rules A±3, G±15, G± publication of the notice of the filing discriminating against non-U.S. entities 17, and G±18 seeking admission as participants. because accelerated approval will permit DTC to continue to use and May 25, 2000. 3 For a complete discussion of the admission study the effectiveness of its admission Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the criteria, refer to Securities Exchange Act Release criteria for non-U.S. entities without Securities Exchange Act of 1934 No. 38600 (May 9, 1997), 62 FR 27086 [File No. SR– interruption when the current (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 DTC–96–13]. temporary approval of these criteria 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 40064 (June 3, 1998), 63 FR 31818 [File No. SR–DTC–98– expires on May 31, 2000. 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 11] and 41466 (May 28, 1999), 64 FR 30077 [File 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). No. SR–DTC–99–12]. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36190 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices notice is hereby given that on May 2, A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 2. Statutory Basis 2000, the Municipal Securities Statement of the Purpose of, and The Board believes that the proposed Rulemaking Board (‘‘Board’’ or Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule rule is consistent with Section ‘‘MSRB’’) filed with the Securities and Change 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act.10 The Board Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or 1. Purpose further believes that the proposed rule ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change will ensure that existing rule The Board proposes to adopt change as described in Items I, II, and provisions are accurate and technical amendments to Rules A–3, G– III below, which Items have been understandable. prepared by the MSRB. The Board has 15, G–17, and G–18 for the purpose of making certain non-substantive changes. B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s designated the proposed rule change as The proposed amendments to Statement on Burden on Competition constituting a ‘‘non-controversial’’ rule subsections (a)(i), (c)(ii) and (c)(iv) of change under paragraph (f)(6) of rule The Board represents that the Rule A–3 correct an unintended 19b-4 under the Act,3 which renders the proposed rule change will not impose omission from the technical any burden on competition that is not proposal effective upon receipt of this amendments (the ‘‘1999 Technical 4 necessary or appropriate in furtherance filing by the Commission. The 5 Amendments’’), filed with and of the purposes of the Act, because it Commission is publishing this notice to approved by the Commission last year, solicit comments on the proposed rule would apply equally to all brokers, with respect to the definition of public dealers and municipal securities change from interested persons. representatives on the Board and its dealers. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Nominating Committee. The proposed rule change is intended to make the rule C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Terms of Substance of Statement on Comments on the the Proposed Rule Change language consistent with Section 15B(b)(1) of the Act.6 Proposed Rule Change Received From The Board has filed with the The proposed changes to Rule G– Members, Participants or Others Commission a proposed rule change 15(d)(ii) make subsection and paragraph No written comments were solicited consisting of technical amendments to references consistent with the Board’s or received with respect to the proposed Rule A–3, on Board membership; Rule general usage of such references rule change. throughout the rules. G–15, on confirmation, clearance and III. Date of Effectiveness of the settlement of customer transactions with The proposed amendments to Rule G– 17 change certain terminology used in Proposed Rule Change and Timing for customers; rule G–17, on conduct of Commission Action municipal securities business; and Rule the rule from ‘‘municipal securities business’’ to ‘‘municipal securities G–18, on execution of transactions. The Because the foregoing proposed rule activities’’ to avoid any ambiguity with change: (i) Does not significantly affect proposed rule change would become the term ‘‘municipal securities the protection of investors or the public operative on June 1, 2000. business’’ as used in Rules G–37 and G– interest; (ii) does not impose any II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 38. The Board represents that the term significant burden on competition; (iii) Statement of the Purpose of, and ‘‘municipal securities business’’ as used was provided to the Commission for its Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule in Rules G–37 and G–38 has a specific review at least five business days prior Change limited definition, whereas Rule G–17 to the filing date; and (iv) does not uses that term in a manner intended to become operative for 30 days after the In its filing with the Commission, the include all of the municipal securities date of its filing, the Board has MSRB included statements concerning activities of the dealer or its associated submitted this proposed rule change, the purpose of and basis for the persons.7 pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 11 of the proposed rule change and discussed any The proposed amendment to Rule G– Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 12 thereunder, comments it received on the proposed 18 would delete a definition of ‘‘broker’s to become operative on June 1, 2000. At rule change. The text of these statements broker’’ that pre-dated the Commission’s any time within sixty days of the filing may be examined at the places specified definition of that term under Rule 15c3– of the proposed rule change, the in Item IV below. The Board has 1(a)(8)(ii) of the Act.8 Because the Commission may summarily abrogate prepared summaries, set forth in language used to define brokers’ broker such rule change if it appears to the Sections A, B, and C below, of the most differs in the two definitions, the Board Commission that such action is significant aspects of such statements. believes that it is possible that some ambiguity may exist as to whether the forth in the Act and the rules and regulations of the term is intended to cover the same Commission thereunder. Thus, the deletion of the definition of brokers’ broker from Rule G–18 would universe of dealers under the general automatically result in this term having the same federal securities laws and Board rules. meaning as set forth under Rule 15c3–1(a)(8)(ii) of The Board represents that the deletion the Act. 3 17 CFT 240.19b-4(f)(6). of this definition from Rule G–18 would 10 Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act states in 4 Pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6), the Board provided eliminate this potential ambiguity.9 pertinent part that the rules of the Board ‘‘shall be the required five-day advance notice to the designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative Commission of its intent to file the proposed rule acts and practices, to promote just and equitable 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41528 change. In the notice, the Board represented that the principles of trade, to foster cooperation and (June 15, 1999), 64 FR 33334 (June 22, 1999). coordination with persons engaged in regulating, proposed rule change: (1) Will not significantly 6 15 U.S.C. 78o–4(b)(1). clearing, settling, processing information with affect the protection of investors; (2) will not 7 The proposed changes to Rule G–17 are respect to, and facilitating transactions in municipal impose any significant burden on competition; and consistent with similar amendments made to Rules securities, to remove impediments to and perfect (3) will not become operative for thirty days after A–14, A–15, G–3 and G–27 in the 1999 Technical the mechanism of a free and open market in the date of this filing. See letter from Ernesto A. Amendments. municipal securities, and, in general, to protect Lanza, Associate General Counsel, MSRB, to 8 17 CFR 240.15c3–1(a)(8)(ii). investors and the public interest.’’ 15 U.S.C. 78o– Katherine A. England, Assistant Director, Division 9 Rule D–1 provides that, unless the context 4(b)(2)(C). of Market Regulation, Commission, dated April 25, otherwise specifically requires, the terms used in 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 2000. Board rules shall have the respective meanings set 12 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36191 necessary or appropriate in the public filed with the Securities and Exchange quotation size for those securities with interest, for the protection of investors, Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the a price exceeding $200.] or otherwise in furtherance of the proposed rule change as described in (b) No change. purposes of the Act. Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. The II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s IV. Solicitation of Comments Commission is publishing this notice to Statement of the Purpose of, and Interested persons are invited to solicit comments on the proposed rule Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule submit written data, views, and change from interested persons. Change arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s In its filing with the Commission, change is consistent with the Act. Statement of the Terms of Substance of Nasdaq included statements concerning Persons making written submissions the Proposed Rule Change the purpose of and basis for the should file six copies thereof with the Nasdaq proposes an amendment to proposed rule change and discussed any Secretary, Securities and Exchange NASD Rule 6750 that would modify the comments it received on the proposed Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., minimum quotation sizes for securities rule change. The text of these statements Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of quoted at a price exceeding $200 in the may be examined at the places specified the submission, all subsequent OTC Bulletin Board (‘‘OTCBB’’). Below in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared amendments, all written statements is the text of the proposed rule change. summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, with respect to the proposed rule Proposed new language is in italic; and C below, of the most significant change that are filed with the proposed deletions are in brackets. aspects of such statements. Commission, and all written communications relating to the 6750. Minimum Quotation Size A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the Requirements For OTC Equity Securities Statement of the Purpose of, and Commission and any person, other than Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule those that may be withheld from the (a) Every member firm that functions Change as a market maker in OTC Equity public in accordance with the 1. Purpose provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Securities by entering firm quotations into the OTC Bulletin Board Service available for inspection and copying at Nasdaq is proposing to modify the (OTCBB) (or any other inter-dealer the Commission’s Public Reference minimum quotation size for securities quotation system that permits quotation Room. Copies of such filing will also be quoted on the OTCBB that exceed a updates on a real-time basis) must honor available for inspection and copying at price of $200 per share. Nasdaq believes those quotations for the minimum size the principal office of the MSRB. All that this modification is necessary to defined in the table below. In this submissions should refer to File No. correct a previously unforeseen problem regard, it is the market maker’s SR–MSRB–00–7 and should be with the schedule contained in Rule responsibility to determine the submitted by June 28, 2000. 6750, which presently mandates that minimum size requirement applicable securities priced over $200 per share be For the Commission, by the Division of to its firm bid and/or offer in each of its traded in blocks of 50 shares or more.3 Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated registered securities (excluding OTC authority.13 For certain highly priced and/or thinly Equity Securities for which the OTCBB Margaret H. McFarland, traded securities, this rule has had an will not accept firm quotations). undesired and detrimental effect on Deputy Secretary. Depending on the price level of the bid transparency and liquidity. [FR Doc. 00–14248 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] or offer, a different minimum size can BILLING CODE 8010±01±M apply to each size of the market being Rule 6750 was originally approved by quoted by the member firm in a given the Commission in 1993 4 during the security. early stages of the OTCBB service. Prior SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE to implementation of the rule, all priced COMMISSION Price Minimum quotations on the OTCBB were required [Release No. 34±42852; File No. SR±NASD± (bid or offer) quote size to be firm for blocks of 100 shares or 00±17] more. This approach soon proved 0±.50 * ...... 5,000 unworkable for lower priced securities .51±1.00 ...... 2,500 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice for which a quote of 100 shares could of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by 1.01±10.00 ...... 500 10.01±100.00 ...... 200 represent an insignificant aggregate the National Association of Securities 100.01±200.00 ...... 100 dollar value commitment to the market. Dealers, Inc. Relating to Minimum [200.01±+ ...... 50] To remedy this situation, the NASD Quotation Sizes in the OTC Bulletin 200.01±500 ...... 25 implemented this minimum quotation Board 500.01±1000 ...... 10 size rule for securities priced at $200 1000.01±2500 ...... 5 May 30, 2000. 2500.01+ ...... 1 per share and below on a ‘‘graduated’’ Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the or ‘‘tired’’ basis.5 For securities quoted Securities Exchange Act of 1934 * The OTCBB can accept bids/offers ex- pressed in fractions as small as 1/256 or in 3 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 The Commission notes that, in SR–NASD–99– decimals up to six places. In applying the 32, the NASD added a provision to Rule 6750 notice is hereby given that on April 10, price test for minimum quotation size, any in- allowing some Nasdaq officers to modify the 2000, the National Association of crement beyond an upper limit in the right minimum quotation size for securities with a price Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’), hand column will trigger application of the min- greater than $200 per share. See Exchange Act imum quote size for the next tier. For exam- Release No. 41907 (Sept. 23, 1999), 64 FR 52817 through its wholly owned subsidiary the ple, a bid (or offer) of $.505 must be firm for a Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (‘‘Nasdaq’’) (Sept. 30, 1999). size of 2,500 shares. 4 See Exchange Act Release No. 32570 (July 1, 1993), 58 FR 36725 (July 8, 1993). 13 [A Nasdaq officer at the Executive 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 5 This requirement applies only to market makers 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Vice President level or above, within its entering priced quotations. Market makers are 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. discretion, may modify the minimum Continued

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36192 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices at 50 cents per share or less, the market original rule, effectively requiring that (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s maker quoting such security would be each quotation represent trading interest Statement on Comments on the required to honor that quotation for a of approximately $5,000 to $20,000. At Proposed Rule Change Received From minimum of 5,000 shares. This the same time, Nasdaq proposes to Members, Participants, or Others approach was extended up to $200 per delete from Rule 6750 the provision share, with different minimum block granting certain officers of the Nasdaq Written comments were neither sizes at 2,500, 500, 200, and 100 shares. discretionary authority to modify tier solicited nor received. For all quotations exceeding $200 per sizes, as this authority will no longer be III. Date of Effectiveness of the share, the minimum quote size was necessary. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for determined to be 50 shares. Since implementation of this rule, 2. Statutory Basis Commission Action there have been unanticipated changes Within 35 days of the date of to the OTCBB. Among those changes Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the publication of this notice in the Federal has been the quotation of certain Register or within such longer period (i) securities for thousands of dollars per provisions of sections 15A(b)(6) and as the Commission may designate up to share, and, in a few isolated instances, 15A(b)(11) of the Act.7 Section 90 days of such date if it finds such securities quoted in excess of $100,000 15A(b)(6) requires, in part, that the rules per share. The presence of these highly of a registered national securities longer period to be appropriate and priced securities was not considered association be designed, among other publishes its reasons for so finding, or when Rule 6750 was originally things, to prevent fraudulent and (ii) as to which Nasdaq consents, the proposed with the smallest minimum manipulative acts and practices, to Commission will: quotation size of 50 shares. A situation promote just and equitable principals to (A) By order approve such proposed has resulted in which market makers trade, to foster cooperation and rule change, or have been unwilling to enter priced coordination with persons engaged in (B) Institute proceedings to determine quotations for such highly priced and regulating, clearing, settling, processing whether the proposed rule change thinly traded securities for fear of information with respect to, and should be disapproved. potentially significant liability to their facilitating transactions in securities, to proprietary accounts. remove impediments to and perfect the IV. Solicitation of Comments To alleviate the potential exposure of mechanism of a free and open market quoting 50 shares of these highly priced Interested persons are invited to and a national market system, and, in securities, market makers have ceased submit written data, views, and general, to protect investors and the entering quotations and instead post arguments concerning the foregoing, only indications of interest for these public interest; and are not designed to including whether the proposed rule is securities into the OTCBB. While permit unfair discrimination between consistent with the Act. Persons making posting an indication of interest is customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. written submissions should file six permitted in the OTCBB, the purpose of Section 15A(b)(11) requires, among copies thereof with the Secretary, the OTCBB or any inter-dealer quotation other things, that the rules of a Securities and Exchange Commission, medium is to permit multiple market registered national securities association 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC participants to obtain quickly and be designed to produce fair and 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, efficiently the best bid or offer in a informative quotations, to prevent all subsequent amendments, all written security and to execute the transaction fictitious or misleading quotations, and statements with respect to the proposed without unnecessary delay. to promote orderly procedures for rule change that are filed with the Additionally, priced quotations create a collecting, distributing, and publishing Commission, and all written more competitive market and foster quotations. communications relating to the enhanced price discovery, ultimately Nasdaq believes that the proposed proposed rule change between the benefiting the investing public. rule specifically promotes the objectives Commission and any person, other than Recognizing these goals and the of sections 15A(b)(6) and 15A(b)(11), present problems caused by the lack of those that may be withheld from the respectively, by facilitating transactions flexibility in Rule 6750, the NASD public in accordance with the recently proposed and was granted free of impediments to a free and open provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be discretionary authority from the market while producing fair and available for inspection and copying in Commission to modify the tier sizes for informative quotations. The rule will the Commission’s Public Reference securities quoted in excess of $200.6 encourage market makers to display Room. Copies of such filing will also be This authority was conferred to alleviate firm quotations in OTCBB securities, available for inspection and copying at a pressing situation while providing thereby providing increased the principal office of the NASD. All Nasdaq with the necessary time to transparency, competition, and price submissions should refer to File No. formulate and approve a permanent discovery. SR–NASD–00–17 and should be proposal for minimum quotation sizes. B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s submitted by June 28, 2000. Accordingly, Nasdaq now submits this Statement on Burden on Competition For the Commission, by the Division of proposal to modify permanently the tier Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated sizes for OTCBB securities quoted at Nasdaq does not believe that the authority.8 prices in excess of $200 per share. The proposed rule change will result in any Margaret H. McFarland, proposed new tier sizes were formulated burden on competition that is not Deputy Secretary. to comport with the objectives of the necessary or appropriate in furtherance [FR Doc. 00–14250 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] of the purposes of the Act. permitted to enter unpriced indications of interest BILLING CODE 8010±01±M into the OTCBB, see NASD Rule 6520, which are not held to the minimum quotation size standard. 6 See supra note 3. 7 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6) and (11). 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36193

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE includes orders from institutions and the requirements of the Act 5 and the COMMISSION broker-dealers that are not market rules and regulations thereunder makers.4 Currently, the ECN Rule only applicable to a national securities [Release No. 34±42851; File No. SR±NASD± requires ECNs to display orders entered association. In particular, the 99±49] by market makers. Accordingly, the Commission finds the proposal is Self-Regulatory Organizations; proposal would amend the ECN Rule to consistent with the requirements of 6 7 National Association of Securities require ECNs to display in Nasdaq any Sections 11A and 15A(b)(6) of the Dealers, Inc.; Order Approving subscriber orders required under Act. Section 11A(a)(1)(C) 8 provides that Proposed Rule Change Relating to Regulation ATS. it is in the public interest and Regulation ATS Regulation ATS also governs appropriate for the protection of alternative trading systems that are investors and the maintenance of fair May 30, 2000. organized other than as ECNs. and orderly markets to assure: (1) I. Introduction Consequently, these other types of ATSs Economically efficient execution of may be required to display orders in securities transactions; (2) fair On September 21, 1999, the National Nasdaq. The proposal would expand the competition among brokers and dealers; Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. current ECN Rule to encompass these (3) the availability to brokers, dealers (‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’), through its other types of ATSs. These systems will and investors of information with wholly owned subsidiary, the Nasdaq have to fulfill a series of obligations respect to quotations and transactions in Stock Market, Inc. (‘‘Nasdaq’’), filed identical to those imposed on ECNs that securities; (4) the practicability of with the Securities and Exchange display orders in Nasdaq. brokers executing investors orders in the Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’), best market; and (5) an opportunity for pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Locked and Crossed Markets investors’ orders to be executed without Securities Exchange Act of 1934 The Locked and Crossed Markets the participation of a dealer. Section (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19(b)–4 thereunder,2 9 Rule, NASD Rule 4613(e), is designed to 15A(b)(6) requires that the rules of a a proposed rule change to amend NASD limit locked and crossed markets by registered national securities association Rules 4623 and 4613(e) to incorporate imposing on market makers an be designed to prevent fraudulent and the requirements of Regulation ATS into obligation to take reasonable measures manipulative acts and practices, to the NASD’s rules. before locking or crossing a market. promote just and equitable principles of The proposed rule change was Currently included within the definition trade, to foster cooperation and published for comment in the Federal of market maker for purposes of this coordination with persons engaged in Register on March 2, 2000.3 The rule is: (1) Any NASD member that regulating, clearing, settling, processing Commission did not receive any enters orders into an ECN, or (2) any information with respect to, and comments on the proposed rule change. NASD member that operates as an ECN facilitating transactions in securities, to This order approves the proposed rule (when the priced order being displayed remove impediments to and perfect the change. by the ECN has been entered by an mechanism of a free and open market II. Description of Proposed Rule Change entity that is not an NASD member). and a national market system, and, in Reasonable measures include general, to protect investors and the The proposal would amend the NASD public interest; and are not designed to Rules to incorporate the requirements of attempting to execute against the contra side of the market prior to entering an permit unfair discrimination between Regulation ATS. Specifically, the customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. proposal would amend NASD Rule order into Nasdaq’s systems that would 4623, which currently governs lock or cross the market in a security. Recently, the Commission adopted a 10 electronic communications networks The proposal would amend the Locked set of rules under the Act that govern (‘‘ECNs’’) that display orders in Nasdaq and Crossed Markets Rule to capture alternative trading systems, including 11 (‘‘ECN Rule’’), and NASD Rule 4613(e), NASD members that place orders in an ECNs. Regulation ATS governs which governs locked and crossed ATS or operate as an ATS (when the alternative trading systems that choose markets (‘‘Locked and Crossed Market priced order being displayed by the ATS to register as broker-dealers (ATSs). The Rule’’). The amendments would: (1) has been entered by an entity that is not most familiar type of ATS is an ECN; Incorporate into the ECN Rule the new an NASD member). however, the definition of ATS obligations that are imposed on ECNs III. Discussion encompasses other types of trading under Regulation ATS, (2) extend the systems that register as broker dealers. current ECN Rule so that it captures The Commission finds that the For example, an electronic trading other types of alternative trading proposed rule change is consistent with system that only accepts orders from systems (‘‘ATSs’’), and (3) extend the institutions and non-market-maker current Locked and Crossed Market 4 Specifically, if during at least 4 of the preceding broker-dealers would be an ATS. Such Rule to capture other types of ATSs. 6 calendar months an ATS accounts for five percent a system would not be an ECN, or more of the aggregate average share volume in however, because, by definition, an ECN ECN Rule a Nasdaq National Market (‘‘NNM’’) or SmallCap security, the ATS must display the best prices of is a system that accepts orders from Regulation ATS requires ATSs orders entered by all subscribers (e.g., market (including ECNs) that account for a makers, nonmarket makers, and institutions). For 5 The Commission has considered the proposed example, if as calculated on July 1, 1999 an ATS significant percentage of the volume in rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, and capital account for 7% of the trading volume in an NNM formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). a security listed on Nasdaq to display in security during January, February, April, and May 6 15 U.S.C. 78k–1. 1999, the ATS would be required to reflect in the public quotation stream the orders 7 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). Nasdaq its best priced order even if the order is of all subscribers of the ATS, which 8 from an institution or other entity that is not a 15 U.S.C. 78k–1(a)(1)(C). Nasdaq market maker. The Nasdaq securities 9 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). subject to this requirement are being phased-in 10 17 CFR 242.300 et seq. (‘‘Regulation ATS’’). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. according to a schedule set by the Commission. See 11 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40760 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42461 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41297 (April (December 8, 1998), 63 FR 70844 (December 22, (February 25, 2000), 64 FR 11359. 16, 1999), 64 FR 19450 (April 21, 1999). 1998).

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36194 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices market makers.12 The NASD’s current filed with the Securities and Exchange Requirements,’’ to revise the margin rules capture only those ATSs that meet Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’), requirements for exempted borrowers, the definition of ECN. Therefore, the pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the good faith accounts, JBO arrangements, Commission believes that it is necessary Securities Exchange Act of 1934 control and restricted securities, and to amend these rules to capture those (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,2 a options transactions. NASD Regulation ATSs that do not meet the definition of proposed rule change amending the believes that the proposal will conform ECN. margin requirements for exempted NASD Rule 2520 to recent changes to Accordingly, the Commission finds borrowers, good faith accounts, joint NYSE Rule 431 and recently adopted that the proposal is consistent with back office (‘‘JBO’’) arrangements, changes to Regulation T.5 NASD sections 11A(a)(1)(C) and section control and restricted securities, and Regulation is also proposing other 15A(b)(6) 13 because it will permit options transactions. The NASD minor changes to eliminate obsolete Nasdaq to incorporate ATS orders into amended its proposal on June 1, 1999, provisions and correct errors in the text the Nasdaq quote montage and provide July 7, 1999, July 15, 1999, October 7, of NASD Rule 2520. 1999 and April 11, 2000.3 The proposed NASD members with the ability to A. Margin Requirements for Exempted rule change and Amendment Nos. 1, 2, access these orders. In addition, to limit Borrowers and Good Faith Accounts market disruptions caused by locked or and 3 were published for comment in crossed markets, the proposal will the Federal Register on August 11, Under the recent changes to require members that submit orders to 1999.4 The Commission received no Regulation T,6 the Federal Reserve ATSs and ATSs, in certain comment letters on the proposal. This Board has created a new category of circumstances, to take reasonable order approves the proposed rule account called the ‘‘good faith account’’ measures before locking or crossing a change, as amended. In addition, the to replace the ‘‘non-purpose,’’ market. Finally, the amendments will Commission is publishing notice to ‘‘arbitrage,’’ and ‘‘government incorporate into the NASD’s rules the solicit comments and is simultaneously securities’’ accounts. In the good faith new obligations imposed on ECNs by approving, on an accelerated basis, account, a customer may purchase Regulation ATS. Amendment Nos. 4 and 5. certain securities (exempted and non- equity securities, and money market and IV. Conclusion I. Description of the Proposal exempted securities mutual funds) on It is therefore ordered, pursuant to NASD Regulation proposes to amend ‘‘good faith’’ margin (the amount of Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,14 that the NASD rule 2520, ‘‘Margin margin specified by the creditor in the proposed rule change (SR–NASD–99– exercise of sound credit judgment) or 49) is approved. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). the margin specified by the regulatory 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. authority, whichever is greater. For the Commission, by the Division of 3 See Letter from Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice Regulation T no longer specifies initial Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, authority.15 to Katherine A. England, Assistant Director, margin, payment and liquidation time Margaret H. McFarland, Division of Market Regulation (‘‘Division’’), frames for transactions in these Commission, dated June 1, 1999 (‘‘Amendment No. securities in a good faith account. Deputy Secretary. 1’’); Letter from Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice NASD Regulation believes that [FR Doc. 00–14251 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] President and General Counsel, NASD Regulation, transactions in good faith accounts raise to Katherine A. England, Assistant Director, BILLING CODE 8010±01±M Division, Commission, dated July 7, 1999 the same safety and soundness (‘‘Amendment No. 2’’); Letter from Alden S. questions as transactions in cash and Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, margin accounts. Accordingly, the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE NASD Regulation, to Richard C. Strasser, Assistant proposal amends NASD Rule 2520(c) to COMMISSION Director, Division, Commission, dated July 15, 1999 (‘‘Amendment No. 3’’); Letter from Alden S. require all accounts, including good [Release No. 42858; File No. SR±NASD±99± Adkins, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, faith accounts, to maintain margin as 05] NASD Regulation, to Richard C. Strasser, Assistant required by NASD Rule 2520.7 Cash Director, Division, Commission, dated October 7, accounts will continue to be subject Self-Regulatory Organizations; 1999 (‘‘Amendment No. 4’’); and Letter from Alden S. Adkins, Senior Vice President and General only to certain specific requirements, National Association of Securities Counsel, NASD Regulation, to Katherine A. not to the overall requirements of the Dealers, Inc.; Order Approving England, Assistant Director, Division, Commission, rule. Proposed Rule Change and Notice of dated April 11, 2000 (‘‘Amendment No. 5’’). In addition, NASD Regulation states Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Amendment No. 1 conforms several provisions of NASD rule 2520 to New York Stock Exchange that the Federal Reserve Board Approval of Amendment Nos. 4 and 5 (‘‘NYSE’’) Rule 431. Among other things, established a classification of exempted to the Proposed Rule Change Relating Amendment No. 1 indicates that, for purposes of borrowers which are exempt from to Margin for Exempted Borrowers, the JBO provisions of NASD Rule 2520, the NASD Regulation T. An ‘‘exempted borrower,’’ Good Faith Accounts, Joint Back will interpret the terms ‘‘carrying and clearing member’’ and ‘‘carrying member’’ in the same as defined in Regulation T, is a broker- Office Arrangements and Options manner as the NYSE. Amendment No. 1 also dealer ‘‘a substantial portion of whose Transactions provides additional information regarding the business consists of transactions with proposed changes to the provisions of NASD Rule persons other than brokers or dealers.’’ 8 May 30, 2000. 2520 governing control and restricted securities. The proposal codifies this exemption On January 19, 1999, the National Amendment Nos. 2 and 3 make technical changes to the text of NASD Rule 2520. Amendment No. 4 Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. states that the NASD will allow a six-month phase- 5 12 CFR 220 et seq. The Board of Governors of (‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’), through its in period for implementation of the proposed rule’s the Federal Reserve System (‘‘Federal Reserve wholly-owned subsidiary, NASD requirements relating to JBO arrangements. Board’’) promulgated Regulation T pursuant to Regulation, Inc. (‘‘NASD Regulation’’), Amendment No. 5 incorporates certain proposed Section 7(a) of the Exchange Act, which authorizes maintenance margin requirements for non-equity it to prescribe regulations relating to credit securities and options-related requirements that are extensions on securities. See 15 U.S.C. 78g(a). 12 SEC Rule 11Ac1–1(a)(8), 17 CFR 240.11Ac1– the subject of related rule filings by NASD 6 See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 1(a)(8). Regulation and to ensure consistency with similar System Docket Nos. R–0905, R–0923, and R–0944, 13 15 U.S.C. 78k–1 and 78o–3(b)(6). proposed changes to NYSE Rule 431. 63 FR 2806 (January 16, 1998). 14 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41704 7 See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3. 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). (August 4, 1999), 64 FR 43797 (August 11, 1999). 8 12 CFR 220.2.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36195 from Regulation T by excluding reasonableness of JBO arrangements NASD in writing of the deficiency; and ‘‘exempted borrowers,’’ as defined in under its supervision.’’ 16 (2) resolve the net capital deficiency Regulation T, from the definition of within three business days. If a JBO 2. Original Filing and Amendments Nos. ‘‘customer’’ in NASD Rule 2520(a)(3), broker fails to correct a net capital 1–4 except for the proprietary account of a deficiency within three business days it broker-dealer carried by a member NASD Regulation proposes to amend would not be permitted to accept new pursuant to NASD Rule 2520(e)(6). NASD Rule 2520(e)(6) to provide for transactions through the JBO Thus, proprietary accounts of an JBO arrangements established pursuant arrangement. introducing member that are carried or to section 220.7 of Regulation T. Under A JBO participant must be a registered cleared by another member will remain the proposal, either a carrying and broker-dealer subject to the Net Capital subject to the equity requirements of clearing or carrying broker would be Rule and must maintain an ownership NASD Rule 2520(e)(6). permitted to be a JBO broker.17 A JBO interest in its JBO broker in accordance broker would be required to: (1) Provide with Regulation T. The JBO participant B. Amendments To Provide for Joint written notification to the NASD prior must maintain in the JBO arrangement Back Office Arrangements to establishing a JBO arrangement; (2) a minimum of $1 million in liquidating 1. Background maintain minimum tentative net equity, exclusive of the JBO capital 18 of $25 million as computed participant’s ownership interest in the Section 220.7(c) of Regulation T 9 under the Net Capital Rule or minimum JBO broker required under Regulation T. allows special margin treatment for 19 net capital of $7 million if it is If a JBO participant’s liquidating equity broker-dealers without clearing engaged in the primary business of falls below $1 million, it must cure the operations, known as ‘‘JBO clearing options market maker deficiency within five business days or participants,’’ who invest in a ‘‘clearing 20 accounts; (3) maintain a written risk lose its JBO participant status. Unless and servicing’’ 10 broker-dealer, known analysis methodology for assessing the the JBO participant was an ‘‘exempted as a ‘‘JBO-broker.’’ Under Regulation T, amount of credit extended to each JBO borrower,’’ 21 a JBO participant that lost the JBO participants are not treated as participant; and (4) deduct from its net its JBO participant status would become ‘‘customers’’ 11 of the JBO broker. capital each JBO participant’s haircut subject to the margin requirements As part of a periodic review of its requirement under the Net Capital Rule prescribed for customers in Regulation regulations, in 1995 the Federal Reserve in excess of the equity maintained in the T and other maintenance margin Board proposed an amendment to JBO participant’s account. requirements under NASD Rule 2520.22 Regulation T relating to JBO If a JBO broker’s tentative net capital 12 NASD Regulation will allow a six- arrangements. The Federal Reserve or net capital, whichever applies, falls month phase-in period for Board stated that the proposed below the prescribed requirement, the implementation of the requirements JBO broker must (1) promptly notify the amendment was prompted by the relating to JBO arrangements. NASD concerns of several stock exchanges that Regulation believes that the six-month JBO brokers were extending credit to 16 Id. 17 See Letter from Scott Holz, Counsel, Federal phase-in will allow sufficient time for JBO participants far in excess of their members and member organizations to ownership interests in the JBO broker.13 Reserve Board, to Raymond J. Hennessey, Vice President, NYSE, dated April 16, 1999 (stating that comply with the new capital and risk Under the proposed amendment, the a carrying firm may be considered a clearing and analysis requirements and to implement favorable margin treatment for a JBO servicing firm within the meaning of the JBO provisions of Regulation T). new or make changes to existing arrangement would have been 23 18 arrangements or systems. conditioned on the JBO participant’s The term ‘‘tentative net capital’’ generally refers to net capital before haircuts and undue ownership interest in the JBO broker concentration charges on proprietary securities and 3. Amendment No. 5 being related to the amount of business options positions. Haircuts are specified Amendment No. 5 proposed to transacted through the JBO arrangement. percentages of the market value of a broker-dealer’s proprietary securities by which a broker-dealer incorporate a related rule change (the After Congress enacted the National must reduce its net worth under Exchange Act Rule ‘‘Exempt Account Proposal’’) into the Securities Market Improvement Act of 15c3–1 (the ‘‘Net Capital Rule’’). current proposal.24 Under the Exempt 1996 (‘‘NSMIA’’),14 the Federal Reserve 19 The term ‘‘net capital’’ is defined under the Net Account Proposal, a broker-dealer’s Board stated that it decided not to adopt Capital Rule and is generally calculated by deducting illiquid assets from a firm’s ‘‘net worth,’’ maintenance margin requirement would its proposed amendment to Regulation as determined under Generally Accepted be reduced below the haircut 15 T relating to JBO arrangements. Accounting Principles (GAAP), adding to that requirement under the Net Capital Rule Instead, the Federal Reserve Board amount properly subordinated debt under for certain non-equity securities held in stated that it ‘‘believes it is appropriate Appendix D of the Net Capital Rule, and further deducting haircuts from securities held in the firm’s to rely on the authority of the JBO’s proprietary accounts. 21 The term ‘‘exempted borrower’’ is defined in examining authority to ensure the 20 Under the proposal, the clearance of options section 220.2 of Regulation T. NASD Rule market maker accounts would be deemed a broker- 2520(a)(3), as revised by the current proposal, specifically excludes an exempted borrower from 9 dealer’s primary business if a minimum of 60% of 12 CFR 220.7(c). its definition of customer. 10 the aggregate deductions in its ratio of gross options Regulation T does not define the term ‘‘clearing 22 See Amendment No. 5, supra note 3. and servicing.’’ However, Regulation T describes a market maker deductions to net capital (including 23 See Amendment No. 4, supra note 3. JBO broker as a clearing and servicing firm. gross deductions for JBO participant accounts) are options market maker deductions. Subparagraph 24 In the Exempt Account Proposal (File No. SR– 11 The term ‘‘customer’’ is defined in section (c)(2)(x) of the Net Capital Rule limits the amount NASD–00–08), the NASD proposes to amend NASD 220.2 of Regulation T. of specialist and market maker options positions a Rule 2520(e)(2)(F) and to adopt NASD Rule 12 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve firm may guarantee, endorse or carry to a ratio of 2520(e)(2)(G) to revise the margin requirements for System Docket No. R–0772 (June 21, 1995), 60 FR 10 to one of options market maker and specialist certain non-equity securities held in ‘‘exempt 33763 (June 29, 1995). deductions to net capital. In addition, subparagraph accounts,’’ as defined in the proposal. The NASD 13 Id. (a)(6) of the Net Capital Rule exempts an option filed the Exempt Account Proposal with the 14 National Securities Markets Improvement Act market maker and specialist from the haircut Commission on March 3, 2000. To date, the of 1996, Pub. L. 104–209, 110 Stat. 3416 (October provisions of the Net Capital Rule provided that, Commission has not taken action on the Exempt 11, 1996). among other things, the firm maintains an account Account Proposal. Accordingly, this order does not 15 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve liquidating equity equal to the percentage described approve the Exempt Account Proposal or its System Docket No. R–0772 (April 24, 1996), 61 FR in subparagraph (a)(6)(iii)(A) of the Net Capital application to the margin requirements contained in 20386 (May 6, 1996). Rule. this filing.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36196 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices an exempt account. Under Amendment exceeds the aggregate amount of A. Exempted Borrowers and Good Faith No. 5 to the current proposal, a JBO securities that would be required to Accounts broker would be permitted to support the aggregate credit extended on The Commission finds that it is alternatively deduct from its net capital such control and restricted securities if reasonable for the NASD to amend the difference between a JBO the applicable margin requirement were NASD Rule 2520(c) to apply the existing participant’s account equity and the 50%. Thus, under the proposed rule maintenance margin requirements of maintenance margin requirement under change, the concentration reduction NASD Rule 2520 to transactions in the Exempt Account Proposal, as calculation will be performed on an ‘‘good faith’’ accounts permitted under opposed to the haircut requirement aggregate position that is only as large Regulation T. Although transactions under the Net Capital Rule originally as the collateral necessary to support a permitted in a good faith account will proposed. The NASD stated that this margin loan of 50%. not be subject to the initial margin amendment would establish consistency In addition, the proposed rule change requirements, payment requirements by incorporating the most recent expands the exception in paragraph and liquidation time frames of maintenance margin requirements of the (e)(8) to include all restricted securities Regulation T, as the NASD notes, Exempt Account Proposal into the JBO that are then saleable, including affiliate transaction in a good faith account may 25 filing. securities, pursuant to SEC Rules 144(k), raise the same safety and soundness 145(d)(2), or 145(d)(3). Accordingly, C. Reduced Margin for Specialist, concerns with regard to maintenance those customer-owned, restricted Market Maker, and Broker-Dealer margin as do transactions in margin securities that are then saleable can be Accounts accounts. Accordingly, the Commission sold under SEC Rule 144(k) would be believes that applying the maintenance NASD Rules 2520(e)(5) and (e)(6) subject to the same maintenance margin margin requirements of NASD Rule currently require a carrying broker- requirements that presently apply to 2520(c) to transactions in a good faith dealer to deduct from its net capital the ordinary stock (25%). account will protect investors and the difference between the equity public interest and help to maintain fair maintained in the account of a E. Amendments to Margin Rules Governing Options Transactions and orderly markets by ensuring that specialist, market maker or broker- good faith accounts contain adequate NASD Regulation is proposing to dealer and the required maintenance margin reserves. The Commission notes amend NASD Rule 2520(f)(2) to add margin under NASD Rule 2520. The that it approved a similar change to subparagraphs (L) and (M)(i), which are NASD proposes to amend NYSE Rule 431(c).30 subparagraphs (e)(5) and (e)(6) to identical to current provisions in NYSE 27 In addition, the Commission believes require the carrying broker-dealer to Rule 431(f)(2)(L) and (f)(2)(M)(i). it is reasonable for the NASD to amend deduct from its net capital the Proposed NASD Rule 2520(f)(2)(L) will the definition of ‘‘customer’’ in NASD difference between the equity allow a customer to designate which Rule 2520(a)(3) to codify the NASD’s maintained in the account of a security position in an account will be position that exempted borrowers, as specialist, market maker or broker- utilized to cover the requested margin at defined under Regulation T, will remain dealer and the required haircut in the time the option order is entered, exempt from the requirements of NASD 26 accordance with the Net Capital Rule. provided the member offers such a Rule 2520, except for the proprietary service. Proposed NASD Rule D. Control and Restricted Securities accounts of a broker-dealer carried by a 2520(f)(2)(M)(i) will permit options member pursuant to NASD Rule The ‘‘Concentration Reduction’’ transactions in customer cash accounts 2520(e)(6). The Commission believes provision in NASD Rule if the transaction is permissible under that it is reasonable for the NASD to 2520(e)(8)(C)(ii) is designed to impose section 220.8 of Regulation T. continue to apply the equity increasing margin requirements for II. Discussion requirements of NASD Rule 2520(e)(6) customer positions in control and to the proprietary accounts of broker- For the reasons discussed below, the restricted securities based upon the dealers that qualify as ‘‘exempted Commission finds that the proposed percent of outstanding shares or the borrowers’’ under Regulation T and that rule change, as amended, is consistent percent of average weekly volume that are carried by another NASD member. with the Exchange Act and the rules and the position represented. However, the By continuing to apply the equity regulations under the Exchange Act NASD believes that the provision requirements of NASD Rule 2520(e)(6) applicable to a national securities unintentionally penalizes a customer for to these proprietary accounts, the association. In particular, the maintaining a position that exceeds the Commission believes that the proposal Commission believes that the proposed collateral necessary to cover his margin will help to ensure that these accounts rule change is consistent with section loan. To eliminate this unintended contain adequate margin, thereby 15A(b)(6) of the Exchange Act,28 which penalty, the proposed rule excludes protecting investors and the public requires the rules of an association be ‘‘excess securities’’ from the interest. The Commission notes that it designed to prevent fraudulent and concentration reduction calculation. approved an identical change to the manipulative acts and practices, to The proposal defines ‘‘excess securities’’ definition of ‘‘customer’’ in NYSE Rule promote just and equitable principles of as the amount of securities, if any, by 431(a)(2).31 which the aggregate position in control trade, and to protect investors and the and restricted securities of any one issue public interest.29 B. JBO Provisions The Commission believes that NASD 27 25 See Amendment No. 5, supra note 3. In Amendment No. 5, NASD Regulation revised Regulation has proposed reasonable 26 For example, in the case of a long position in its proposal to delete proposed subparagraph an equity security, the proposal would require a (f)(2)(M)(ii). On March 31, 2000, NASD Regulation carrying broker to compute its net capital deduction filed a revised version of proposed subparagraph on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. for deficient specialist, market maker and broker- (f)(2)(M)(ii) in File No. SR–NASD–00–15. The 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). dealer accounts based on the 15% haircut Commission has not taken action on that proposal. 30 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40529 requirement of paragraph (c)(2)(vi)(J) of the Net 28 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). (October 7, 1998), 63 FR 55567 (October 16, 1998) Capital Rule, rather than the 25% maintenance 29 In approving the proposed rule changes, the (‘‘1998 Order’’). margin requirement of NASD Rule 2520(c)(1). Commission has considered the proposal’s impact 31 See 1998 Order, supra note 29.

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36197 capital and equity requirements for JBO the minimum standards specified by accordance with the Net Capital Rule.34 brokers and JBO participants. The those sections. The Commission believes that it is Commission also believes that the The Commission believes that the $7 appropriate and equitable for SROs to proposed rule change fulfills the Federal million net capital requirement for JBO require the same maintenance margin Reserve Board’s mandate for the SROs brokers is a reasonable response to the requirements for specialist, market to provide rules that ‘‘ensure the need for a capital cushion for the maker and broker-dealer accounts as reasonableness of JBO arrangements.’’ 32 fluctuations in net capital resulting from JBO participant accounts. With respect to JBO brokers, the the daily changes in JBO participant Commission believes that it is D. Concentration Provisions for Control accounts and would avoid unnecessary and Restricted Securities reasonable for the Association to require and inadvertent violations of the net a JBO broker to: (1) Provide written capital requirements at the times when The Commission believes that it is notification to the Association prior to a firm’s capital needs are more volatile, reasonable for the NASD to permit a establishing a JBO arrangement; (2) such as the week that options expire or firm to deduct the amount of its provide prompt written notification to during severe market stresses. customers’ excess control and restricted the Association if its tentative net securities in determining if a The Commission believes that it is capital or net capital, whichever concentration of control and restricted reasonable for the Association to require applies, falls below the prescribed securities exists for purposes of a JBO broker to be either a clearing and requirements; (3) resolve any net capital deducting from its net capital any carrying, clearing, or carrying firm in deficiency within three business days or margin deficiencies in a customer’s accordance with the requirements under not be permitted to accept additional account under subparagraph (e)(8)(B)(i) Regulation T and the Federal Reserve transactions through the JBO of NASD Rule 2520. Excess securities Board’s applicable interpretations. arrangement; (4) maintain a written risk includes securities by which a analysis methodology for assessing the With respect to JBO participants, the customer’s aggregate position in control amount of credit extended to each JBO Commission believes that it is and restricted securities of any one issue participant; and (5) deduct from its net reasonable for the Association to require exceeds the aggregate amount of capital each JBO participant’s haircut a JBO participant to: (1) Be a registered securities that would be required to requirement in excess of the equity broker-dealer subject to the Net Capital support the aggregate credit extended on maintained in the JBO participant’s Rule; (2) maintain an ownership interest those securities, assuming a 50% margin account.33 In addition, the Commission in the JBO Broker in accordance with requirement. believes that it is reasonable for the Regulation T; and (3) maintain a The Commission notes that the Association to require a JBO broker to minimum liquidating equity of $1 current concentration provisions for maintain a minimum of $25 million in million in the JBO arrangement. The control and restricted securities appear tentative net capital or $7 million in net Commission also believes that it is to be inappropriate because they impose capital if the JBO broker’s primary reasonable to require a JBO participant stricter requirements on accounts that business is clearing options market whose liquidating equity falls below the have more control and restricted maker accounts. The Commission also required $1 million to deposit the securities than necessary to collateralize believes that it is reasonable to deem a deficiency within five business days or a credit extension. By limiting the broker-dealer’s primary business to be lose its JBO participant status and determination of whether a the clearance of options market maker become subject to the customer margin concentration of control and restricted accounts if a minimum of 60% of its account requirements under Regulation securities exists to two times the credit aggregate deductions in its ratio of gross T and the other NASD maintenance extension, the proposal would subject options market maker deductions to net margin requirements. these securities to a greater margin capital (including gross deductions for The Commission believes that the requirement based only on financed JBO participant accounts) are options requirement of $1 million equity in the control and restricted securities. The market maker deductions. account is not unreasonable, Commission believes that this is a In addition, the Commission believes considering the lack of regular reasonable and appropriate margin that it is reasonable for the NASD to maintenance margin requirements and requirement. require a JBO broker to immediately the substantial leverage that would be The Commission also believes that it notify the NASD if its tentative net obtained by the JBO participant. is reasonable for the NASD to exempt capital or net capital, whichever The Commission believes that it is affiliate securities from the margin applies, falls below the prescribe important for the Association to be provisions relating to control and minimum levels. The Commission also adequately prepared to implement and restricted securities provided that the believes that it is reasonable for a JBO monitor the revised rules. Therefore, the securities otherwise meet the broker to be subject to the equity capital Commission believes that it is requirements of subparagraph (e)(8)(D), withdrawal restrictions of paragraph (e) appropriate to permit firms to allow a including that: (1) The securities are of the Net Capital Rule and the six-month phase-in of these new rules considered then saleable under prohibitions against the reduction, relating to JBO arrangements. Securities Act Rule 144(k), Securities prepayment, and repayment of Act Rule 145(d)(2) or Securities Act C. Reduced Margin for Specialist, subordination debt of paragraph (b) of Rule 145(d)(3); and (2) the issuer is Market Maker and Broker-Dealer Appendix D of the Net Capital Rule, as current in its filings pursuant to the Accounts if the firm’s net capital would be below continuous disclosure system under the The Commission believes that it is Act. 32 See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Docket No. R–0772 (April 24, 1996), 61 FR reasonable to require a broker-dealer to The Commission notes that its 20386 (May 6, 1996). deduct from its net capital the interpretations under Securities Act 33 To date, the Commission has not taken action difference between the equity on the NASD’s Exempt Account Proposal. maintained in the account of a 34 As noted above, this order does not approve Accordingly, this order does not approve the NASD’s Exempt Account Proposal on its Exempt Account Proposal or its application to the specialist, market maker and broker- application to the margin requirements contained in margin amendments contained in this filing. dealer and the required haircut in this filing.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36198 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Rule 144(k) may, under certain new rules relating to JBO arrangements. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE circumstances, permit a broker-dealer to Amendment No. 5 clarifies the proposal COMMISSION sell control and restricted securities of by incorporating references to the [Release No. 34±42876; File No. SR±NASD± an affiliate in default without regard to Exempt Account Proposal, and deleting 99±69] the volume and other restrictions a proposed change to NASD Rule imposed on affiliates, In addition, 2520(f)(2)(m)(ii), which has been Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice subparagraph (d)(3)(iv) of Securities Act superseded by a change to subparagraph of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by Rule 144 permits a broker-dealer to (f)(2)(m)(ii) proposed in File No. SR– the National Association of Securities ‘‘tack’’ the ownership period of an NASD–00–15. Accordingly, the Dealers, Inc. Clarifying Certain Listing affiliate in default to its own for Commission finds it is consistent with Standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market, purposes of determining if the time sections 6(b)(5) and 19(b) of the Inc. conditions of Securities Act Rule 144(k) are met. Accordingly, the Commission Exchange Act to approve Amendment May 31, 2000. believes that it is appropriate for Nos. 4 and 5 on an accelerated basis. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the affiliate securities, which otherwise III. Solicitation of Comments Securities Exchange Act of 1934 meet the requirements subparagraph (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 (e)(8)(D), to be exempt from the Interested persons are invited to notice is hereby given that on November maintenance margin rules for control submit written data, views and 22, 1999, the National Association of and restricted securities. arguments concerning Amendment Nos. Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’ or 4 and 5, including whether Amendment ‘‘Association’’) through its wholly E. Amendments to Margin Rules owned subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Governing Options Transactions Nos. 4 and 5 are consistent with the Act. Persons making written submissions Market, Inc. (‘‘Nasdaq’’), filed with the The NASD proposes to amend Rule should file six copies thereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission 2520(f)(2) to add subsections (L) and Secretary, Securities and Exchange (‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed (M)(i). Section 2520(f)(2)(L) incorporates rule change as described in Items I, II, Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., the provisions currently contained in and III below, which Items have been Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of Regulation T regarding ‘‘exclusive prepared by Nasdaq. The Association designation’’ that allow a customer to the submissions, all subsequent submitted Amendments No. 1 3 and No. designate which security position in an amendments, all written statements 2 4 to the proposed rule change on April account is to be utilized to cover the with respect to the proposed rule 10, 2000, and April 2000, respectively. required margin at the time an option change that are filed with the The Commission is publishing this order is entered, provided the member Commission, and all written notice to solicit comments on the organization offers such a service. This communications relating to the proposed rule change, as amended, from section merely incorporates existing proposed rule change between the interested persons. provisions of Regulation T into the Commission and any persons, other I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s NASD rule and, accordingly, is than those that may be withheld from Statement of the Terms of Substance of reasonable. The Commission notes that the public in accordance with the the Proposed Rule Change it approved an identical change to NYSE provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Rule 431.35 available for inspection and copying in Nasdaq has filed with the Further, proposed NASD Rule the Commission’s Public Reference Commission a proposed rule change to 2520(f)(2)(M)(i) does not raise new Room, 450 Fifth Street, NW., 1 regulatory issues because it incorporates Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). those provisions of Regulation T that 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. filing will also be available for 3 allow certain defined options-related See Letter to Jack Drogin, Senior Special inspection and copying at the principal Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, transactions to be maintained in a cash office of the NASD. All submissions Commission, from Robert E. Aber, Senior Vice account. The Commission notes that it President and General Counsel, Nasdaq, dated April approved a similar change to NYSE Rule should appropriately refer to SR– 7, 2000 (‘‘Amendment No. 1’’). Amendment No. 1 36 NASD–99–05. clarifies that the proposed time frame for gaining 431. compliance with the continued inclusion market F. Accelerated Approval of Amendment IV. Conclusion capitalization standards applies to issuers listed on both the Nasdaq SmallCap Market and the Nasdaq Nos. 4 and 5 It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to National Market. In addition, Amendment No. 1 The Commission finds good cause for 37 clarifies that the method for regaining compliance Section 19(b)(2) of the Exchange Act, with the continued inclusion requirement for the approving Amendment Nos. 4 and 5 that the proposed rule change, SR– number of market makers set forth in Rule prior to the thirtieth day after the date NASD–99–05, as amended, is approved. 4310(c)(8)(A) applies to issuers listed on both The of publication of notice of filing Nasdaq SmallCap Market and the Nasdaq National therefore in the Federal Register. For the Commission, by the Division of Market. Finally, Amendment No. 1 makes certain Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated technical corrections to the proposed rule change. Amendment No. 4 proposes a six-month 4 authority.38 See Letter to Jack Drogin, Senior Special phase-in of the rule changes relating to Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, JBO arrangements. The Commission Margaret H. McFarland, Commission, from Robert E. Aber, Senior Vice Deputy Secretary. President and General Counsel, Nasdaq, dated April believes that this amendment is 25, 2000 (‘‘Amendment No. 2’’). Amendment No. 2 necessary because it is important for the [FR Doc. 00–14252 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] clarifies that Rule 4310(c)(8)(C) is being amended to NASD and its members to be adequately BILLING CODE 8010±01±M specify time frames for determining when an issuer prepared to implement and monitor the is non-compliant or has regained compliance with the Association’s market capitalization standards. Amendment No. 2 also clarifies that the NASD’s 35 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38708 Rule 4300 series contains the qualification (June 2, 1997), 62 FR 31650 (June 10, 1997) (‘‘1997 requirements for all securities included in The Order’’). Nasdaq Stock Market while the Rule 4400 Series 36 See 1997 Order, supra note 34. As discussed sets forth additional requirements for those above, NASD Regulation withdrew proposed NASD 37 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). securities designated for the Nasdaq National Rule 2520(f)(2)(m)(ii) from the proposal. 38 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Market.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36199 clarify certain provisions of its listing days during the 30 day compliance capitalization shall be determined to standards. Below is the text of the period. exist only if the deficiency continues for proposed rule change. Proposed new (9)–(24) No change. a period of 10 consecutive business language is italicized; proposed (25) Corporate Governance days. Upon such failure, the issuer shall deletions are in brackets. Requirements be notified promptly and shall have a * * * * * period of 30 calendar days from such * * * * * notification to achieve compliance with 4200. DEFINITIONS (A)–(G) No change. the applicable continued inclusion (a) For purposes of the Rule 4000 (H) Shareholder Approval standard. Compliance can be achieved by meeting the applicable standard for Series, unless the context requires (i) Each issuer shall require otherwise: a minimum of 10 consecutive business shareholder approval of a plan or days during the 30 day compliance (1)–(19) No change. arrangement under subparagraph a. (20) ‘‘Market Capitalization’’ means period. below, or prior to the issuance of (E) In the case of ADRs, the the closing bid price multiplied by total designated securities under shares outstanding, including all underlying security will be considered subparagraph b., c., or d. below: when determining the ADR’s common and convertible preferred a. No change. qualification for initial or continued shares (but excluding redeemable b. When the issuance or potential inclusion on Nasdaq. convertible preferred shares, other than issuance will result in a change of preferred stock redeemable solely by the (3)–(20) No change. control of the issuer. (21) Corporate Governance issuer). c. No change. (20)–(36) renumbered as (21)–(37). d. In connection with a transaction Requirements. (b) No change. other than a public offering involving: * * * * * 1. the sale, [or] issuance or potential (A)–(G) No change. 4310. Qualification Requirements for issuance by the issuer of common stock Domestic and Canadian Securities (H) Shareholder Approval (or securities convertible into or To qualify for inclusion in Nasdaq, a exercisable for common stock) at a price (i) Each issuer shall require security of a domestic or Canadian less than the greater of book or market shareholder approval of a plan or issuer shall satisfy all applicable value which together with sales by arrangement under subparagraph a. requirements contained in paragraphs officers, directors or substantial below, or prior to the issuance of (a) or (b), and (c) hereof. shareholders of the company equal 20% designated securities under (a) No change. or more of common stock or 20% or subparagraph b., c., or d. below: (b) No change. more of the voting power outstanding a. No change. b. When the issuance or potential (c) In addition to the requirements before the issuance; or issuance will result in a change of contained in paragraph (a) or (b) above, 2. the sale, [or] issuance or potential control of the issuer; and unless otherwise indicated, a issuance by the company of common stock (or securities convertible into or c. No change. security shall satisfy the following d. in connection with a transaction exercisable common stock) equal to criteria for inclusion in Nasdaq: other than a public offering involving: 20% or more of the common stock or (1)–(7) No change. 1. The sale, [or] issuance or potential 20% or more of the voting power (8)(A) A failure to meet the continued issuance by the issuer of common stock outstanding before the issuance for less inclusion requirements for a number of (or securities convertible into or than the greater of book or market value market makers shall be determined to exercisable for common stock) at a price of the stock. exist only if the deficiency continues for less than the greater of book or market (ii)–(vi) No change. a period of 10 consecutive business value which together with sales by days. Upon such failure, the issuer shall (26)–(28) No change. (d) No change. officers, directors or substantial be notified promptly and shall have a shareholders of the company equals period of 30 calendar days from such 4320. Qualification Requirements for 20% or more of common stock or 20% notification to achieve compliance with Non-Canadian Foreign Securities and or more of the voting power outstanding the applicable continued inclusion American Depositary Receipts before the issuance; or standard. To qualify for inclusion in Nasdaq, a 2. the sale, [or] issuance or potential Compliance can be achieved by security of a non-Canadian foreign issuance by the company of common meeting the applicable standard for a issuer, an American Depositary Receipt stock (or securities convertible into or minimum of 10 consecutive business (ADR) or similar security issued in exercisable common stock) equal to days during the 30 day compliance respect of a security of a foreign issuer 20% or more of the common stock for period. shall satisfy the requirements of 20% or more of the voting power (B) No change. paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), and (d) and (e) outstanding before the issuance for less (C) A failure to meet the continued of this Rule. than greater of book or market value of inclusion requirements for market (a)–(d) No change. the stock. capitalization shall be determined to (e) In addition to the requirements (ii)–(vi) No change. exist only if the deficiency continues for contained in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), (22)–(24) No change. a period of 10 consecutive business and (d), the security shall satisfy the (f) No change. days. Upon such failure, the issuer shall following criteria for inclusion in 4420. Quantitative Designation Criteria be notified promptly and shall have a Nasdaq: period of 30 calendar days from such (1) No change. In order to be designated for the notification to achieve compliance with (2) (A) No change. Nasdaq National Market, an issuer shall the applicable continued inclusion (B) No change. be required to substantially meet the standard. Compliance can be achieved (C) No change. criteria set forth in paragraphs (a), (b), by meeting the applicable standard for (D) A failure to meet the continued (c), (d), (e), (f), or (g) below. Initial a minimum of 10 consecutive business inclusion requirements for market Public Offerings substantially meeting

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36200 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices such criteria are eligible for immediate (a)–(f) No change. A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s inclusion in the Nasdaq National Market Statement of the Purpose of, and (g) American Depositary Receipts upon prior application and with the Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule written consent of the managing In the case of American Depositary Change Receipts, the underlying security will be underwriter that immediate inclusion is 1. Purpose desired. All other qualifying issues, considered when determining the ADR’s excepting special situations, are qualification for continued inclusion on Nasdaq is proposing certain included on the next inclusion date Nasdaq under paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), clarifying, non-substantive amendments established by Nasdaq. (a)(3), (a)(4), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), and to certain provisions of its listing (a)–(c) No change. (b)(5) of this rule. standards. Specifically, the proposed changes will: (1) Define market (d) Rights and Warrants 4460. Non-Quantitative Designation capitalization; (2) codify the time frames (1) Rights or warrants to purchase Criteria for Issuers Excepting Limited for determining compliance with the designated securities may be designated Partnerships continued inclusion requirements for if [the warrants] they substantially meet (a)–(h) No change. market capitalization and number of the above criteria; provided, however, market makers; (3) clarify the need for that they shall not be subject to the (i) Shareholder Approval shareholder approval for a transaction publicly held shares, market value of (1) Each NNM issuer shall require in which the potential issuance of publicly held shares, or bid price shareholder approval of a plan or shares could exceed the applicable requirements and shall not be required arrangement under subparagraph (A) threshold; (4) codify the method used to to meet the criteria set forth in below, or prior to the issuance of determine whether an American paragraph (a)(2), (b)(2), or (c)(1) if designated securities under Depositary Receipt complies with the immediately after the distribution, there subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) below: listing standards; and (5) clarify the are at least 450,000 rights or warrants (A) No change. non-application of the publicly held outstanding. (B) when the issuance or potential shares, market value of publicly held (2) No change. issuance will result in a change of shares, and bid price initial inclusion requirements to rights and warrants to (e) Computations control of the issuer; (C) No change. be listed on the National Market. The computations required by Rules 4310(c)(2)(B)(ii) and (D) in connection with a transaction paragraph (a)(1), (a)(5), and (b)(1) shall 4450(b)(1)(A) set forth the market other than a public offering involving: be taken from the issuer’s most recent capitalization standards for continued financial information filed with Nasdaq. (i) the sale, [or] issuance or potential inclusion on The Nasdaq SmallCap The computations required in issuance by the issuer of common stock Market and the Nasdaq National Market, paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (b)(2), (b)(3), (or securities convertible into or respectively. These rules, however, (c)(1), and (c)(2) shall be as of the date exercisable for common stock) at a price unlike the bid price requirement, do not of application of the issuer. less than the greater of book or market provide time frames for determining Determinations of beneficial ownership value which together with sales by when an issuer is non-complaint or for purposes of paragraphs (a)(2), (b)(2), officers, directors or substantial when it has regained compliance with and (c)(1) shall be made in accordance shareholders of the company equals these standards. Accordingly, Nasdaq 20% or more of common stock or 20% with SEC Rule 13d–3. In the case of proposes to amend Rule 4310(c)(8)(C) 5 or more of the voting power outstanding American Depositary Receipts, the to clarify that a failure to meet the before the issuance; or computations required by paragraphs market capitalization continued (a)(1), (a)(5), and (b)(1) shall relate to the (ii) the sale, [or] issuance or potential inclusion requirement shall result if the foreign issuer and not to any depositary issuance by the company of common deficiency continues for a period of ten or any other person deemed to be an stock (or securities convertible into or consecutive business days and that issuer for purposes of Form S–12 under exercisable common stock) equal to compliance may be regained by meeting the Securities Act of 1933. In the case 20% or more of the common stock or the applicable standard for a minimum of American Depositary Receipts, the 20% or more of the voting power of ten consecutive business days.6 underlying security will be considered outstanding before the issuance for less Furthermore, NASD rules do not define when determining the computations than the greater of book or market value required by paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), of the stock. 5 Although the time frames regarding compliance (a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), (2)–(6) No change. with the continued inclusion market capitalization (b)(6), (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), and (j)–(n) No change. standards are proposed to be set forth only in Rule 4310(c)(8)(A), these time frames, like those for the (c)(6) of this rule. II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s minimum bid price and market value of public (f)–(g) No change. Statement of the Purpose of, and float, are applicable to issuers listed on both The Nasdaq SmallCap Market and the Nasdaq National 4450. Quantitative Maintenance Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Market. Specifically, the Rule 4300 Series contains Criteria Change the qualification requirements for all securities included in The Nasdaq Stock Market while the After designation as a Nasdaq In its filing with the Commission, Rule 4400 Series sets forth additional requirements National Market security, a security Nasdaq included statements concerning for those securities designated for the Nasdaq must substantially meet the criteria set the purpose of, and basis for, the National Market. See Amendments No. 1 and 2, forth in paragraphs (a) or (b), and (c), proposed rule change and discussed any supra notes 3 and 4. 6 Although this proposed rule, like the minimum (d), (e), and (f) below to continue to be comments it received on the proposed bid price requirement, states that compliance may designated as a national market system rule change. The text of these statements be regained by meeting the applicable standard for security. A security maintaining its may be examined at the places specified a minimum of ten consecutive business days, designation under paragraph (b) need in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared issuers are also required to demonstrate more than mere temporary compliance in order to protect the not also be in compliance with the summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, interests of prospective investors. See, e.g., Ryan- quantitative maintenance criteria in the and C below, of the most significant Murphy, Inc., Securities Exchange Act Rel. No. Rule 4300 series. aspects of such statements. 38999 (Sept. 2, 1997).

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36201 market capitalization. In making this time frame requirements for market C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s calculation, Nasdaq has traditionally capitalization purposes, and the fact Statement on Comments on the considered the market value of all that the underlying security should be Proposed Rule Change Received From common and convertible preferred stock considered when determining Members, Participants, or Others (excluding redeemable convertible compliance in the case of ADRs. preferred shares other than preferred Written comments were neither Rule 4420(d)(1) does not currently stock redeemable solely by the issuer). solicited nor received. As such, Nasdaq proposes to codify this reference the initial listing of rights on III. Date of Effectiveness of the definition is proposed Rule 4200(a)(20). the Nasdaq National Market. Rule 4310(c)(8)(A) provides that an Specifically, although the Nasdaq Proposed Rule Change and Timing for issuer that fails to meet the continued National Market continued listing Commission Action standards address both warrants and inclusion requirements for the number Within 35 days of the date of rights, the initial listing standards of market makers has 30 calendar days publication of this notice in the Federal mention only warrants. This Rule also to regain compliance. The rule, Register or within such longer period (i) however, does not indicate how the states that warrants to purchase as the Commission may designate, up to issuer can regain compliance. designated securities may be listed on 90 days of such date if it finds such Consequently, Nasdaq proposes to the Nasdaq National Market provided longer period to be appropriate and amend this rule to provide that that they substantially meet the initial publishes its reasons for so finding, or compliance is achieved by meeting the inclusion requirements applicable to applicable standard for a minimum of (ii) as to which the Association common stock. Consistent with the consents, the Commission will: ten consecutive business days, which is industry practices for pricing this type similar to the method for determining of security, Nasdaq has not historically (A) By order approve such proposed compliance with the bid price required issuers to satisfy the publicly rule change, or 7 requirement. held shares, market value of publicly (B) Institute proceedings to determine Rules 4310(c)(25)(H)(i)(b) and (d), held shares, or bid price initial whether the proposed rule change 4320(e)(21)(H)(i)(b) and (d), and inclusion standards. As such, Nasdaq should be disapproved. 4460(i)(1)(B) and (D) refer only to the proposes to amend this rule to clarify issuance of shares in conjunction with IV. Solicitation of Comments the initial inclusion rules apply to rights the requirement for shareholder approval, while Rules as well as warrants and that issuers are Interested persons are invited to 4310(c)(25)(H)(i)(c)(2), not required to satisfy the publicly held submit written data, views, and 4320(e)(21)(H)(i)(c)(2), and shares, market value of publicly held arguments concerning the foregoing, 4460(i)(1)(C)(ii), require shareholder shares, or bid price initial inclusion including whether the proposed rule approval based on the present or standards with respect to rights or change is consistent with the Act. potential issuance of shares. warrants.8 Persons making written submissions Nevertheless, Nasdaq has consistently 2. Statutory Basis should file six copies thereof with the interpreted the former shareholder Secretary, Securities and Exchange approval rules as including potential Nasdaq believes that the proposed Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, issuances in order to protect rule change is consistent with the Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of shareholders’ right to vote on significant provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the the submission, all subsequent corporate transactions. The proposed Act 9 which requires, among other amendments, all written statements rule changes would therefore conform things, the Association’s rules to be with respect to the proposed rule the language of these rules. designed to prevent fraudulent and change that are filed with the Historically, Nasdaq has looked to the manipulative acts and practices and, in Commission, and all written underlying security of an American general, to protect investors and the communications relating to the Depositary Receipt (ADR) for public interest. As noted above, proposed rule change between the determining compliance with certain Nasdaq’s proposed rule changes are Commission and any person, other than standards (e.g., round lot shareholders, aimed at clarifying certain listing those that may be withheld from the number of shares in the public float, standards, thus providing greater public in accordance with the market value of public float, and market transparency in the rules for issuers and provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be capitalization). Rule 4320 provides the investors. available for inspection and copying in initial and continued listing standards the Commission’s Public Reference for ADRs, but does not make clear B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Room. Copies of such filing will also be whether the underlying security should Statement on Burden on Competition available for inspection and copying at be considered when determining Nasdaq does not believe that the the principal office of the NASD. All compliance. The proposed rule change submissions should refer to the File No. would clarify the continued inclusion proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not SR–NASD–99–69 and should be submitted by June 28, 2000. 7 Although the method of regaining compliance necessary or appropriate in furtherance with the continued inclusion requirement for the of the purposes of the Act. For the Commission, by the Division of number of market makers is proposed to be set forth Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated only in Rule 4310(c)(8)(A), the method for regaining 10 compliance is applicable to issuers listed on both 8 Issuers, however, must continue to comply with authority. The Nasdaq SmallCap Market and the Nasdaq the requirement that there be at least 450,000 Margaret H. McFarland, National Market. As stated previously, the Rule warrants outstanding immediately after the public 4300 Series contains the qualification requirements distribution as set forth in existing NASD Rule Deputy Secretary. for all securities included in The Nasdaq Stock 4420(d)(1). This rule is also being amended to [FR Doc. 00–14280 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] clarify existing Nasdaq policy that there must be Market while the Rule 4400 Series sets additional BILLING CODE 8010±01±M requirements for those securities designated for the 450,000 rights outstanding immediately after the Nasdaq National Market. See Amendments No. 1 public distribution. 10 and 2, supra notes 3 and 4. 9 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6). 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36202 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE on the primary market to Nasdaq using majority of the trades at the time were COMMISSION a special indicator, as designated by the being effected on an agency cross basis. Association. Since 1991, the market has changed in [Release No. 34±42871; File No. SR±NASD± (b)–(e) No Change. 00±21] many ways. In particular, the NASD * * * * * recently amended a number of its rules Self-Regulatory Organization; Notice of to allow certain systems, including the II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Automated Confirmation and Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Statement of the Purpose of, and Proposed Rule Change by the National Transaction System (‘‘ACT’’), to stay Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule open until 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time 5 to Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. Change Relating to Trade-Reporting of facilitate after-hours trading.6 As part of Average-Price Trades In its filing with the Commission, this initiative, the NASD amended Rule Nasdaq included statements concerning 6420 to require members to report May 31, 2000. the purpose of and basis for the within 90 seconds transactions effected Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the proposed rule change and discussed any between 9:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. Prior Securities Exchange Act of 1934 comments it received on the proposed to this change, the 90 second trade- (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 rule change. The text of these statements reporting requirement applied to notice is hereby given that on May 17, may be examined at the places specified transactions effected between 9:30 a.m. 2000, the National Association of in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared and 5:15 p.m. and transaction effected Securities Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’ or summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, between 5:15 and 6:30 p.m. were not ‘‘Association’’), through its wholly and C below, of the most significant subject to 90 second trade reporting owned subsidiary the Nasdaq Stock aspects of such statements. requirements; rather, such transactions Market, Inc. (‘‘Nasdaq’’), filed with the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s were reported the next day (i.e., T+1) on Securities and Exchange Commission Statement of the Purpose of, and an ‘‘as of’’ basis. (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule One effect of this rule change has Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule been to subject transactions that change as described in Items I, II, and Change III below, which Items have been previously were reported on an ‘‘as of’’ prepared by Nasdaq. On May 17, 2000, 1. Purpose basis T+1—because they were effected Nasdaq submitted Amendment No. 1 to The NASD proposes to amend NASD between 5:15 p.m. and 6:30 p.m.—to 90 the proposed rule change. 3 The Rule 6420, Transaction Reporting, to second trade reporting requirements. Commission is publishing this notice to require all transactions in exchange- Recently, the NASD has learned that a solicit comments on the proposed rule listed securities executed in the over- sizable number of trades effected during change from interested persons. the-counter market and done on a the 5:15 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. time period are volume-weighted transactions, I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s weighted average or other special- pricing basis to be reported with a .W which are effected on a principal or Statement of the Terms of Substance of riskless principal basis. These volume- the Proposed Rule Change trade modifier. NASD Rule 6420 sets out NASD weighted trades are often effected at a Nasdaq proposes to amend NASD member reporting obligations for price unrelated to the close (or if Rule 6420, Transaction Reporting, to transactions in exchange-listed effected during the trading day, the last require all transactions in exchange- securities effected in the over-the- sale) on the primary exchange. Because listed securities that are executed on a counter market (i.e, third market these trades are not executed as agency weighted average basis, or effected transaction). NASD Rule 6420(a)(6) crosses and thus not subject to the .W based on other special pricing formulae, requires members to append a special reporting requirement in Rule to be reported with a special indicator. indicator (.W) to a trade report when 6420(a)(6), they are reported to the tape Proposed deletions are in brackets. effecting agency crosses at prices based without a modifier and they affect the * * * * * on average-weighting or other special reporting to the media and vendors of pricing formulae unrelated to the the last sale in the exchanged-listed Rule 6420. Transaction Reporting current or closing price of the security. security. As such, there is the potential (a)(1)–(5) No Change. The NASD adopted this rule in 1994,4 for disorderly markets when the security (6) All members shall report [agency in part, because these weighted-average opens the next day on the primary cross] transactions at prices based on trades were being effected in the third exchange at a price that, although average-weighting or other special market at a price that did not relate to related to the last sale on the primary pricing formulae unrelated to the the closing price on the primary exchange, is unrelated to the last current or closing price of the security exchanges, but such trades affected the reported price that was effected on a reporting of the last sale in the exchange weighted average basis on the previous 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). listed security to the media and day prior to 6:30 p.m. As a short-term 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. vendors. Pursuant to Rule 6420, these method of alleviating confusion before 3 Nasdaq originally filed the proposal on April 14, weighted average or special pricing this rule change could be proposed, the 2000, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act. 15 NASD requested that NASD members U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). On May 17, 2000, Nasdaq formulae trades, when reported with the submitted a letter from Robert E. Aber, Senior Vice .W modifier, do not affect the last sale report these weighted average trades President and General Counsel, Nasdaq, to Alton price. effected between 4:00 and 6:30 p.m. on Harvey, Division of Market Regulation, an ‘‘as of’’ basis, T+1. Commission, amending the proposal (‘‘Amendment According to the NASD, when adopted, the scope of Rule 6420(a)(6) The NASD proposes to amend NASD No. 1’’). In Amendment No. 1, Nasdaq requested Rule 6420 to require all transactions, not that the Commission consider the proposal under was limited to agency cross trades Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act. 15 U.S.C. effected on a weighted average basis or 78s(b)(3)(A). Because Nasdaq amended the proposal 5 All times mentioned in this proposal are Eastern to file it under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, the other special pricing formulae because a Standard times. Commission considers the proposal re-filed as of 6 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42003 the date of the amendment. Therefore, the date of 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 29632 (October 13, 1999), 64 FR 56554 (October 20, 1999) the amendment is deemed the date of the filing of (August 30, 1991), 56 FR 46022 (September 9, 1991) (order approving File No. SR–NASD–99–57 on a the proposal. (order approving File No. SR–NASD–91–37). pilot basis).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36203 just agency crosses, in exchange-listed which it was filed and, since the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE securities that are based on a weighted Exchange provided the Commission COMMISSION average or other special pricing with written notice of its intent to file [Release No. 34±42859; File No. SR±NSCC± formulae, to be reported with the .W the proposed rule change at least five 00±04] modifier. business days prior to the filing date,9 2. Statutory Basis the proposed rule change has become Self-Regulatory Organizations; effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) National Securities Clearing Nasdaq believes that the proposed of the Act 10 and subparagraph (f)(6) of Corporation; Notice of Filing and rule change is consistent with Section Rule 19b–4 thereunder.11 Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed 15A(b)(6) 7of the Act. Among other Rule Change Relating to a Change in At any time within 60 days of the things, Section 15A(b)(6) requires that Fee Schedule the rules of a national securities filing of the proposed rule change, the association be designed to prevent Commission may summarily abrogate May 30, 2000. fraudulent and manipulative acts and such rule change if it appears to the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the practices, to promote just and equitable Commission that such action is Securities Exchange Act of 1934 principles of trade, to foster cooperation necessary or appropriate in the public (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on and coordination with persons engaged interest, for the protection of investors, April 6, 2000, the National Securities in regulating, clearing, settling, or otherwise in furtherance of the Clearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) filed processing information with respect to, purposes of the Act. with the Securities and Exchange and facilitating transactions in Commission (‘‘Commission ’’) the securities, to remove impediments to IV. Solicitation of Comments proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which items and perfect the mechanism of a free and Interested persons are invited to open market and a national market have been prepared primarily by NSCC. submit written data, views, and system and in general to protect The Commission is publishing this arguments concerning the foregoing, investors and the public interest. In notice to solicit comments on the including whether the proposed rule is addition, Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change from interested proposed rule change furthers the consistent with the Act. Person making parties. objective set forth in Section written submissions should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 11A(a)(1)(C)(iii) 8of the Act by ensuring Statement of the Terms of Substance of Securities and Exchange Commission, the availability to brokers, dealers and the Proposed Rule Change investors of information with respect to 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. quotations for and transactions in 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, The proposed rule change consists of securities. Nasdaq believes that all subsequent amendments, all written changes to NSCC’s fee schedule. reporting transactions in exchange- statements with respect to the proposed II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s listed securities that are marked with a rule change that are filed with the Statement of the Purpose of, and special indicator to identify their unique Commission, and all written Statutory Basis for the Proposed Rule pricing formulae is appropriate for communications relating to the Change regulatory purposes and will reduce proposed rule change between the In its filing with the Commission, investor confusion with regard to these Commission and any person, other than NSCC included statements concerning transactions. those that may be withheld from the the purpose of and basis for, the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s public in accordance with the proposed rule change and discussed any Statement on Burden on Competition provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be comments it received on the proposed available for inspection and copying in rule change. The text of these statements Nasdaq does not believe that the the Commission’s Public Reference may be examined at the places specified proposed rule change will result in any Room. Copies of such filing will also be in Item IV below. NSCC has prepared burden on competition that is not available for inspection and copying at summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), necessary or appropriate in furtherance and (C) below, of the most significant of the purposes of the Act. the principal office of the NASD. All submissions should refer to File No. aspects of these statements.2 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s SR–NASD–00–21 and should be (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement on Comments on the submitted by June 28, 2000. Statement of the Purpose of, and Proposed Rule Change Received From Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Members, Participants, or Others For the Commission, by the Division of Change Written comments were neither Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 12 On December 30, 1999, NSCC filed a solicited nor received. authority. Margaret H. McFarland, rule change to amend its fee schedule to III. Date of Effectiveness of the charge fees to members using its Deputy Secretary. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Insurance Processing Services (‘‘IPS’’) Commission Action [FR Doc. 00–14281 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] for the transmission of test, as well as BILLING CODE 8010±01±M production, files.3 These charges Because the foregoing proposed rule became effective on January 3, 2000. change: (1) Does not significantly affect However, in order to encourage industry the protection of investors or the public 9 The Commission notes that Nasdaq gave the participation in pilot test development interest; (2) does not impose any Commission notice of its intent to file the proposed programs, NSCC has determined that it significant burden on competition; and rule change through its original filing of the (3) does not become operative for 30 proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act on 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). April 14, 2000. days from May 17, 2000, the date on 2 The Commission has modified the text of the 10 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). summaries prepared by NSCC. 7 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6). 11 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42336 8 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1)(C)(iii). 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). (January 12, 2000), 65 FR 3514.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36204 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices will not impose test fees on participants IV. Solicitation of Comments rule change as described in Items I and participating with NSCC in pilot test Interested persons are invited to II below, which items have been 2 programs to develop service submit written data, views, and prepared primarily by NSCC. The enhancements or additional IPS arguments concerning the foregoing, Commission is publishing this notice products. Thus a participant in a pilot including whether the proposed rule and order to solicit comments from test program will not be charged for the change is consistent with the Act. interested persons and to grant transmission of pilot test files for the Persons making written submissions accelerated approval of the proposed period of time from the date the should file six copies thereof with the rule change through May 31, 2001. participant commences participation in Secretary, Securities and Exchange I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the pilot program through the date that Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Statement of the Terms of Substance of is the last business day of the calendar Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of the Proposed Rule Change month immediately following the the submission, all subsequent month during which the pilot amendments, all written statements The proposed rule change extends the enhancement or new IPS product is first with respect to the proposed rule temporary approval of additional released by NSCC into production. Any change that are filed with the procedures that govern the placement of current IPS participants participating in Commission, and all written NSCC members on Class A surveillance a prior pilot development program will communications relating to the and the clearing fund deposit and other not be charged for their applicable test proposed rule change between the collateral requirements for such files through April 30, 2000. Thereafter, Commission and any person, other than members. they will be charged in accordance with those that may be withheld from the II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s NSCC’s revised fee schedule. public in accordance with the Statement of the Purpose of, and The proposed rule change is provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule consistent with the requirements of the available for inspection and copying in Change Act, as amended, and the rules and the Commission’s Public Reference In its filing with the Commission, regulations thereunder since it provides Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., NSCC included statements concerning for the equitable allocation of dues, fees, Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such the purpose of and basis for the and other charges among NSCC’s filing also will be available for proposed rule change and discussed any participants. inspection and copying at the principal comments it received on the proposed office of NSCC. All submissions should rule change. The text of these statements (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s refer to File No. SR–NSCC–00–04 and may be examined at the places specified Statement on Burden on Competition should be submitted by June 28, 2000. For the Commission by the Division in Item IV below. NSCC has prepared NSCC does not believe that the summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), proposed rule change will have an of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.6 and (C) below, of the most significant impact on or impose a burden on aspects of these statements.3 competition. Margaret H. McFarland, (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Deputy Secretary. (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Purpose of, and Statement on Comments on the [FR Doc. 00–14249 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Proposed Rule Change Received From BILLING CODE 8010±01±M Change Members, Participants or Others NSCC seeks to extend the temporary No written comments relating to the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE approval of Addendum O, which proposed rule change have been COMMISSION governs the application of Class A surveillance procedures to and the solicited or received. NSCC will notify [Release No. 34±42864; File No. SR±NSCC± the Commission of any written 99±09] additional collateralization comments received by NSCC. requirements for settling members that Self-Regulatory Organizations; engage in certain over-the-counter III. Date of Effectiveness of the National Securities Clearing (‘‘OTC’’) market making activities. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Corporation; Notice of Filing and Order Addendum O is designed to decrease Commission Action Granting Accelerated Approval of a the risks associated with OTC market makers by use of Class A surveillance The foregoing rule change has become Proposed Rule Change Relating to and special collateralization procedures. effective pursuant to Section Additional Procedures for Class A The Commission originally granted 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) 4 of the Act and Rule 19b– Surveillance of Certain Settling temporary approval on May 10, 1996, 4(f)(2) 5 promulgated thereunder Members and to the Collection of and has subsequently extended its because the proposal establishes or Clearing Fund and Other Collateral approval through May 31, 2000.4 changes a due, fee, or other charge Deposits From These Settling Members imposed by NSCC. At any time within 2 In its amendment, NSCC withdrew any sixty days of the filing of such proposed Pursuant to section 19(b)(i) of the proposed changes to Addendum O to NSCC Rules rule change, the Commission may Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and requested that the Commission extend the summarily abrogate such rule change if (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on temporary approval of Addendum O in its current form. Letter from Richard Paley, Associate Counsel, it appears to the Commission that such July 16, 1999, the National Securities NSCC (May 11, 2000). action is necessary or appropriate in the Clearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) filed 3 The Commission has modified the text of the public interest, for the protection of with the Securities and Exchange summaries prepared by NSCC. investors, or otherwise in furtherance of Commission (‘‘Commission’’) and on 4 For a complete discussion of NSCC’s Class A the purposes of the Act. May 12, 2000, amended the proposed Surveillance procedures and collateralization requirements, refer to Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 37202 (May 10, 1996), 61 FR 24993 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii) 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). [File No. SR–NSCC–95–17]; 38622 (May 19, 1997), 5 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(2). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 62 FR 27285 [File No. SR–NSCC–97–04]; 40034

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36205

NSCC believes that the proposed rule assist NSCC in fulfilling its obligations proposed rule change (File No. SR– change is consistent with the under the Act to safeguard securities NSCC–99–09) be, and hereby is requirements of section 17A of the Act 5 and funds for which it has control of or approved on an accelerated basis and the rules and regulations is responsible for and to protect through May 31, 2001. 7 thereunder because the surveillance and investors and the public interest. For the Commission by the Division of additional collateralization procedures NSCC has requested that the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated will facilitate the safeguarding of Commission find good cause for authority.8 securities and funds which are in its approving the proposed rule change Margaret H. McFarland, custody or control or for which it is prior to the thirtieth day after responsible, and in general will protect publication of the notice of filing Deputy Secretary. investors and the public interest. because accelerated approval will allow [FR Doc. 00–14253 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] NSCC to continue to utilize its Class A BILLING CODE 8010±01±M (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s surveillance procedures, the interim Statement on Burden on Competition collateralization policy, and the NSCC does not believe that the alternative clearing fund formula SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE proposed rule change will have an without interruption until it makes a COMMISSION impact on or impose a burden on filing requesting permanent approval of competition. the rule change. The Commission finds [Release No. 34±42873; File No. SR±NSCC± (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s good cause for granting approval prior 00±07] Statement on Comments on the to the thirtieth day after the date of Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Change Received From publication of the notice because this National Securities Clearing Members, Participants or Others should allow NSCC to continue to protect itself and its participants from Corporation; Notice of Filing and Order No written comments relating to the the potential risks of OTC market Granting Accelerated Approval of a proposed rule change have been making activities without interruption Proposed Rule Change Related to solicited or received. NSCC will notify when the current approval of Certain Mini-Tender Offers the Commission of any written Addendum O expires on May 31, 2000. comments received by NSCC. May 31, 2000. IV. Solicitation of Comments III. Date of Effectiveness of the Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Interested persons are invited to Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Commission Action submit written data, views, and (‘‘Act’’), 1 notice is hereby given that on May 26, 2000, the National Securities Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act arguments concerning the foregoing, Clearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) filed requires that the rules of a clearing including whether the proposed rule with the Securities and Exchange agency be designed to assure the change is consistent with the Act. Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the safeguarding of securities and funds Persons making written submissions which are in the custody or control of should file six copies thereof with the proposed rule change as described in the clearing agency and generally to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Items I and II below, which items have protect investors and the public interest. Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., been prepared primarily by NSCC. The As the Commission previously stated, it Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of Commission is publishing this notice finds that NSCC’s proposed rule change the submission, all subsequent and order to solicit comments from is consistent with these obligations amendments, all written statements interested persons and to grant under the Act because it should help with respect to the proposed rule accelerated approval of the proposal. change that are filed with the NSCC protect itself, its members, and I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission, and all written investors from members that pose an Statement of the Terms of Substance of communications relating to the increased risk because of their the Proposed Rule Change involvement in OTC market making.6 proposed rule change between the Under the proposal, NSCC will Commission and any person, other than The proposed rule change permits continue to have the authority with those that may be withheld from the NSCC to process certain securities respect to members which participate in public in accordance with the which are subject to mini-tender offers OTC market making activities or clear provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be through NSCC’s continuous net for correspondents that engage in such available for inspection and copying in settlement (‘‘CNS’’) system. activity (1) to place such members on the Commission’s Public Reference Class A surveillance, (2) to require such Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s members to post additional collateral Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such Statement of the Purpose of, and with NSCC, and (3) to calculate an filing also will be available for Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule alternative clearing fund requirement inspection and copying at the principal Change office of NSCC. All submissions should for such members when additional risk In its filing with the Commission, refer to File No. SR–NSCC–99–09 and factors are present. Collectively, the NSCC included statements concerning should be submitted by June 28, 2000. higher level of surveillance, the the purpose of and basis for the additional level of collateralization, and It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the proposed rule change and discussed any the alternative clearing fund comments it received on the proposed requirements should help ameliorate rule change. The text of these statements NSCC’s exposure, which in turn should 7 As noted in each of the previous approval orders, prior to filing a proposed rule change may be examined at the places specified seeking permanent approval of the procedures set in Item IV below. NSCC has prepared (May 27, 1998), 63 FR 30277 [File No. SR–NSCC– forth in this temporary approval order, NSCC shall summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), 98–03]; (June 4, 1999), 64 FR 31664 [File No. SR– present to the Commission a more detailed report NSCC–99–06]. of its findings regarding the adequacy of the 5 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. controls and discussing any changes to be made to 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 6 Supra note 4. the procedures. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36206 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices and (C) below, of the most significant III. Date of Effectiveness of the NSCC–00–07) be and hereby is aspects of such statements. 2 Proposed Rule Change and Timing for approved. Commission Action (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Statement of the Purpose of, and The Commission finds that the authority.6 proposed rule change is consistent with Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Margaret H. McFarland, Change the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder and Deputy Secretary. The purpose of the proposed rule particularly with the requirements of [FR Doc. 00–14258 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] filing is to permit NSCC to keep section 17A(b)(3)(F).4 Section BILLING CODE 8010±01±M McDonalds Corp., USX-Maraton GR., 17A(b)(3)(F) requires that the rules of a and Blackrock Inc., securities, which are clearing agency be designed to promote SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE subject to mini-tender offers, in the CNS the prompt and accurate clearance and COMMISSION system. Under normal circumstances settlement of securities transactions. because these mini-tender offers have Allowing these securities which are [Release No. 34±42848; File No. SR±PCX± no protect period, NSCC would exit subject to mini-tender offers to continue 99±18] these securities from CNS. However, to be processed in the CNS system should help ensure the securities will be Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order because of the high trading volume in Approving Proposed Rule Change and these securities and the operational promptly and accurately cleared and settled. Notice of Filing and Order Granting impact exiting this security from CNS Accelerated Approval to Amendment would have on NSCC’s participants, NSCC has requested that the No. 1 to the Proposed Rule Change by NSCC has filed this rule change to allow Commission approve the proposed rule the Pacific Exchange, Inc., Relating to NSCC to continue to process these change prior to the thirtieth day after Facilitation Crosses securities in CNS. If NSCC receives a publication of the notice of the filing. request from a long participant, NSCC The Commission finds good cause for May 26, 2000. approving the rule change prior to the will exit the relevant position and will I. Introduction issue a receive and deliver instruction thirtieth day after publication because such approval will allow NSCC to On June 4, 1999, the Pacific Exchange, naming short participants selected by an Inc. (‘‘PCX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with allocation procedure using the oldest continue to process these securities in the CNS system. the Securities and Exchange short position first. Participants who Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant wish to participate in any of the tender IV. Solicitation of Comments to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities offers must contact NSCC Operations no 1 Interested persons are invited to Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule later than 1:00 PM on Tuesday, May 30, 2 submit written data, views, and 19b–4 thereunder, a proposed rule 2000, so arrangements can be made to arguments concerning the foregoing, change to give member firms a remove the relevant positions from CNS. including whether the proposed rule participation right in trades proposed as NSCC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. facilitation crosses in certain change is consistent with the Persons making written submissions circumstances; and to allow facilitation requirements of the Act and the rules should file six copies thereof with the crosses for broker-dealer orders. Notice and regulations thereunder. In Secretary, Securities and Exchange of the proposed rule change was particular, the proposed rule change is Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., published for comment in the Federal 3 consistent with section 17A(b)(3)(F) of Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of Register on September 21, 1999. On the Act 3 which requires that the rules the submission, all subsequent May 26, 2000, the PCX filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal. 4 No of a clearing agency be designed to amendments, all written statements comments were received on the promote the prompt and accurate with respect to the proposed rule proposal. This order approves the clearance and settlement of securities change that are filed with the proposed rule change, as amended, transactions. Commission, and all written communications relating to the accelerates approval of Amendment No. (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the 1, and solicits comments from interested Statement on Burden on Competition Commission and any person, other than persons on that amendment. those that may be withheld from the II. Description of the Proposal NSCC does not believe that the public in accordance with the PCX Rule 6.47(b) sets forth the proposed rule change will have an provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be procedures by which a floor broker impact on or impose a burden on available for inspection and copying in representing the order of a member competition. the Commission’s Public Reference firm’s public customer may cross it with Room, 450 Fifth Street, NW, (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s a contra side order provided by the firm Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such Statement on Comments on the from its own proprietary account. In filing will also be available for Proposed Rule Change Received from these circumstances, the firm is said to inspection and copying at the principal Members, Participants, or Others be ‘‘facilitating’’ the customer order, and office of NSCC. All submissions should refer to File No. SR–NSCC–00–07 and No written comments have been 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). solicited or received. NSCC will notify should be submitted by June 28, 2000. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). the Commission of any written It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. comments received by NSCC. section 19(b)(2) of the Act,5 that the 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41867 proposed rule change (File No. SR– (September 13, 1999), 64 FR 51171. 4 The substantive modifications of Amendment 2 The Commission has modified the text of the No. 1 are incorporated in the description of the summaries prepared by NSCC. 4 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). proposal in Section II below, and are further 3 15 U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F). 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). discussed in Section III below.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36207 the transaction is called a ‘‘facilitation proposes the facilitation cross at a price class being traded, the guaranteed cross.’’ between the best bid and offer provided participation to which the LMM is Under the current version of the rule, by the crowd in response to his initial ordinarily entitled in such case 11 would a floor broker seeking to execute a request for a market—and the crowd apply only to the number of contracts facilitation cross must first bring the then wants to take part or all of the remaining after all public customer transaction to the trading floor and order at the improved price—the floor orders have been filled and the request a market from the trading broker would be entitled to priority over facilitating firm’s crossing rights have crowd. After receiving bids and offers the crowd to facilitate 40% of the been exercised. Further, the total from the crowd, the floor broker must contracts 7 remaining after any public number of contracts allocated in the propose a price at which to cross the customer orders represented at that aggregate to the facilitating firm and the order that improves upon the price improved price have been satisfied.8 LMM as the result of their guaranteed provided by the crowd. However, before In the case of orders for less than 200 participations could not exceed 40%.12 the floor broker can execute the cross, contracts, the proposed rule change The proposed rule change makes the market makers in the crowd are makes clear that the floor broker would clear, however, that it is not intended to given the opportunity to take all or part be permitted to facilitate a customer prohibit either a floor broker or LMM of the transaction at the proposed price. order by following PCX Rule 6.47(b) from trading more than their percentage Under the current rule, if the crowd procedures, but would not receive any entitlements if the other members of the does not want to participate in the trade, priority over the crowd.9 trading crowd do not choose to trade the floor broker may proceed with the As under the current version of the with the remainder of the order.13 The cross. If the crowd wants to take part of PCX facilitation cross rule, the order proposal further makes clear, in the order, however, the crowd has tickets for both the customer order and accordance with PCX Rule 6.82, that if precedence and the floor broker may the firm’s facilitation order would be the trade takes place at a price other cross only that amount remaining after required under the proposal to display than that of the LMM’s quoted bid or the crowd has taken its portion. If the all the terms of the orders, including offer, the LMM would not be entitled to crowd wants to take the entire order, the any contingencies involving, and all a guaranteed participation.14 floor broker will not be able to cross any related transactions in, either options or The proposed rule change also part of the order. the underlying security. Similarly, the provides that the members of the crowd The proposed rule change, applicable floor broker would continue to be who establish the facilitation market in to both equity options and index required to disclose all securities that response to the floor broker’s initial options,5 would entitle the floor broker, are components of the customer order request would have priority over all under certain conditions, to cross a before requesting the crowd’s market.10 other non-public customer orders 15 that specified percentage of the customer The proposed rule change adds a were not represented in the crowd at the order on behalf of the member firm stipulation that would require the floor time that market was established, except before market makers in the crowd can broker to clearly disclose to the crowd for orders that improve upon those participate in the transaction. This that he is intending to execute a quotes. Further, a floor broker holding a provision would apply only to orders of facilitation cross when he initially asks customer order and a facilitation order 200 contracts or more. The percentage of for its market. Once the trading crowd who calls for a facilitation market would the floor broker’s guarantee would provides that market, it would remain in be deemed to be representing both the depend upon whether the price at effect under the proposal until (a) a customer order and the facilitation which the order is ultimately traded is reasonable amount of time has passed; order, so that the customer order and at the crowd’s best bid or offer in (b) a significant change has occurred in the facilitation order would also have response to the broker’s initial request the price of the underlying security of priority over all other non-public for a market, or at an improved price. the option; or (c) the market is customer orders 16 that were not being First, the floor broker would be improved. ‘‘Significant change’’ would represented in the trading crowd at the granted a right under the proposal to be interpreted on a case-by-case basis by time the market was established. execute a facilitation cross event at the two Floor Officials, based upon the Finally, the proposed rule change price that does not improve upon the extent of recent trading in the option would permit facilitation crosses for best bid or offer provided by the crowd and the underlying security and any broker-dealer orders.17 in response to his initial request for a other relevant factors. market. The proposed rule change The proposed rule change also III. Discussion provides that where the trade takes provides that if the trade takes place at After careful review, the Commission place at the market provided by the the quoted bid or offer of the Lead finds that the proposed rule change is crowd, all public customer orders in the Market Maker (‘‘LMM’’) in the options consistent with the provisions of the Act book 6 and those represented in the applicable to a national securities crowd at the time the market was 7 See Amendment No. 1, which reduces the exchange, particularly those of section established would first need to be proposed percentage guarantee from 50% to 40%. 8 Such orders are included within the meaning of satisfied. Once these public customer 11 See PCX Rule 6.82(d)(1). ‘‘all public customer orders represented in the 12 orders are satisfied, the floor broker trading crowd’’ in the proposed rule text. See Amendment No. 1, concerning proposed would be entitled to facilitate 25% of Telephone conversation with the PCX subsection 6.47(b)(5). 13 the contracts remaining in the customer 9 See Amendment No. 1, concerning proposed Id., concerning proposed subsection 6.47(b)(6). order. subsection 6.47(b)(1). In this case, the members of 14 Thus the LMM participation right is not a The proposed rule change further the trading crowd would have priority over the concern where the facilitating firm receives a 40% floor broker seeking to cross a transaction. crossing right, because that right is granted only provides that if the floor broker Telephone conversation with the PCX. when the trade occurs between the best bid and 10 As codified in PCX Rule 6.46, the floor broker offer given by the crowd, which is by definition at 5 Telephone conversation between Robert P. must make all persons in the crowd aware of his a price other than the LMM’s quoted bid or offer. Pacileo, Senior Attorney, Regulatory Policy, PCX, request for a market, and must allow adequate time 15 See Amendment No. 1, concerning proposed and Ira L. Brandriss, Attorney, Division of Market for a response. In its proposed amendments to Rule subsection 6.47(b)(6). Regulation, the Commission, on May 23, 2000 6.47, the PCX has deleted current references to 16 Id. (‘‘Telephone conversation with the PCX’’). these procedural obligations to avoid redundancy. 17 Current Rule 6.47(b) authorizes facilitation 6 Telephone conversation with the PCX. Telephone conversation with the PCX. crosses only for public customer orders.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36208 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

6(b)(5) 18 and section 6(b)(8) 19 of the In its recent approval of the proposed new rule text that clarify its Act, and the rules and regulations application of the International meaning and thus strengthen the thereunder.20 The Commission believes Securities Exchange (‘‘ISE’’) for proposal.23 Accordingly, the that the proposal will enable the PCX to registration as a national securities Commission finds good cause, better compete with other options exchange, the Commission discussed consistent with Sections 6(b)(5) 24 and exchanges in attracting the order flow of the same concern with respect to the 19(b)(2) 25 of the Act to accelerate broker-dealer firms seeking to facilitate ISE’s proposed ‘‘facilitation approval of Amendment No. 1 to the customer orders, with adversely mechanism,’’ a system designed to effect proposed rule change. impacting the prices those orders a type of facilitation guarantee in an receive. electronic context. The Commission IV. Solicitation of Comments The Commission finds that the PCX’s wrote: Interested persons are invited to proposal to grant participation rights, It is difficult to assess the precise level at under certain conditions, to member submit written data, views, and which guarantees may begin to erode arguments concerning Amendment No. firms seeking to execute facilitation competitive market maker participation and crosses on the Exchange is reasonable. potential price competition within a given 1, including whether it is consistent Currently, PCX market makers have market. In the future, after the Commission with the Act. Persons making written priority rights for the full size of a has studied the impact of guarantees, the submissions should file six copies customer order over the firm that brings Commission may need to reassess the level thereof with the Secretary, Securities a crossing transaction to the PCX floor, of these guarantees. For the immediate term, and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth the Commission believes that 40% is not Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549– as long as the market makers are willing clearly inconsistent with the statutory to trade at the proposed price. standards of competition and free and open 0609. Copies of the submission, all While the proposal entitles the markets.21 subsequent amendments, all written member firm to a specified percentage statements with respect to the proposed By the same token, the Commission of a facilitation transaction when rule change that are filed with the believes that the PCX’s proposed rule executed at the trading crowd’s best bid Commission, and all written change, which allocates no more than or offer, it does not eliminate the communications relating to the 40% of an order to the firm seeking to crowd’s ability to trade with a portion facilitate an order, is not inconsistent proposed rule change between the of the order proposed to be crossed, or with the statutory standard. The Commission and any person, other than even so substantially reduce that ability Commission notes, moreover, that for those that may be withheld from the so as to raise serious concern that the those crossing transactions in which an public in accordance with the proposal would reduce price LMM is entitled to an allocation in provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be competition by the crowd. Moreover, addition to the proposed allocation for available for inspection and copying in the Commission believes that the the facilitating firm, the PCX has the Commission’s Public Reference proposal may contribute to better prices included a provision to limit the Room. Copies of such filing will also be for crossing transactions. Specifically, it combined allocations awarded to the available for inspection and copying at provides an incentive for upstairs firms firm and the LMM an aggregate of no the principal office of the PCX. All to improve on the prices quoted by the more than 40% of the order. submissions should refer to File No. crowd by offering these firms a greater Although facilitation cross rules have participation in the trade when they SR–PCX–99–18 and should be heretofore been limited to public better the crowd’s price. In addition, submitted by June 28, 2000. customer orders, the Commission market makers will always have an believes it is reasonable to permit the V. Conclusion opportunity to improve the market and PCX to allow firms to facilitate orders of compete for a greater portion of the For the reasons discussed above, the broker-dealers—to the degree permitted trade. Commission finds that the proposal is under the proposed rule change—in its In evaluating the proposed rule consistent with the Act and the rules belief that this will enable the PCX to change, the Commission considered, and regulations thereunder. better compete with other exchanges in among other matters, whether the PCX’s attracting order flow to its market. It is therefore ordered, pursuant to proposal to guarantee that a member The Commission finds good cause, Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the firm could cross up to 40% of an order pursuant to section 19(b)(2) 22 of the proposed rule change (SR–PCX–99–18), would reduce the incentive of crowds to Act, for approving Amendment No. 1 to as amended, be and hereby is approved. compete for orders, and thus impair the the proposal prior to the thirtieth day price discovery mechanism of the For the Commission, by the Division after the date of publication of notice of Exchange’s market. of Market Regulation, pursuant to filing thereof in the Federal Register. delegated authority. 26 Amendment No. 1 includes the 18 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Section 6(b)(5) requires that Margaret H. McFarland, the rules of a national securities exchange be provisions described above that limit designed to, among other things, promote just and the total percentage of an order that may Deputy Secretary. equitable principles of trade, remove impediments be guaranteed to no more than 40%, a [FR Doc. 00–14256 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open percentage that the Commission has market, and, in general, to protect investors and the BILLING CODE 8010±01±M public interest. It also requires that those rules not previously found consistent with the be designed to permit unfair discrimination Act. It also clarifies the application of between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. the facilitation cross rule, as amended 19 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). Section 6(b)(8) requires that by the proposal, for orders of less than 23 Among these is a textual revision that makes the rules of the exchange do not impose any burden 200 contracts. Amendment No. 1 further clear that members of the trading crowd who on competition not necessary to appropriate in established the facilitation market will not maintain furtherance of the purposes of the Act. includes several changes to the priority over any order that improves the market. 20 In approving this proposal, the Commission has 24 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). considered the proposed rule’s impact on 21 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 42455 efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 (February 24, 2000), 65 FR 11388 (March 2, 2000). 25 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). U.S.C. 78c(f). 22 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 26 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36209

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE indirectly, any financial interest or The Phlx states that this proposed rule COMMISSION power to make investment decisions. change would aid the investigative (b) Every report shall, at a minimum, efforts of the other exchanges, as well as [(Release No. 34±42860; File No. SR±Phlx± include the name of the account, the 00±07)] its own efforts, by assisting the account number, the type of account, Intermarket Surveillance Group (‘‘ISG’’) Self Regulatory Organizations; Notice the current securities position(s) in the in creating a floor member securities of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by account, and the name, address, and account database.4 The Phlx would the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. telephone number of the institution that transmit information it receives about Relating to Disclosure of Securities services the account or at which the accounts of Exchange members and Accounts account is maintained. A report shall organizations to the Securities Industry contain such additional information as Automation Corporation, which would May 30, 2000. the Exchange may from time to time maintain the information on behalf of Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the require. the ISG.5 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (c) Every member, member Under the proposed rule, each report (‘‘Act’’), 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, 2 organization, participant, or participant would include, at a minimum, the name notice is hereby given that on January organization having a reportable of the account, the account number, the 31, 2000, the Philadelphia Stock account for purposes of this rule shall type of account, the current securities Exchange, Inc. ‘‘Phlx’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) notify each institution that services an position(s) in the account, and the filed with the Securities and Exchange account or at which an account is name, address, and telephone number of Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the maintained that the member, member the institution that services the account proposed rule change as described in organization, participant, or participant or at which the account is maintained.6 Items I, II, and III below, which Items organization is a member of the In addition, the rule requires every have been prepared by the Exchange. Exchange. Exchange member and organization that The Commission is publishing this Commentary: has a reportable account to inform each notice to solicit comments on the .01 Purchases of a security of a institution that services the account, or publicly traded registered investment proposed rule change from interested at which the account is maintained, that company directly from the issuer or the persons. the Exchange member or organization is principal underwriter shall not be a member of the Exchange. Also, a I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s deemed a reportable security for the report shall contain such additional Statement of the Terms of Substance of purposes of this section. Interest in a information as the Exchange may from the Proposed Rule Change non-publicly traded investment vehicle, time to time require. The proposed The Exchange proposes to adopt new including a hedge fund, is a reportable commentary to new Rule 757 states that Rule 757 (‘‘Disclosure of Securities security for purposes of this section. purchases of a security of a publicly Accounts’’), which would require * * * * * traded registered investment company Exchange members, member directly from the issuer or the principal organizations, foreign currency options II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s underwriter shall not be deemed a participants, and foreign currency Statement of the Purpose of, and reportable security for the purposes of options participant organizations Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule the rule. Interest in a non-publicly (‘‘Exchange members and Change traded investment vehicle, including a organizations’’) to report to the In its filing with the Commission, the hedge fund, would be a reportable Exchange all securities accounts in Phlx included statements concerning security. which they have any financial interest the purpose of, and basis for, the The Exchange represents that or power to make investment decisions. proposed rule change and discussed any proposed new Rule 757 would also In addition, the rule would require that comments it received on the proposed enhance Exchange surveillance and Exchange members and organizations rule change. The text of these statements regulatory efforts by expanding current notify the institution that services the may be examined at the places specified account reporting requirements. Phlx accounts, or at which the accounts are in Item IV below. The Exchange has Rule 751 presently requires employees located, that the Exchange members and prepared summaries, set forth in of Exchange members and organizations organizations are members of the Sections A, B, and C below, of the most to report certain account information to Exchange. Below is the text of the significant aspects of such statements. the Exchange members and proposed rule change, which is entirely A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s organizations that employ them, but new. Statement of the Purpose of, and there is no corresponding obligation on * * * * * Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Exchange member and organization Rule 757—Disclosure of Securities Change employers to report their account Accounts 1. Purpose information to the Exchange. The (a) Every member, member Proposed new Rule 757 would require 4 The ISG is an organization formed by organization, participant, and Exchange members and organizations to representatives of exchanges in the United States participant organization shall promptly report to the Exchange information (and certain international exchanges) to address report to the Exchange any securities about all securities accounts in which surveillance issues. account, including any error account, in they have any financial interest or 5 Telephone conversation between Jurij Trypupenko, Counsel, Phlx, and Ira Brandriss, 3 the name of the member, member power to make investment decisions. Attorney, Division, Commission, and Joshua Kans, organization, participant, or participant Special Counsel, Division, Commission, March 9, organization or in which the member, 3 Proposed new Rule 757 does not impose an 2000. member organization, participant, or obligation on Exchange members and organizations 6 The term ‘‘institution’’ includes a non-member participant organization has, directly or to report the securities positions in their accounts brokerage firm, investment adviser firm, bank, or on an ongoing basis. Telephone conversation other financial institution. Telephone conversation between Jurij Trypupenko, Counsel, Phlx, and Ira between Jurij Trypupenko, Counsel, Phlx, and Ira 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Brandriss, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation Brandriss, Attorney, Division, Commission, 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. (‘‘Division’’), Commission, February 22, 2000. February 22, 2000.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36210 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Exchange believes that proposed new should file six copies thereof with the (Percent) Rule 757’s requirement that Exchange Secretary, Securities and Exchange members and organizations report Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, Businesses and non-profit or- securities accounts to the Exchange Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of ganizations without credit should provide the Exchange with the the submission, all subsequent available elsewhere ...... 4.000 capability to monitor and investigate amendments, all written statements Others (including non-profit or- ganizations) with credit quickly the trading of securities by with respect to the proposed rule available elsewhere ...... 6.750 personnel that trade on the equity, change that are filed with the For Economic Injury: options, and foreign currency floors of Commission, and all written Businesses and small agricul- the Exchange. communications relating to the tural cooperatives without proposed rule change between the credit available elsewhere ... 4.000 2. Statutory Basis Commission and any person, other than The Exchange believes that the those that may be withheld from the The numbers assigned to this disaster proposed rule change is consistent with public in accordance with the are 325606 for physical damage and section 6 of the Act 7 in general, and provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 9H4300 for economic injury. furthers the objectives of section available for inspection and copying at 8 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 6(b)(5) in particular, in that it is the Commission’s Public Reference Program Nos. 59002 and 59008). designed to prevent fraudulent and Room. Copies of such filing will also be Dated: May 25, 2000. manipulative acts and practices, and to available for inspection and copying at Aida Alvarez, protect investors and the public interest the principal office of the Exchange. All Administrator. by requiring disclosure of securities submissions should refer to File No. accounts in which Exchange members SR–Phlx–00–07 and should be [FR Doc. 00–14224 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] have a financial interest or power to submitted by June 28, 2000. BILLING CODE 8025±01±P make investment decisions. For the Commission, by the Division of B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 9 Statement on Burden on Competition authority. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Margaret H. McFarland, The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose Deputy Secretary. Administrative Review Process, Test of any burden on competition that is not [FR Doc. 00–14261 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] the Elimination of the Fourth Step of necessary or appropriate in furtherance BILLING CODE 8010±01±M Administrative Review in the Disability of the purposes of the Act. Claim Process (Request for Review by the Appeals Council) in Conjunction C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s With Testing of Modifications to the SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Statement on Comments on the Disability Determination Procedures; Proposed Rule Change Received From [Declaration of Disaster #3256] Disability Claims Process Redesign Members, Participants, or Others Prototype State of Oklahoma The Exchange did not solicit or AGENCY: Social Security Administration. receive written comments on the Creek County and the contiguous ACTION: Notice of a test. proposed rule change. counties of Lincoln, Okfuskee, III. Date of Effectiveness of the Okmulgee, Osage, Pawnee, Payne, and SUMMARY: The Social Security Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Tulsa in the State of Oklahoma Administration (SSA) is announcing a Commission Action constitute a disaster area as a result of test of the elimination of the fourth step damages caused by severe of administrative review in the Within 35 days of the date of thunderstorms, rain, and flooding that disability claim process (Request for publication of this notice in the Federal occurred May 5–8, 2000. Applications Review by the Appeals Council) in Register or within such longer period (i) for loans for physical damage as a result conjunction with the present disability as the Commission may designate up to of this disaster may be filed until the prototype test. Before making any 90 days of such date if it finds such close of business on July 24, 2000 and decisions on the merits of the longer period to be appropriate and for economic injury until the close of elimination of the request for review, publishes its reasons for so finding or business on February 26, 2001 at the SSA must obtain valid and reliable data (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, address listed below or other locally on the effects of such elimination— the Commission will: including the impact it may have on (A) By order approve such proposed announced locations: U.S. Small agency operations, notices and other rule change, or Business Administration, Disaster Area procedures, rates of filing to Federal (B) Institute proceedings to determine 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., Suite District Courts, and quality and whether the proposed rule change 102, Ft. Worth, TX 76155. timeliness of service to the public. should be disapproved. The interest rates are: DATES: Cases to be included in the test IV. Solicitation of Comments (Percent) of the elimination of the Request for Review will be selected from those Interested persons are invited to For Physical Damage: submit written data, views, and Homeowners with credit avail- prototype case requests for hearing arguments concerning the foregoing, able elsewhere ...... 7.375 which are received in servicing hearing including whether the proposed rule Homeowners without credit offices on or after June 1, 2000, or the change is consistent with the Act. available elsewhere ...... 3.687 date of this notice—whichever is later; Persons making written submissions Businesses with credit avail- and in which an initial application for able elsewhere ...... 8.000 Social Security Disability Insurance or 7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). Supplemental Security Income 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). Disability Benefits was filed effective

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36211 between and including January 1, 2000 modifications. We are now announcing Louisiana and July 31, 2000. a retest of the RRE (‘‘RRE II’’) because —Department of Social Services, Office FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: initial RRE study results failed to of Family Support, Disability Georgia E. Myers, Regulations Officer, produce sufficient data upon which to Determination Services, 5905 Florida Office of Process and Innovation base policy decisions and because Blvd. Suite 3, Baton Rouge, LA 70806 Management, Social Security testing the RRE in conjunction with —Department of Social Services, Office Administration, L2109 West Low Rise, recently implemented initiatives would of Family Support, Disability 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD yield valuable data for assessing the Determination Services, 2920 Knight 21235–6401, (410) 965–3632 or TTY effects of the RRE upon claimant service Street, Suite 232, Shreveport, LA 410–966–5609 for information about and administrative processes. 71105 this notice. For information on Initial Level Prototype Testing —Department of Social Services, Office eligibility or filing for benefits, call our of Family Support, Disability national toll-free number, 1–800–772– The latest test using the regulatory Determination Services, 3510 North 1213 or TTY 1–800–325–0778. authority at 20 CFR 404.906 and 20 CFR Causeway Blvd., Metairie, LA 70002 416.1406 was announced in the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Current Register on August 30, 1999 (64 FR Michigan rules codified at 20 CFR 404.966 and 47218). There we announced a 416.966 authorize us to test procedures —Family Independence Agency, prototype that incorporates multiple for eliminating the request for Appeals Disability Determination Services, 608 modifications to the disability Council Review (‘‘Request for Review W. Allegan Street, Third Floor, determination procedures employed by Eliminated’’—RRE) on randomly Lansing, MI 48933 State Disability Determination Services selected cases. Additional rules codified —Family Independence Agency, (DDSs) which have been shown to be at 20 CFR 404.906 and 20 CFR 416.1406 Disability Determination Services, MI effective in earlier tests. Specifically, the authorize us to test other modifications Plaza Building, Tenth Floor, 1200 prototype incorporates a series of to the disability determination Sixth Street, Detroit, MI 48226 changes that improve the initial procedures individually or in any —Family Independence Agency, disability determination process by: combination. One test has already been Disability Determination Services, 315 providing greater decisional authority to conducted using the former authority E. Front Street, Traverse City, MI the disability examiner and more and several tests have already been 49684 effective use of the expertise of the conducted using the latter. In fact, the —Family Independence Agency, medical consultant; ensuring sole test using the authority for Disability Determination Services, 151 development and explanation of key elimination of request for Appeals South Rose Street, Kalamazoo, MI issues; increasing opportunities for Council Review was combined with a 49007–4715 claimant interaction with the decision test using the authority to test maker before a determination is made; Missouri modifications to the disability and simplifying the appeals process by —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, determination procedures individually eliminating the reconsideration step. Section of Disability Determinations, or in any combination that we termed The test is focused on 10 states to enable 1500B Southridge Drive, Jefferson the full process model (FPM). us to further refine the process and learn City, MO 65109 The FPM was an integrated test —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, (authorized in part under 404.906 and more about potential operational impacts of the changes identified. This Section of Disability Determinations, 416.1406) that we initiated on April 7, 1845 Borman Court, Suite 200, St. 1997 (published in the Federal Register strategy should allow us to put the complete process together and ensure Louis, MO 63146 on April 4, 1997 (62 FR 16210)) that —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, combined several modifications to the that the changes meet our goal of improved service to disability Section of Disability Determinations, disability determination process 4040 Seven Hills Drive, Florissant, including enhanced decision making applicants. The prototype test is being conducted MO 63033 authority for Disability Determination in 10 states. Eight include all Social —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Services (DDS) disability examiners and Security and Supplemental Security Section of Disability Determinations, a restructuring of the role of the DDS Income disability applications: 8500 East Bannister Road, Kansas medical consultant; provision for a City, MO 64134 predecision interview conducted by the Alabama —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, decision maker if the evidence is —Department of Education, Disability Section of Disability Determinations, insufficient to support a fully favorable Determination Services, 2545 Rocky 3014 Blattner Drive, Cape Girardeau, disability determination; and Ridge Lane, Birmingham, AL 35216 MO 63701 elimination of the reconsideration step —Department of Education, Disability —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, of review for initial disability claims. It Determination Services, 2000 Old Section of Disability Determinations, also included testing of the use of an Bayfont Drive, Mobile, AL 36652 2530 I South Campbell, Springfield, adjudication officer for cases in which MO 65807 a request for hearing was filed. The test Alaska of the adjudication officer is authorized —Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, New Hampshire under rules at 20 CFR 404.943 and Disability Determination Unit, 619 —Division of Adult Learning and 416.1443. East Ship Creek Avenue, Suite 305, Rehabilitation, Disability As an adjunct to the FPM test, using Anchorage, AK 99501 Determination Services, State Dept. of regulatory authority at 20 CFR 404.966 Education Building JB, 78 Regional Colorado and 416.1466 (published in the Federal Drive, Concord, NH 03301 Register on September 23, 1997 (62 FR —Department of Human Services, 49598)) we tested the RRE in order to Division of Disability Determination, Pennsylvania assess the effects of this change, in 2530 South Parker Road, Suite 500, —Bureau of Disability Determination, conjunction with the other FPM Aurora, CO 80014–1641 Room 200—Central Operations, 1171

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36212 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

South Camerson Street, Harrisburg, implemented and will be in place DDSs HOs PA 17104–2594 during this test include: —Bureau of Disability Determination, • ‘‘Differential case management’’—a Walnut St. Executive 264 Highland Park Blvd., Wilkes- systematic technique of differentiating Center, 205 S. Barre, PA 18702 cases for processing based on Walnut St., Suite D, Florence, AL —Bureau of Disability Determination, substantive issues in the case. • 35630. 351 Harvey Avenue, Greensburg, PA Processing of appeals by Office of 3605 Springhill Busi- 15605 Appellate Operations managers and ness Park, Mobile, Two include only applicants whose supervisors without prior examination AL 36608. disability claims are processed in by hearings and appeals analysts; 3381 Atlanta High- designated Disability Determination • Temporary use of attorneys from way, Montgomery, Services (DDS) branches: the Office of the General Counsel to AL 36109. Alaska ...... 2101 4th Ave., Suite California augment staff in the Appeals Council; • Expedited presentation of cases to 900, Seattle, WA 98121. —Los Angeles North and West— adjudicators; and Department of Social Services, • California: Temporary use of Administrative Los Angeles West/ City National Bank Disability and Adult Programs Law Judges as Acting Administrative Division, 3425 Wilshire Blvd., Suite North. Bldg., 606 S. Olive Appeals Judges to enhance the St., Suite 1200, Los 1500, Los Angeles, CA 90010 adjudicatory and analytic strength of the Angeles, CA New York Appeals Council in the short term. 90014. If appealed to the ALJ level, most, but 11000 Wilshire Blvd., —Brooklyn—New York State not all, of the cases from the prototype Rm. 8200, Los An- Department of Social Services, sites will go to hearing offices (HOs) that geles, CA 90024. Division of Disability Determinations, are in the first phase of the HPI. Thus, Grosvenor Plaza, 150 300 Cadman Plaza West, 13th floor, they will be processed using the S. Los Robles Ave- nue, Suite 500, Brooklyn, NY 11201–2701 efficiencies such as the ‘‘national —Albany—New York State Department Pasadena, CA workflow model’’ mentioned above. The 91101. of Social Services, Division of prototype process is effective in Disability Determinations, 99 8345 Firestone Blvd., prototype sites for cases effectively filed Second Floor, Washington Avenue, Room 1239, October 1, 1999 or after, with the Downey, CA Albany, NY 12260. exception of Albany, New York which 90241. Administrative Appeals Process became operational on April 1, 2000. Colorado ...... 1244 Speer Blvd., Improvements and Testing of the RRE Under the existing regulatory Suite 752, Denver, Paired With Prototype Test authority authorizing us to test RRE at CO 80204. 20 CFR 404.966 and 416.1466 Louisiana ...... 3403 Government St., Testing the use of an Adjudication Alexandria, LA (published in the Federal Register on Officer (AO) authorized under 20 CFR 71302. September 23, 1997 (62 FR 49598)) we 404.943 and 416.1443 is not included in 1515 Poydras St., intend to add to the previously the prototype. Suite 1600, New announced prototypes a test of the Orleans, LA 70112. Along with the prototype changes, we effects of the RRE on prototype cases are incorporating several initiatives to First Bank Center, 1 that could potentially reach the Appeals Galleria, Suite improve the hearings process, including Council level, following an unfavorable 2000, Metairie, LA administrative efficiencies designed to ALJ decision, that meet the following 70001. streamline case processing; structural criteria: 700 Louisiana Towers changes in the management • Effective date of initial filing is 401 Edwards St., organization of hearings offices; between and including January 1 and Shreveport, LA improvements in automation and data 71101. July 31, 2000. collection; and implementation of a • Michigan ...... Patrick J. McNamara ‘‘national workflow model’’ that Request for an ALJ hearing has been Federal Bldg., 477 filed; Michigan Ave., combines pre-hearing activities, a • standardized pre-hearing conference, Case is received in the servicing HO Room 430, Detroit, and processing-time benchmarks for on or after June 1, 2000 or the effective MI 48226. various tasks. This initiative was date of this notice whichever is later; 605 N. Saginaw St., and First Floor, Suite A, announced in the Federal Register on Flint, MI 48502. August 30, 1999 (64 FR 47218) as the The servicing HO has implemented HPI (‘‘HPI Phase One’’). A case meeting 15 Ionia St. S.W., Hearing Process Improvement (HPI) Third Floor, Grand initiative. the other criteria but whose servicing Rapids, MI 49503. Additionally, since the announcement HO is not an HPI phase One Office will Everett Plaza, 3500 of the HPI initiative, we have not be included. S. Cedar St, Suite undertaken an Appeals Council Process Cases meeting the criteria received at 109, Lansing, MI Improvement (ACPI) initiative. ACPI the following HOs will be included: 48910. includes short range initiatives to Crown Pointe, 25900 reduce pending workloads and DDSs HOs Greenfield Rd., Room 430, Oak processing times and long-range Alabama ...... Burger-Phillips Cen- Park, MI 48237. improvements in structure and tre, 1910 3rd Ave. Missouri ...... 11475 Olde Cabin operations enabling high quality, timely, North, Suite 100, Rd., Creve Coeur, and efficient case processing. The short- Birmingham, AL MO 63141. range elements that already are being 35203.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36213

DDSs HOs RRE II (test) cases will be collected and well as to assessments by the Bureau of analyzed. Before making any decisions Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Old Post Office Bldg., on the merits of the RRE, SSA must and the U.S. Embassy in Beijing of the 815 Olive St., Rm. obtain valid and reliable data on the desired pace of expansion. The goal is 220, St. Louis, MO effects of such elimination—including to expand the program incrementally 63101. the impact it may have on agency over the next few years. 901 E. St. Louis St., operations, notices and other Suite 210, Spring- The focus of the principal program is field, MO 65806. procedures, rates of filing to Federal to link schools and communities in as New Hampshire ...... Daniel Webster Hwy. District Courts, and quality and many provinces of China as possible North, 207 timeliness of service to the public. with schools and communities across Hooksett Rd., Man- Dated: May 31, 2000. the United States and to foster chester, NH 03104. Rita S. Geier, interaction and lasting relationships New YorkÐBrooklyn * 111 Livingston Street, between these partnered schools 18th Floor, Brook- Associate Commissioner for Hearings and Appeals. through Internet connections and lyn, NY 11201. reciprocal student and educator Pennsylvania ...... 8380 Old York Rd., [FR Doc. 00–14216 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Suite 250, Elkins BILLING CODE 4191±02±P exchanges with strong academic Park, PA 19027. content. Each one-to-one school Penn National Office partnership will choose a theme Bldg., 2 N. 2nd St., DEPARTMENT OF STATE relevant to their communities; students 8th Floor, Harris- will work together to complete a joint burg, PA 17101. [Public Notice 3332] project related to this theme. Support 334 Washington St., for Internet connectivity and computer Suite 200, Johns- Bureau of Educational and Cultural training is also an important component town, PA 15901. Affairs; U.S.-China Youth Exchange of the program so that the paired 1601 Market St., 9th Initiative: Pilot Project; Notice: schools can communicate throughout Floor, Philadelphia, Request for Proposals PA 19103. the school year and work on these joint 601 Grant St., Suite SUMMARY: The Youth Programs Division, projects. The three-to four-week 500, Pittsburgh, PA Office of Citizen Exchanges, of the exchange visits to the partner 15219. Bureau of Educational and Cultural community will involve studying at the 7 N. Wilkes-Barre Affairs announces an open competition host school, working on the thematic Blvd., Suite 210, to award one grant for the U.S.-China project, participating in cultural Wilkes-Barre, PA Youth Exchange Initiative: Pilot Project. activities, and spending time with host 18702. Public and private non-profit families. The overarching goals of this * Prototype cases processed at New YorkÐ organizations meeting the provisions program are to support student Albany will not be included in the test described in IRS regulation 26 CFR participation in community affairs and becasuse of Albany's later start date. 1.501(c) may submit proposals for the to advance mutual understanding As stated in the Federal Register of recruitment and screening of schools, an between the youth and teachers of the August 30, 1999 (64 FR 47218) it is assessment of communication U.S. and China. estimated that annually on a national technology, and the implementation of This competition is intended to allow level approximately 20 percent of a pilot project of a reciprocal youth the Youth Programs Division to select applicants for disability benefits would exchange program between secondary the organization that will best be able to potentially participate in the prototype. schools in the United States and in establish these linkages and facilitate Since those applications covered under China. This program will develop the joint projects and exchanges. The the provisions of this notice include just linkages between schools and objectives of this project are (1) to plan over half a year, we estimate that communities in the U.S. and China for for the principal program by recruiting approximately 10–12% of applicants for the purpose of mutual education and and screening schools, (2) to assess the disability benefits (effective filings the development of student opportunities for establishing Internet between 1/1/00 and 7/31/00) would participation in community affairs. access in the schools, and (3) to develop potentially participate in at least one Program Information and implement a pilot partnership that aspect of the prototype. Based on past will serve as a model for future case experience, those actually included Overview development. in the RRE II cohort would be well During a June 1998 visit to China, The components of the program are as below 1 percent of the national President Clinton announced a youth follows: applicant workload. exchange program that would link (1) Planning and Selection Selection of test and control cases will schools and communities in China and be done on a random basis. For those the United States. The program has been (a) Announce the program to recruit a selected as test cases, the right to projected to span three years and to strong pool of candidate schools and request review by the Appeals Council provide funding for the reciprocal communities in the U.S. and China. will be eliminated and the right of the exchange of students and teachers from Communities should represent the great claimant to appeal, in the case of an the paired schools. It is in anticipation geographic diversity of each country. unfavorable ALJ decision, will be of this program being enacted in fiscal (b) Conduct an open, merit-based directly to Federal District Court. year 2001 that the Office of Citizen competition to screen secondary schools Claimants who could potentially be Exchanges offers this opportunity for for participation in the principal included in this retest of the RRE will organizations to apply for an assistance program. Applicants should be prepared be supplied notice of their appeal rights. award to pilot a modest school exchange to select approximately 50 schools, or Case outcome and appeals project this year. Expansion beyond the 25 partnerships. information about both Request for pilot phase is subject to the availability (c) Determine the capacity of the Review Retained (RRR) (control) and of funding in subsequent fiscal years, as schools to develop lines of

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36214 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices communication, especially through the • Experience with managing To Download a Solicitation Package use of the Internet. international institutional linkages and/ Via Internet or experience developing the program (2) Pilot Project The entire Solicitation Package may content for short-term exchanges; be downloaded from the Bureau’s (a) Select a partnership to conduct a • An established partnership with an website at http://exchanges.state.gov/ pilot exchange program (this will be individual or organization based in education/rfps. Please read all selected outside of the larger China or own branch office or information before downloading. competitive process noted above). representative there; and (b) Oversee the communications and Deadline for Proposals • Access to schools in both the project activity between the two All proposal copies must be received United States and China through the schools. at the Bureau of Educational and partner organization. (c) Manage the exchange of 22 Cultural Affairs by 5:00 p.m. participants: nine students and two Programs must comply with J–1 visa Washington, DC time on Friday, July 28, educators (or one educator and one regulations. Please refer to the complete 2000. Faxed documents will not be community member chaperone) from Solicitation Package, which includes the accepted at any time. Documents each school will visit the partner school Project Objectives, Guidelines, and postmarked the due date but received for three to four weeks while the host Implementation (POGI) and the on a later date will not be accepted. school is in session. Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), Each applicant must ensure that the (d) Monitor and evaluate the pilot for further information. proposals are received by the above project. deadline. Budget Guidelines Guidelines Applicants must follow all An initial assistance award for no instructions in the Solicitation Package. The grant will begin on or about more than $98,900 will be awarded. The original proposal and eight copies November 1, 2000, and conclude 14 of the application should be sent to: months later. The pilot project activity Organizations with less than four years of experience in conducting U.S. Department of State, Bureau of should begin as soon as possible. The Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: exchanges should take place in Fall international exchange programs are not eligible for this competition. Applicants ECA/PE/C–00–58, Program 2001. Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 336, This pilot project will create the must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. There must be a 301 4th Street, SW, Washington, DC foundation for the follow-on program. 20547. This project should be designed to best summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and Applicants must also submit the prepare the organization for the ‘‘Executive Summary’’ and ‘‘Proposal implementation of the full program. program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each Narrative’’ sections of the proposal on a However, all applicants should be aware 3.5″ diskette, formatted for DOS. These that there are no assurances of a specific program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. documents must be provided in ASCII level of funding for a follow-on text (DOS) format with a maximum line program. As is the case with all Bureau Please refer to the Solicitation length of 65 characters. The Bureau will exchange programs, actual funding for Package for complete budget guidelines transmit these files electronically to the future activities is contingent upon the and formatting instructions. Public Affairs Section at the U.S. Congressional Appropriation and Embassy in Beijing for its review. Authorization Process and final Announcement Title and Number Diversity, Freedom and Democracy availability of funds. Funding to support All correspondence with the Bureau Guidelines the initial phase of this project is concerning this RFP should reference $98,900. Upon successful the above title and number ECA/PE/C– Pursuant to the Bureau’s authorizing implementation of the pilot phase and 00–58. legislation, programs must maintain a pending the availability of funds, ECA non-political character and should be For Further Information Contact: The reserves the right to amend the grant to balanced and representative of the Youth Programs Division, ECA/PE/C/ support future program activities. diversity of American political, social, PY, Room 568, U.S. Department of State, As ECA and the U.S. Embassy in and cultural life. ‘‘Diversity’’ should be 301 4th Street, SW, Washington, DC Beijing will need to carefully gauge the interpreted in the broadest sense and 20547, telephone (202) 619–6299; fax appropriate rate of growth of this encompass differences including, but (202) 619–5311; e-mail address: program (in terms of the number of not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, [email protected] to request a states or provinces, schools, and religion, geographic location, socio- participants) and future funding is Solicitation Package. The Solicitation economic status, and physical indefinite, ECA requests that applicants Package contains detailed award challenges. Applicants are strongly create a rank ordered list of the schools criteria, required application forms, encouraged to adhere to the that they recruit and screen so that the specific budget instructions, and advancement of this principle both in schools can be approached to standard guidelines for proposal program administration and in program participate once the FY–2001 funding preparation. Please specify Bureau content. Please refer to the review level has been determined. ECA expects Program Officer Carolyn Lantz on all criteria under the ‘‘Support for to work up to the participation of as other inquiries and correspondence. Diversity’’ section for specific many as 50 schools over the course of Please read the complete Federal suggestions on incorporating diversity the initiative. Register announcement before sending into the total proposal. Public Law 104– Eligible applicant organizations will inquiries or submitting proposals. Once 319 provides that ‘‘in carrying out have the following: the RFP deadline has passed, Bureau programs of educational and cultural • Experience working in China; staff may not discuss this competition exchange in countries whose people do • A demonstrated track record of with applicants until the proposal not fully enjoy freedom and conducting youth exchange; review process has been completed. democracy,’’ the Bureau ‘‘shall take

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36215 appropriate steps to provide States to increase mutual understanding national recreational boating safety opportunities for participation in such between the people of the United States program. The Act also requires that the programs to human rights and and the people of other Secretary publish annually in the democracy leaders of such countries.’’ countries***; to strengthen the ties Federal Register a detailed accounting Proposals should reflect advancement of which unite us with other nations by of the projects, programs, and activities this goal in their program contents, to demonstrating the educational and under this subsection. This is the first the full extent deemed feasible. cultural interests, developments, and report. Year 2000 Compliance Requirement achievements of the people of the ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of (Y2K Requirement) United States and other this notice by calling the U. S. Coast nations***and thus to assist in the Guard Infoline at 1–800–368–5647. This The Year 2000 (Y2K) issue is a broad development of friendly, sympathetic notice is available on the Internet at operational and accounting problem and peaceful relations between the http://dms.dot.gov or at the Web Site for that could potentially prohibit United States and the other countries of the Office of Boating Safety at URL organizations from processing the world.’’ The funding authority for address www.uscgboating.org. information in accordance with Federal the program above is provided through FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: management and program specific legislation. Captain Michael F. Holmes, USCG, requirements including data exchange Notice Chief, Office of Boating Safety, with the Bureau. The inability to telephone 202–267–1077, fax 202–267– process information in accordance with The terms and conditions published 4285, or Mr. Albert J. Marmo, Chief, Federal requirements could result in in this RFP are binding and may not be Program Management Division, grantees being required to return funds modified by any Bureau representative. telephone 202–267–0950, fax 202–267– that have not been accounted for Explanatory information provided by 4285. properly. the Bureau that contradicts published SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The The Bureau therefore requires all language will not be binding. Issuance Transportation Equity Act for the 21st organizations use Y2K compliant of the RFP does not constitute an award Century became law on June 9, 1998. systems including hardware, software, commitment on the part of the The Act requires that of the $5 million and firmware. Systems must accurately Government. The Bureau reserves the made available to carry out the national process data and dates (calculating, right to reduce, revise, or increase recreational boating safety program, comparing and sequencing) both before proposal budgets in accordance with the $2,000,000 shall be available only to and after the beginning of the year 2000 needs of the program and the ensure compliance with chapter 43 of and correctly adjust for leap years. availability of funds. Awards made will title 46, U.S. Code—Recreational Additional information addressing the be subject to periodic reporting and Vessels. This responsibility is delegated Y2K issue may be found at the General evaluation requirements. to the Commandant of the United States Services Administration’s Office of Coast Guard. The statute directs that no Information Technology website at Notification funds available to the Secretary under http://www.itpolicy.gsa.gov. Final awards cannot be made until this subsection may be used to replace Review Process funds have been appropriated by funding traditionally provided through Congress, allocated and committed general appropriations, nor for any The Bureau will acknowledge receipt through internal Bureau procedures. of all proposals and will review them purposes except those purposes for technical eligibility. Proposals will Dated: May 30, 2000. authorized by this section. Amounts be deemed ineligible if they do not fully Evelyn S. Lieberman, made available each fiscal year, 1999– adhere to the guidelines stated herein Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and 2003, shall remain available until and in the Solicitation Package. All Public Affairs, U.S. Department of State. expended. Upon passage of the Act the eligible proposals will be reviewed by [FR Doc. 00–14361 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] U.S. Coast Guard Office of Boating Safety began the process of developing the program office, as well as the Public BILLING CODE 4710±11±P basic spending plans for this new source Diplomacy section overseas, where of revenue. For accounting purposes, appropriate. Eligible proposals will be funding was divided into two program forwarded to panels of Bureau officers DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION elements: Boat Safety Compliance and for advisory review. Proposals may also National Recreational Boating Safety be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Coast Guard Program. Use of these funds entails Adviser or by other Department [USCG±2000±7465] compliance with standard Federal elements. Final funding decisions are at contracting rules with associated lead the discretion of the Department of Recreational Boating Safety Projects, and processing times resulting in a lag State’s Under Secretary for Public Programs and Activities Funded Under time between available funds and Diplomacy and Public Affairs. Final Provisions of the Transportation spending. An accounting of the use of technical authority for assistance Equity Act for the 21st Century; the funds to date follows, including a awards (grants or cooperative Accounting of narrative summary and a table that agreements) resides with the Bureau’s reflects commitment, obligation, or Grants Officer. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. expenditure of fiscal years 1999 and ACTION: Authority Notice. 2000 funds. Overall grant making authority for SUMMARY: Subsection (c) of section 7405 Boat Safety Compliance this program is contained in the Mutual of the Transportation Equity Act for the Educational and Cultural Exchange Act 21st Century makes $5,000,000 available Factory Visit Program of 1961, Public Law 87–256, as each of five fiscal years to the Secretary A contract was awarded to establish a amended, also known as the Fulbright- of Transportation for personnel and national recreational boat factory visit Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is ‘‘to activities directly related to program using contractor personnel. enable the Government of the United coordinating and carrying out the The contract includes the development

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36216 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices of a plan of action and a pilot program New Boat Manufacturer Outreach using BARD software. New fiscal year to validate the elements of the plan and Package 1999 funding of $392,234 allows the concept of the program. The plan A fiscal year 1999 contract for software module development, software was completed at a cost of $133,912.55 $357,582.34 was awarded to design and module rework and unit testing, module using fiscal year 1999 funding. The pilot develop a comprehensive and user integration testing and system testing program will commence in the summer friendly outreach package for associated with this innovative program, of 2000. The factory visit program will distribution to new recreational boat and for providing the software to the 50 allow contractor personnel, acting on manufacturers. Included will be a States, five territories, and the District of behalf of the Coast Guard, to visit brochure and video that will outline the Columbia. approximately 2,000 recreational boat many facets of the recreational boat Transfer of Funds to the Seventeenth manufacturers each year to manufacturing business, including, Coast Guard District communicate with the manufacturers as Federal regulations, voluntary to why they need to comply with the standards, self-certification, financial A non-recurring transfer of $25,000 Federal regulations, educate them, as aspects, insurance concerns, liability fiscal year 1999 funds was made to the necessary, on how to comply with the issues, points of contact and the steps Seventeenth Coast Guard District in Federal regulations, and inspect for necessary to become a new recreational support of a Coast Guard Boating Safety compliance with the Federal boat manufacturer. The package will Detachment to assist in the transition of regulations. also include plain language guidelines State of Alaska assumption of that help clarify Federal requirements. Recreational Boating Safety Program Associated Equipment Compliance The new outreach package is expected responsibilities. Testing to increase the level of compliance with the Federal regulations among new National Boating Registration System Currently, the Office of Boating Safety recreational boat manufacturers. conducts compliance testing by As a service for States/Territories that purchasing recreational boats in the Risk Analysis Study currently have inadequate (or no) open market and testing them for This effort will develop a risk-based computer software program to maintain compliance with the Federal flotation compliance approval process for their vessel numbering system standards. As a new initiative, the Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs) using information, $24,000 has been Office of Boating Safety is planning to a Life Saving Index methodology. Fiscal transferred to the U.S. Coast Guard Operations Systems Center (OSC) to buy recreational boat ‘‘associated year 1999 funding for this project develop a National Boating Registration equipment,’’ e.g., starters, alternators, amounted to $229,465.64. The results of System software program. OSC will fuel pumps, bilge pumps, etc., and test this effort will provide a formal structure and consistency to the process modify an existing program currently this equipment for compliance with used by the Coast Guard in Alaska (the Federal safety regulations. The for accepting new approaches to designing devices for drowning only State that does not have a Coast anticipated annual cost of this multi- Guard-approved vessel numbering year effort is estimated at $100,000. To prevention. The risk-based process identifies critical factors for evaluating system) to develop a generic version date $44,000 of fiscal year 1999 funds PFD lifesaving potential and defines the that can easily be adapted by any State/ have been expended, and $83,000 of minimum level of performance Territory for their own use. The fiscal year 2000 funds has been necessary for approval. software, which will be provided to committed for this testing. interested States/Territories at no cost, Virtual Reality Personal Watercraft will include a function to automatically Articulated Mannequins/Computer (PWC) Simulation Model generate the annual report on numbered A contract was awarded to develop a vessels that must be submitted to the The objective of this multi-year virtual reality personal watercraft. If this Coast Guard each year, which currently program is to improve the safety of application of virtual reality technology can be a very time-consuming process recreational boaters by encouraging the proves to be effective it will provide a for States whose systems are not design of new/unique personal flotation platform to gather valuable data in many automated. The current schedule calls devices (PFDs) through the development areas that would otherwise be for delivery of the beta version system of a computer simulation program to unobtainable or would require more in July 2000. costly methods and sources. The data evaluate the effectiveness of new/ Federal Requirements Publication unique PFD designs. The computer from this effort will give greater insight simulation program will be validated into the human/machine interface A customer friendly ‘‘Federal related to PWC and will assist in the through the use of a family of Requirements and Safety Tips for effort to attempt to reduce PWC anthropomorphic articulated Recreational Boaters’’ publication is accidents. The contract award amount being developed based on easy to read mannequins. Fiscal year 1999 funding using fiscal year 2000 funds was for this effort is $300,000. high visibility graphics, focusing on $133,620. provision of subject specific safety tips Compliance Associated Travel National Recreational Boating Safety with retention factors built in. Support Program for this effort using fiscal year 1999 Travel is being performed to carry out funds is $73,000. The Coast Guard additional compliance actions and to Boating Accident Report Database anticipates expanding this development gather background and planning (BARD) effort and intends to evaluate information for proposed compliance The BARD system is aimed at recreational boater retention factors for initiatives or to research possible new effectively providing the capability to Federal regulations in August 2000. The compliance initiatives. Fiscal year 1999 all States and the Coast Guard for the end result will be publication of both funding for this travel has amounted to successful exchange of recreational hard copy and electronic interactive $13,332.44. boating accident data and information versions for public use.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36217

Coast Guard Infoline/Office of Boating Additional target group research and one of the Coast Guard’s largest external Safety Website testing will be conducted during customer groups. The Knowledge This effort provides both technology calendar year 2000 validating outreach Management and SEAFIT systems will and educational enhancements to the components. This research will result in provide for quicker more effective and Coast Guard Infoline, a toll free 800 the release of a national ‘‘point-of- efficient program oversight while telephone number (including a purchase’’ kiosk system, serving as an providing each customer with the dedicated line for the hearing impaired) extension to the Office of Boating ability to electronically do business accessible to callers anywhere in the Safety’s ‘‘one-stop’’ information system. with the Coast Guard. This system will United States. The Infoline provides There are three new projects that are assist in the electronic monitoring, information about safety, regulations, in final stages for commitment of funds. storage and daily use of all multi- disciplined information and materials communications, Coast Guard policy, The Vessel Safety Check Program and available material related to boating within the Office of Boating Safety. We safety issues. Additionally, this effort Fiscal year 2000 funding, estimated at plan to convert current business provides a complete interactive less than $50,000 will be used to processes that support activity in grant recreational boating safety website that support the efforts of the U.S. Coast administration, program oversight, offers the public and boating safety Guard Auxiliary, U.S. Power Squadrons financial payments and requested agencies and organizations with up-to- and the National Association of State program information to an electronic the-minute information on every aspect Boating Law Administrators in format and be web-based compatible. providing free safety inspections of of recreational boating safety. One of the National Boating Survey goals of this program is to create a ‘‘one- recreational boats. The ‘‘safety check’’ stop’’ customer service center for all provides a complete review of a The contracting process is being users. Fiscal year 1999 funding recreational vessel ensuring that the initiated for a comprehensive major amounted to $186,435. vessel is in compliance with all Federal national recreational boating survey. and State specific carriage requirements. The survey will provide information on Marine Dealer Display Kiosks Ultimately the end result will lead to boats, boaters and their activities. In An expenditure of $23,950 of fiscal fewer recreational boating accidents, order to avoid taking the large amount year 1999 funds supports the Hunters injuries and fatalities. of money required for a large-scale and Anglers Outreach Program and survey from available funds for a single Knowledge Management System and supplies marine dealers with U.S. Coast fiscal year, we will escrow funds each SEAFIT (State Electronic Guard and U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary year. We placed $900,000 of fiscal year Administrative, Financial and literature display racks, including 1999 funds and $400,000 of fiscal year Information Technology System) associated boating safety information 2000 funds in escrow. pertaining to the hazards associated This effort will enable the Coast The following table reflects with Boating Under the Influence (BUI) Guard to reduce the amount of paper commitment, obligation, or expenditure as well as discipline specific transactions required and obtained by to date of fiscal years 1999 and 2000 information to this target group. its external customers. The States are funds.

RECREATIONAL BOATING SAFETY PROGRAMS ACCOUNTING

FY 1999 FY 2000

Boat Safety Compliance

Factory visit program ...... $133,912.55 Associated equipment compliance testing ...... 44,000.00 $83,000.00 Articulated mannequins/computer simulation model ...... 300,000.00 Compliance associated travel ...... 13,332.44 New boat manufacturer outreach package ...... 357,582.34 Risk analysis study ...... 229,465.64 Virtual reality personal watercraft ...... 133,620.00

Total boat safety compliance ...... 1,078,292.97 216,620.00

National Recreational Boating Safety Program

Boating accident report database (BARD) ...... 392,234.00 17th CG District boating safety detachment ...... 25,000.00 National boating registration system ...... 24,000.00 Federal requirements publication ...... 73,000.00 CG Infoline/Office of boating safety website ...... 186,435.00 Marine dealer display kiosks ...... 23,950.00 Total recreational boating safety ...... 724,619.00

National boating survey escrow ...... 900,000.00 400,000.00 Grand total ...... 2,702,911.97 616,620.00 Note: This Chart Shows FY 1999 and FY 2000 Dedicated Funds Committed, Obligated, or Expended for the Individual Projects Listed.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36218 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Dated: June 2, 2000. (3) Evaluation of the validity of the (1936 Act). The vessels currently Kenneth T. Venuto, CTAC’s previous recommendations. covered by those contracts are presently Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of (4) Discussions of the comments owned by FLI Ships, and will continue Operations Policy. submitted on the ANPRM. to be covered by those contracts after [FR Doc. 00–14362 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Procedural transfer. BILLING CODE 4910±15±P The transfer of MSP Operating The meeting is open to the public. Agreements MA/MSP–18 through 20 is Please note that the meeting may close part of a series of overall transactions DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION early if all business is finished. All whereby Farrell will merge with P & O attendees at the meeting are encouraged Nedlloyd Acquisition Corporation, a Coast Guard to fully review CTAC’s previous wholly owned subsidiary of P & O recommendations prior to the meeting; [USCG±2000±443] Nedlloyd Limited. After merger, Farrell additional copies of CTAC’s previous will be the surviving entity Chemical Transportation Advisory recommendations are available from the (reconstituted Farrell). Committee Deputy Assistant to CTAC. At the With respect to the transfer of MSP discretion of the Subcommittee Chair, Operating Agreements, section 652(j) of AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. members of the public may make oral the 1936 Act provides that ‘‘A ACTION: Notice of meeting. presentations during the meeting. If you Contractor under an operating would like to make an oral presentation agreement may transfer the agreement SUMMARY: The Subcommittee of the at the meeting, please notify the Coast (including all rights and obligations Chemical Transportation Advisory Guard Technical Representative to the under the agreement) to any person Committee (CTAC) on the revalidation Subcommittee on or before June 20, eligible to enter into that Operating of recommendations for 46 CFR part 151 2000. If you would like a copy of your Agreement under this subtitle after will meet to discuss the previous material distributed to each member of notification of the Secretary [of recommendations of CTAC. the committee or subcommittee in Transportation] in accordance with DATES: The Subcommittee will meet on advance of a meeting, please submit 25 regulations prescribed by the Secretary, Wednesday, June 21, 2000, from 8:30 copies to the Coast Guard Technical unless the transfer is disapproved by the a.m. to 4 p.m. The meeting may close Representative to the Subcommittee no Secretary within 90 days after the date early if all business is finished. Written later than June 19, 2000. of Notification. A person to whom an Operating Agreement is transferred may material and requests to make oral Information on Services for Individuals receive payments from the Secretary presentations should reach the Coast With Disabilities Guard on or before June 20, 2000. under the agreement only if each vessel Requests to have a copy of your material For information on facilities or to be covered by the agreement after the distributed to each member of the services for individuals with disabilities transfer is an eligible vessel under committee or subcommittee should or to request special assistance at the section 651(b).’’ reach the Coast Guard on or before June meeting, contact the Deputy Assistant to In implementing the proposed 19, 2000. the Executive Director of CTAC as soon transaction, FLI Ships is to be spun off as possible. by sale of all its stock to FLI Ships ADDRESSES: The Subcommittee will Dated: May 31, 2000. Holdings, Inc. (Holdings), a U.S. citizen meet in room 6103, U.S. Coast Guard corporation within the meaning of Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW, Joseph J. Angelo, Director of Standards, Marine Safety and section 2 of the Shipping Act, 1916, as Washington, DC. Send written material amended. Holdings will be and requests to make oral presentations Environmental Protection. [FR Doc. 00–14276 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] independently capitalized and to Commander Robert F. Corbin, operationally independent of P & O Commandant (G–MSO–3), U.S. Coast BILLING CODE 4910±15±M Nedlloyd Limited and any of its Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street affiliates. The MSP vessels will be time SW, Washington, DC 20593–0001. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION chartered from FLI Ships to either FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. P&ONL FAME, Inc. (FAME), a U.S. Thomas J. Felleisen, Coast Guard Maritime Administration documentation citizen owned by P & O Technical Representative to the Nedlloyd B.V., a Dutch corporation, or Subcommittee, or Lieutenant Gregory F. [Docket MARAD±2000±7470] to a reconstituted Farrell for operation. Herold, Deputy Assistant to the Farrell Lines Incorporated; Notice of In the event that Farrell becomes the Executive Director of CTAC, telephone Application for approvals to the time charterer, it will also become a 202–267–1217, fax 202–267–4570. proposed transfer of Maritime Security documentation citizen. The time SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of Program Operating Agreements MA/ charters of two other MSP vessels this meeting is given under the Federal MSP±18 through 20 owned by First American Bulk Carrier Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. Corp. (FABC) and chartered to Farrell, 2. By applications dated June 1, 2000, will be novated to either FAME, or Farrell Lines Incorporated (Farrell) and remain with the reconstituted Farrell for Agenda of Meeting counsel for FLI Ships, Inc. (FLI Ships) operation. FLI Ships will manage and The agenda of the Subcommittee of have notified the Maritime operate the former Farrell vessels the Chemical Transportation Advisory Administration (MARAD) of the utilizing former Farrell personnel. The Committee (CTAC) on the revalidation proposed transfer of three Maritime FABC vessels will continue to operate of recommendations for 46 CFR part 151 Security Program (MSP) Operating under their existing charters. One includes the following: Agreements (MA/MSP–18 through 20) additional vessel operated by Farrell (1) Introduction of the Subcommittee from Farrell to FLI Ships, a wholly under bareboat charter from MARAD members. owned subsidiary of Farrell, pursuant to may be turned back to MARAD subject (2) Review and discussion of CTAC’s section 652(j) of Subtitle B, Title VI, to settlement under that charter. previous recommendations. Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended Another vessel bareboat chartered by

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36219

Farrell under a sale/leaseback agreement to provide the public with meaningful required to close complicated large will most likely be paid off and participation in advance of the dollar transactions. scrapped. rulemaking process. Specifically, the The Fund also is considering selecting A redacted copy of the transfer Fund intends to convene four regional insured depository institutions to application will be available for meetings that are open to the public for participate in the BEA Program before inspection at the Department of purposes of gathering facts and the commencement of the assessment Transportation (DOT) Dockets Facility information on how to improve the BEA period. The Fund is considering such a and on the DOT Dockets website Program. The Fund will consider the change to: (1) Provide greater incentives (address information follows). Any facts and information gathered from for insured depository institutions to person, firm or corporation having an such regional meetings in deciding engage in BEA Program activities that interest in this proposal, and desiring to whether to revise the BEA Program they would not otherwise engage in by submit comments concerning the regulations. (a) Assuring such institutions that if application, may file comments as DATES AND LOCATIONS: The four regional they carry out their BEA Program follows. You should mention the docket meetings are scheduled for the activities within the assessment period, number that appears at the top of this following cities and dates: (1) June 21, they will receive a BEA Program award notice. Written comments should be 2000, Los Angeles, CA; (2) June 23, and (b) enabling such institutions to submitted to the Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT 2000, Dallas, TX; (3) June 28, 2000, New take into consideration the economic Dockets, Room PL–401, Nassif Building, York, NY; and (4) June 30, 2000, value of an award when underwriting a Department of Transportation, 400 Chicago, IL. Registration is required, transaction; and (2) reduce paperwork Seventh Street, SW, Washington, D.C. because space is limited in each city to burdens for those insured depository 20590. Comments may also be 40 members of the public. institutions that are not deemed submitted by electronic means via the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO competitive by relieving such internet at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/ REGISTER CONTACT: The Community institutions of the burden of having to . You may call Docket Management at Development Financial Institutions submit a final report at the end of the (202) 366–9324. You may visit the Fund (the Fund), U.S. Department of assessment period. As part of this docket room to inspect and copy Treasury, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite change, the Fund would utilize a comments at the above address between 200 South, Washington, DC, 20005, competitive evaluation and selection 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. EDT, Monday (202) 622–8662 (this is not a toll free process. through Friday, except holidays. An number) or visit the Fund’s website at The Fund intends to provide the electronic version of this document is http://www.treas.gov/cdfi. Other public with meaningful participation in available on the World Wide Web at information regarding the Fund and its improving the efficacy of the BEA http://dms.dot.gov. Comments must be programs also may be obtained through Program by obtaining facts and received by close of business June 14, the Fund’s website at http:// information from the public prior to 2000. www.treas.gov/cdfi. making any regulatory changes. The Fund intends to accomplish this by This notice is published as a matter of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The discretion, and the fact of its publication purpose of the BEA Program is to assist convening four regional information should in no way be considered a in the revitalization of distressed urban gathering sessions in the month of June favorable or unfavorable decision on the and rural communities. Under the BEA that are open to the public. The Fund application, as filed, or as may be Program, the Fund issues grant awards will consider the facts and information amended. MARAD will consider all annually (e.g. in September 1999) to from such public meetings in deciding comments submitted in a timely insured depository institutions that whether to revise the BEA Program fashion, and will take such action have increased their level of investment regulations. thereto as may be deemed appropriate. in Community Development Financial Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4703; 12 U.S.C. 4713; By Order of the Maritime Administration. Institutions and distressed communities 12 U.S.C. 1834a; and E.O. 12866, § 6(a). Dated: June 2, 2000. (‘‘BEA Program activities’’) between a Dated: June 1, 2000. Joel C. Richard, six month assessment period (e.g. Maurice A. Jones, Secretary, Maritime Administration. January 1 through June 30, 1999) and a Deputy Director for Policy and Programs, [FR Doc. 00–14354 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] six month baseline period (e.g. January Community Development Financial 1 through June 30, 1998). As part of its Institutions Fund. BILLING CODE 4910±81±P strategy to maximize the effectiveness of [FR Doc. 00–14308 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] scarce public resources, the Fund is BILLING CODE 4810±70±P considering various means to enhance DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY the efficacy of the BEA Program in Community Development Financial revitalizing distressed urban and rural DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Institutions Fund Open Meetings communities. AFFAIRS For example, the Fund is considering AGENCY: Community Development whether to measure increases in BEA [OMB Control No. 2900±0219] Financial Institutions Fund, Department Program activities from six month of the Treasury. baseline/assessment periods (e.g. Proposed Information Collection Activity: Proposed Collection; ACTION: Notice of open meetings. January 1 through June 30) to annual baseline/assessment periods (e.g. Comment Request SUMMARY: The Community Development January 1 through December 31) for AGENCY: Veterans Health Financial Institutions Fund (the purposes of affording insured Administration, Department of Veterans ‘‘Fund’’) is considering revising its depository institutions greater flexibility Affairs. regulations implementing the Bank in planning BEA Program activities year ACTION: Notice. Enterprise Award (‘‘BEA’’) Program. round as part of their community Before revising such regulations in the reinvestment strategies and to take into SUMMARY: The Veterans Health form of an interim rule, the Fund seeks account the longer lead times often Administration (VHA), Department of

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 36220 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an d. CHAMPVA Potential Liability DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS opportunity for public comment on the Claim, VA Form 10–7959D. AFFAIRS proposed collection of certain e. VA Spina Bifida Healthcare information by the agency. Under the Benefits, Claim for Miscellaneous [OMB Control No. 2900±0098] Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of Expenses, VA Form 10–7959E. Agency Information Collection OMB Control Number: 2900–0219. 1995, Federal agencies are required to Activities Under OMB Review publish notice in the Federal Register Type of Review: Reinstatement, with concerning each proposed collection of change, of a previously approved AGENCY: Veterans Benefits information, including each proposed collection for which approval has Administration, Department of Veterans Reinstatement, with change, of a expired. Affairs. Abstract: The following forms are previously approved collection for ACTION: Notice. which approval has expired, and allow used by Civilian Health and Medical 60 days for public comment in response Program-VA (CHAMPVA) and spina SUMMARY: In compliance with the to the notice. This notice solicits bifida claimants to claim reimbursement Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 comments for information needed to for medical care and by VA to determine (44 U.S.C., 3501 et seq.), this notice adjudicate and pay healthcare benefit eligibility, process claims, detect fraud announces that the Veterans Benefits claims. and recover costs from third parties. Administration (VBA), Department of a. VA Form 10–10D is used to Veterans Affairs, has submitted the DATES: Written comments and determine eligibility of persons collection of information abstracted recommendations on the proposed applying for healthcare benefits under below to the Office of Management and collection of information should be the CHAMPVA program. Budget (OMB) for review and comment. received on or before August 7, 2000. b. VA Form 10–7959A is used to The PRA submission describes the ADDRESSES: Submit written comments adjudicate claims for CHAMPVA nature of the information collection and on the collection of information to Ann benefits. its expected cost and burden; it includes c. VA Form 10–7959C is used to W. Bickoff, Veterans Health the actual data collection instrument. Administration (193B1), Department of systematically obtain Other Health DATES: Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, Insurance information and to correctly Comments must be submitted on NW., Washington, DC 20420. Please coordinate benefits among all liable or before July 7, 2000. refer to ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0219’’ parties. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY OF in any correspondence. d. VA Form 10–7959D is used to THE SUBMISSION CONTACT: Denise FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann recover costs associated with healthcare McLamb, Information Management W. Bickoff at (202) 273–8310 or Fax services related to injury or illness Service (045A4), Department of (202) 273–9381. caused by a third party. Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, e. VA Form 10–7959E is used by VA NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Spina Bifida Healthcare beneficiaries to 8030 or FAX (202) 273–5981. Please PRA of 1995 (Public Law 104–13; 44 claim payment or reimbursement for refer to ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0098.’’ U.S.C., 3501–3520), Federal agencies healthcare services and related travel must obtain approval from the Office of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: expenses. Title: Application for Survivors’ and Management and Budget (OMB) for each Affected Public: Individuals or collection of information they conduct Dependents’ Educational Assistance Households, Business or Other for- (Under Provisions of Chapter 35, Title or sponsor. This request for comment is Profit. being made pursuant to Section 38, U.S.C.), VA Form 22–5490. Estimated Annual Burden: 60,467 OMB Control Number: 2900–0098. 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. hours. With respect to the following Type of Review: Extension of a a. VA Form 10–10D—1,500 hours. currently approved collection. collection of information, VHA invites b. VA Form 10–7959A—50,000 hours. Abstract: VA Form 22–5490 serves as comments on: (1) Whether the proposed c. VA Form 10–7959C—6,200 hours. collection of information is necessary d. VA Form 10–7959D—1,167 hours. an application for Dependents’ for the proper performance of VHA’s e. VA Form 10–7959E—1,600 hours. Educational Assistance (DEA). Spouses, functions, including whether the surviving spouses, and children of Estimated Average Burden Per information will have practical utility; veterans must submit evidence to Respondent (2) the accuracy of VHA’s estimate of establish eligibility and entitlement to the burden of the proposed collection of a. VA Form 10–10D—10 minutes. DEA under Title 38, U.S.C., 3513. VA information; (3) ways to enhance the b. VA Form 10–7959A—10 minutes. uses the information to determine if an quality, utility, and clarity of the c. VA Form 10–7959C—6 minutes. individual claimant qualifies for DEA information to be collected; and (4) d. VA Form 10–7959D—7 minutes. benefits. e. VA Form 10–7959E—4 minutes. An agency may not conduct or ways to minimize the burden of the Frequency of Response: On occasion. collection of information on sponsor, and a person is not required to Estimated Number of Respondents: respond to a collection of information respondents, including through the use 405,000. of automated collection techniques or unless it displays a currently valid OMB a. VA Form 10–10D—9,000. control number. The Federal Register the use of other forms of information b. VA Form 10–7959A—300,000. technology. c. VA Form 10–7959C—62,000. Notice with a 60-day comment period d. VA Form 10–7959D—10,000. soliciting comments on this collection Titles e. VA Form 10–7959E—24,000. of information was published on March 9, 2000 at page 12627. a. Application for CHAMPVA Dated: May 11, 2000. Benefits, VA Form 10–10D. Affected Public: Individuals or b. CHAMPVA Claim Form, VA Form By direction of the Secretary: households. 10–7959A. Donald L. Neilson, Estimated Annual Burden: 10,050 c. CHAMPVA—Other Health Director, Information Management Service. hours. Insurance (OHI) Certification, VA Form [FR Doc. 00–14265 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Estimated Average Burden Per 10–7959C. BILLING CODE 8320±01±P Respondent: 30 minutes.

VerDate 112000 13:40 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36221

Frequency of Response: Once—Initial Application. Estimated Number of Respondents: 20,100. Send comments and recommendations concerning any aspect of the information collection to VA’s OMB Desk Officer, Allison Eydt, OMB Human Resources and Housing Branch, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503 (202) 395–4650. Please refer to ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0098’’ in any correspondence. Dated: May 18, 2000. By direction of the Secretary. Donald L. Neilson, Director, Information Management Service. [FR Doc. 00–14264 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320±01±P

VerDate 112000 19:50 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 07JNN1 36222

Corrections Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110

Wednesday, June 7, 2000

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER On page 30175, in the second column, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE contains editorial corrections of previously after the heading, the date is added to COMMISSION published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, read as set forth above. and Notice documents. These corrections are prepared by the Office of the Federal [FR Doc. C0–11682 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] [Release No. 34-42760; File No. SR-NASD- Register. Agency prepared corrections are BILLING CODE 1505±01±D 99-26] issued as signed documents and appear in the appropriate document categories Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice elsewhere in the issue. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by COMMISSION National Association of Securities [File No. 500-1] Dealers, Inc. Relating to Denial of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Access Procedures COMMISSION In the Matter of Asthma Disease Management, Inc.; Order of May 5, 2000. [Release No. 34-42758; File No. SR-NYSE- Suspension of Trading 99-48] Correction May 8, 2000. Self-Regulatory Organizations; New In notice document 00–11807 York Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order Correction beginning on page 30460 in the issue of Approving Proposed Change To In notice document 00–11798 Thursday, May 11, 2000, make the Rescind Exchange Rule 390 appearing on page 30154 in the issue of following correction: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 make the On page 30460, in the third column, May 5, 2000. following correction: after the heading, the date is added to Correction In the third column, after the heading, read as set forth above. the date is added to read as set forth In notice document 00–11682 above. [FR Doc. C0–11807 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] beginning on page 30175 in the issue of BILLING CODE 1505±01±D Wednesday, May 10, 2000, make the [FR Doc. C0–11798 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] following correction: BILLING CODE 1505±01±D

VerDate 112000 19:54 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4734 Sfmt 4734 E:\FR\FM\07JNCX.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNCX Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part II

Department of Justice Antitrust Division

United States v. Allied Waste Industries, et al.; Response to Public Comments on Antitrust Consent Decree and Joint Motion for Entry of a Modified Final Judgment; Notice

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36224 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE filed with the Court. Copies of the defendants in raising prices in some markets Complaint, Hold Separate Stipulation in order to avoid potential price wars with Antitrust Division and Order, proposed Final Judgment, the defendants elsewhere. You state that Competitive Impact Statement, the selling the assets to a major integrated [Civil No. 99±1962] company could reduce competition and United States Certificate of Compliance result in increased prices. United States v. Allied Waste with Provisions of the Antitrust The United States could not categorically Industries, et al.; Response to Public Procedures and Penalties Act (to which conclude that selling the assets required to be Comments on Antitrust Consent the public comments and the United divested under the proposed Final Judgment Decree and Joint Motion for Entry of a States responses are attached), proposed to a large national waste collection and Modified Judgment Modified Final Judgment, and the disposal firm would be less competitive than Memorandum of the United States in a sale to a municipal agency or small Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Support of Entry of the Proposed independent firm, or that large waste companies are more prone to collude, when Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, Modified Final Judgment are available 15 U.S.C. 16(b)–(h), that on May 10, given the opportunity, than small for inspection in Room 215 of the independent firms. Also, large waste 2000, the United States filed its Antitrust Division, Department of responses to public comments on the collection and disposal companies may enjoy Justice, 325 7th Street, NW., some competitive advantages, such as better proposed Final Judgment in United Washington, DC 20530 (telephone: 202– access to capital and more extensive States v. Allied Waste Industries, Inc., et 514–2481), and at the office of the Clerk experience. These advantages would make al. (‘‘Allied’’), Civil No. 99–1962 (D.D.C. of the United States District Court for them in some respects more formidable filed July 20, 1999), with the United the District of Columbia, Third Street competitors than small independent firms. States District Court in Washington, DC. Thank you for bringing your concerns to On July 20, 1999, the United States and Constitution Avenue, NW., our attention, and we hope this information filed a civil antitrust complaint, which Washington, DC 20001. will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Copies of any of these materials may alleged that the proposed acquisition by Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 be obtained upon request and payment Allied of Browning-Ferris Industries, U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and of a copying fee. Inc. (‘‘BFI’’) would violate section 7 of this response will be published in the Federal Register and filed with the Court. the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18, by Constance K. Robinson, Sincerely yours, substantially lessening competition in Director of Operations & Merger Enforcement, waste collection and/or disposal Antitrust Division. J. Robert Kramer II, Chief, Litigation II Section. services, or both, in a number of markets Note: The letter dated October 5, 1999 from around the country, including the Peter Anderson of Recycle Worlds Consulting House of Representatives greater Chicago metropolitan market. was not able to be published in the Federal The proposed Final Judgment, filed Register but a copy can be obtained from the Committee on the Judiciary on July 20, 1999, requires Allied and U.S. Department of Justice, Document Group, October 5, 1999. 325 7th Street, NW., Room 215, Washington, BFI to divest commercial waste J. Robert Kramer II, Esq., DC 20530 or you may call and request a copy collection and/or municipal solid waste Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust at (202) 514–2481. disposal operations in each of the Division, United States Department of geographic areas alleged in the U.S. Department of Justice Justice, 1401 H Street, NW., Suite 3000, Complaint. This includes the divestiture Washington, DC 20530. Antitrust Division of commercial routes that serve the City Re United States v. Allied Waste Industries, of Chicago and Cook, DuPage, Will, May 10, 2000. No. 99 CV 01962. Kane, McHenry and Lake counties, IL. Peter Anderson, Dear Mr. Kramer: On August 6, 1999, the These routes included municipal Recycle Worlds, 4513 Vernon Blvd., Suite 15, Department of Justice published a Tunney Madison, WI 53705–4964. franchise waste business. Because of Act notice of a proposed final judgment in comments received objecting to the Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in the above referenced case. 64 Fed. Reg. 42962 (August 6, 1999). As required by the Act, the divestiture of the municipal franchises, United States v. Allied Waste Industries, Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Department has invited public comment on the United States determined and Allied No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). the proposed final judgment. agreed that instead of the municipal Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter responds to I have received correspondence from the franchise contract work being divested, your letter of October 5, 1999 commenting on DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference, Allied would be permitted to retain the the Final Judgment in this case on behalf of representing most of the local governments in municipal franchise contracts and Recycle Works. The Complaint in this case my district, and the Village of Lisle divest instead additional assets which charged, among other things, that Allied’s requesting, certain changes to the proposed are not required to be divested by the acquisition of BFI would substantially lessen final judgment. A copy of this proposed Final Judgment. These competition in the collection or disposal of correspondence is attached for your review. small container commercial waste in the In essence, the Conference asks that the additional assets consist of residential consent decree not require local governments and rolloff waste hauling business in the greater Chicago metropolitan market. The proposed modified Final Judgment, now to rebid their waste collection contracts in greater Chicago metropolitan market. A pending in federal district court in the middle of the contract terms. I modified version of the proposed Washington, DC, would settle the case by understand that these contracts tend to run Judgment (Modified Final Judgment), requiring the defendants to divest a number from three to six years and that the current filed on May 11, 2000, permits Allied to of waste collection routes and waste disposal contracts are generally viewed as retain the municipal franchise business facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan advantageous to the communities. By and to divest instead the residential and market. This relief, if approved by the Court, allowing current contracts to run their term, rolloff waste hauling business. would establish one or more new competitors local governments will receive substantial Public comment on the proposed in this market for which relief was sought. savings, and the potentially procompetitive benefits of the consent decree will be delayed Judgment was invited within the In your letter, you urged the United States not to approve any asset divestiture under for only a short period. This strikes me as a statutory 60-day comment period. The the proposed Final Judgment to one of the reasonable short term accommodation, and I public comments and the United States major integrated waste collection and recommend it to you. responses thereto are hereby published disposal firms. In your view, these firms may I appreciate your attention to my views and in the Federal Register and have been be more inclined to cooperate with the those of the local governments in my district.

VerDate 112000 20:24 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36225

Please place this letter in whatever public filed a motion with the Court to modify the would protect BFI’s existing franchise files are appropriate under applicable law. proposed Final Judgment which would agreements with units of local government. Please feel free to contact me if I may be of permit Allied to retain the municipal The Conference supports consideration of further assistance. franchise contracts initially required to be the following suggestions previously Sincerely, divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate submitted to the Department of Justice by the West Cook County Solid Waste Agency: Henry J. Hyde, the municipal franchise contracts, which were required to be divested, until the (1) Modify the definition of ‘‘Collection of Chairman. Court’s acceptance of the modification to the small container solid waste’’ to exclude from cc: Mr. Ronald S. Ghilardi, DuPage Mayors proposed Final Judgment. the definition ‘‘any collection of waste from and Managers Conference; Ms. Barbara J. I have responded directly to the customers that is being provided subject to Adamec, Village of Lisle. Conference and the Village of Lisle the terms of a properly executed, legally binding contract or franchise agreement with U.S. Department of Justice addressing their concerns. Copies of my responses are enclosed. a unit of local government,’’ or Antitrust Division Thank you for bringing your concerns and (2) Modify the proposed Final Judgment Order to limit the divestiture of commercial May 10, 2000. theirs to our attention, and we hope this information will help alleviate them. routes that ‘‘serve any non-franchised or Honorable Henry J. Hyde, Pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures and open competition ares.’’ U.S. House of Representives, 2138 Rayburn Implementing either of these two Building, Washington, DC 20515–6216. Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and those of the Conference and suggestions will avoid the adverse impacts to Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in Village of Lisle, and this response will be local governments that currently have franchise agreements with BFI, while also (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, published in the Federal Register and filed preserving the Department of Justice’s goal of Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. with the Court. No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999) promoting competition in waste hauling Sincerely yours, Dear Congressman Hyde: This letter services. responds to your letter of October 5, 1999 Robert Kramer II, Sincerely, commenting on the final Judgment in this Chief, Litigation II Section. Ronald S. Ghilardi, case on behalf of the DuPage Mayors and DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference President, DuPage Mayors and Managers Managers conference (‘‘Conference’’) and Conference. Village of Lisle. The Complaint in this case September 22, 1999. cc: House Speaker Dennis Hastert; U.S. charged, among other things, that Allied’s Anthony Harris, Senator Dick Durbin; U.S. Senator Peter acquisition of BFI would substantially lessen Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Fitzgerald; Congresswoman Judy Biggert; competition in the collection or disposal of Justice, 1401 H Street, Northwest, Suite Congressman Henry J. Hyde. small container commercial waste in the 3000, Washington, DC 20530. greater Chicago metropolitan market. The U.S. Department of Justice proposed modified Final Judgment, now Re United States v. Allied Waste Industries, pending in federal district court in Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Antitrust Division Inc.—Case No. 1:99 CV 01962. Washington, DC., would settle the case by May 10, 2000. requiring the defendants to divest a number Dear Mr. Harris: The DuPage Mayors and of waste collection routes and waste disposal Managers Conference, an association of the Ronald S. Ghilardi, facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan 35 municipalities located in DuPage County, DuPage Mayors and Managers Conference, market. This relief, if approved by the Court, Illinois, respectfully submits the following 1220 Oak Brook Road, Oak Brook, IL would establish one or more new competitors comments related to the proposed Final 60523–2203. in this market for which relief was sought. Judgment Order issued in United States v. Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in In your letter, you state that the Conference Allied Waste Industries and Browning-Ferris (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, and the Village of Lisle express concern that Industries (BFI) Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. the Final judgment, by ordering divestiture of The proposed Final Judgment Order No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). BFI’s small container commercial waste requires BFI to sell their small container Dear Mr. Ghilardi: This letter responds to business, may interfere with BFI’s existing commercial waste collection operations in your letter of September 22, 1999 government franchise contracts which also several highly concentrated markets, commenting on the Final Judgment in this includes the disposal of the communities’ including the Chicago region. BFI’s case on behalf of DuPage Mayors and residential waste. The local communities fear divestiture of these operations will have the Managers Conference. The Complaint in this that requiring Allied to divest only the following adverse impacts on communities case charged, among other things, that franchise commercial waste collection that have exclusive contracts with BFI for the Allied’s acquisition of BFI would business would, in effect, split the collection provision of commercial and/or multi-family substantially lessen competition in the business between two firms—the purchaser collection services; collection or disposal of small container who would have the franchise commercial (1) Since the proposed Final Judgment commercial waste in the greater Chicago waste business; and Allied, which would Order would allow BFI to maintain its hand metropolitan market. The proposed modified retain the residential and recycling waste pick-up collection services, it is likely that Final Judgment, now pending in federal collection services. The communities believe one company would be responsible for district court in Washington, DC., would that this will result in the purchaser collecting small container solid waste from settle the case by requiring the defendants to providing a lower level of service, or result commercial and multi-family customers divest a number of waste collection routes in additional trucks being sent down city while BFI would still be responsible for the and waste disposal facilities in the greater streets. hand pick-up of recyclables from the same Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if In light of this concern raised by you and customers. This will undermine the policy approved by the Court, would establish one others, the United States and Allied reached decision made by many communities to have or more new competitors in this market for agreement that instead of the municipal an exclusive contract with a single company which relief was sought. franchise contracts being divested, Allied to provide all waste collection services in the In your letter, you expressed concern that would be permitted to retain the municipal community. the Final Judgment, by ordering divestiture of franchise contracts and divest instead (2) Many communities will have to re-bid BFI’s small container commercial waste additional assets which are not required to be their existing contracts to identify a new business, may interfere with BFI’s existing divested by the proposed modified Final provider for small container commercial government franchise contracts which also Judgment. These additional assets include waste collection services. includes the disposal of the communities’ residential and rolloff waste hauling The DuPage Mayors and Mangers residential waste. The local communities fear business. These assets have been acquired by Conference requests that the Department of that requiring Allied to divest only the Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved Justice consider amending the proposed franchise commercial waste collection by the United States. The United States has Final Judgment Order in a manner that business would, in effect, split the collection

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36226 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices business between two firms—the purchaser Relevant Disposal Assets. The purchase of of BFI would substantially lessen who would have the franchise commercial these assets by a unit of local government competition in the collection or disposal of waste business, and Allied, which would such as the Agency would enhance and foster small container commercial waste in the retain the residential and recycling collection competition in the marketplace. Yet the greater Chicago metropolitan market. The services. The communities fear that this will proposed timeline for the ordered proposed modified Final Judgment, now result in the purchaser providing a lower divestitures in this case would make it pending in federal district court in level of service, or result in additional trucks virtually impossible for the Agency to Washington, DC., would settle the case by being sent down city streets. successfully compete for this asset. requiring the defendants to divest a number In light of this concern raised by you and Requiring Allied to divest itself of these of waste collection routes and waste disposal others, the United States and Allied reached assets within 60 days after the approval of facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan agreement that instead of the municipal the Final Judgment by the Court creates an market. This relief, if approved by the Court, franchise contracts being divested, Allied unfair and unreasonable bias towards large, would establish one or more new competitors would be permitted to retain the municipal highly liquid, waste hauling firms and denies in this market for which relief was sought. franchise contracts and divest instead smaller companies and local governments In your letter, you urged the United States additional assets which are not required to be (either individually or in the form of a not to approve any asset divestiture under divested by the proposed modified Natural consortium) sufficient time to conduct proper the proposed Final Judgment to one of the Final Judgment. These additional assets due diligence and arrange for the necessary major integrated waste collection and include residential and rolloff waste hauling financing to be able to effectively bid on the disposal firms. In your view, these firms may business. These assets have been acquired by available assets. be more inclined to cooperate with the Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved The proposed Final Judgment as drafted, defendants in raising prices in some markets by the United States. The United States has would serve to exacerbate the decline in the in order to avoid potential price wars with filed a motion with the Court to modify the number of local government agencies and the defendants elsewhere. You state that proposed Final Judgment which would independent solid waste companies that are selling the assets to a major integrated permit Allied to retain the municipal able to compete in the marketplace. This company could reduce competition and franchise contracts intially required to be would be especially true if, as according to result in increased prices. divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate recent press reports, Allied were to sell all The United States could not categorically the municipal franchise contracts, which assets in the Chicago area to only one entity. conclude that selling the assets required to be were required to be divested, until the This would reduce competition to only three divested under the proposed Final Judgment Court’s acceptance of the modification to the significant competitors—all of which would to a large national waste collection and proposed Final Judgment. be vertically integrated and in a position to disposal firm would be less competitive than Thank you for bringing your concerns to control pricing within the market. Such an a sale to a municipal agency or small our attention, and we hope this information event could create an anti-competitive independent firm, or that large waste will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the market environment that could lead to companies are more prone to collude, when Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 increased prices that would clearly be given the opportunity, than small U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and harmful to municipalities and to the general independent firms. Also, large waste this response will be published in the business community. collection and disposal companies may enjoy Federal Register and filed with the Court. Therefore, in order to ensure that all some competitive advantages, such as better Sincerely yours, interested parties are provided a fair and access to capital and more extensive J. Robert Kramer II, equal opportunity to bid on one or more of experience. These advantages would make the assets, SWANA strongly recommends them in some respects more formidable Chief, Litigation II Section. that the proposed Final Judgment be competitors than small independent firms. Thank you for bringing your concerns to Solid Waste Association of North America modified to require Allied to take bids on the assets individually. Furthermore, SWANA our attention, and we hope this information October 5, 1999. recommends that the proposed Final will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, Judgment be modified to require Allied to Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 Chief, Litigation II Section, Anti Trust receive bids to acquire Relevant Disposal U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Assets and Relevant Hauling Assets for 180 this response will be published in the 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, days after the Final Judgment has been Federal Register and filed with the Court. Washington, DC 20530. approved by the Court (rather than within a Sincerely yours, Re Proposed Consent Decree in United States 60 day limit as specified in the proposed J. Robert Kramer II, Final Judgment). v. Allied Waste Industries, Inc. and Chief, Litigation II Section. Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.—Case SWANA appreciates the opportunity No. 1:99 CV 01962 provided by the Court to file these comments Village of Lisle and looks forward to your favorable Dear Mr. Kramer: With over 6,700 August 24, 1999. members, and 47 chapters in the U.S. and consideration of this request. Canada, the Solid Waste Association of North Sincerely, Anthony Harris, America (SWANA) is the largest professional Anti Trust Division, U.S. Department of John H. Skinner Ph.D., Justice, 1401 H. Street, Northwest, Suite association in the solid waste management Executive Director and CEO. field. Our mission is to advance the practice 3000, Washington, DC 20503. of environmentally and economically sound U.S. Department of Justice Re United States v. Allied Waste Industries, municipal solid waste management. On Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, behalf of SWANA, I am writing to offer Antitrust Division Inc.—Case No. 1:99 CV 0192. comments regarding the draft Final Judgment May 10, 2000. Dear Mr. Harris: I am writing to you on order that has been filed with the U.S. John H. Skinner, behalf of the Village of Lisle Mayor and District Court for the District of Columbia in SWANA, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 700, Board of Trustees, with regard to the above the above referenced case. Silver Spring, MD 20910. captioned matter. SWANA supports, in principle, the With a population of 21,000, the Village of proposed Final Judgment directive which Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in Lisle, Lisle, Illinois, is considered small requires Allied Waste Industries, Inc. (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, compared to neighboring municipalities in (‘‘Allied’’) to divest itself of the Relevant Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. the Chicago region. However, we are well Disposal Assets and Relevant Hauling Assets. No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). known in this region and other parts of the One of SWANA’s members, the West Cook Dear Mr. Skinner: This letter responds to United States as a leader in developing user County Solid Waste Agency (representing 36 your letter of October 5, 1999 commenting on fee based programs designed to significantly local governments in Cook County, Illinois), the Final Judgment in this case on behalf of reduce solid waste to be landfilled. The has begun the process of pursuing its own SWANA. The Complaint in this case charged, Village has spent many hours and dollars interest in purchasing a portion of the among other things, that Allied’s acquisition developing creative, innovative programs

VerDate 112000 20:24 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36227 based on sound economic theories. Our gap in prices between the Waste Management Village of Lisle, programs have greatly reduced the municipal and ARC bids. If the Village of Lisle’s Barbara J. Adamec, solid waste stream in Lisle and, when other contract is voided, and BFI/Allied is removed Assistant Village Manager. communities have copied our programs, from bidding process, it is very likely that those communities have experienced similar Waste Management will submit similar Enclosures: starting results. prices or higher prices on dumpsters which LEAP Curbside Program brochure To demonstrate a few of the many ways we would represent an increase over the current LEAP Multi-Family Program brochure Illinois Recycling Association newsletter—4– have impacted solid waste programs across contract costs. 9–93 the nation, please note the following The proposed Final Judgment Order will accomplishments: Analysis A—Overview Analysis of Solid have a negative impact on both of our 1. Signed the first user-fee based, Waste Services comprehensive solid waste program for programs and will probably increase costs to Village of Lisle Mayor & Board of Trustees refuse, recyclable and yard waste in the State our residents because fewer vendors will be Carl Doerr, Village Manager of Illinois. Developed the program in 1989 proposing/bidding on our contract. In past U.S. Department of Justice and implemented it in 1990. Subsequently, bidding sessions, Waste Management and BFI the majority of communities in northern were the only bidders in close competition Antitrust Division with respect to prices and equivalent Illinois have adopted similar plans with great May 10, 2000. results. The success in Illinois was parroted services. With BFI out of the picture, the in neighboring states and as word spread, our opportunity to secure the same or lower Barbara J. Adamec, program was copied in states across the prices appears less likely. Assistant Village Manager, Village of Lisle, county. Attached please find a copy of an With increased costs aside, the greatest loss 1040 Burlington Avenue, Lisle, IL 60532– 1898, article published in Resource Recycling of all will be the loss of a very innovative, magazine shortly after our program in Lisle comprehensive program for Lisle residents Re Comment on Proposed final Judgment began. We handled hundreds of calls from whereby the pickup of refuse, recyclables in the (United States v. Allied Waste people requesting information on the and yard waste are collected by one vendor Industries, Inc. and Browning-Ferris program and, in fact, received requests for in a smooth, seamless manner. This user fee Industries, Inc., No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C. July information from as far away as Great Britain based program has influenced solid waste 21, 1999). and Brazil. programs across the country and the damage Dear Ms. Adamec: This letter responds to 2. Lisle is unique in that over 53% of the done to our program in Lisle will be a loss your letter of August 24, 1999 commenting living units in the Village are multi-family others communities as well because we will on the Final Judgment in this case on behalf residences. Once the single family program not be able to continue to fine tune and of the Village of Lisle. The Complaint in this was up and running smoothly, we developed experiment with our program as designed. case charged, among other things, that a pilot multi-family recycling program and Historically speaking, the waste industry Allied’s acquisition of BFI would experimented with ways to encourage waste has defined residential service as curbside substantially lessen competition in the reduction through on-site recycling centers. collection or disposal of small container service whereby residents place garbage in After analyzing the results of our commercial waste in the greater Chicago bags or cans at the curb. They also defined experiments, we developed a comprehensive; metropolitan market. The proposed modified commercial service as service whereby refuse user fee based system for all of the multi- Final Judgment, now pending in federal family units in Lisle, meaning townhouses, is placed in a dumpster. We decided to district court in Washington, DC., would coach homes, apartments and change the definition in 1993 to suit our own settle the case by requiring the defendants to condominiums. Typically these units have needs. Therefore, in Lisle we define divest a number of waste collection routes dumpsters (small containers) on the site for residential service as service for our and waste disposal facilities in the greater refuse disposal along with mini-recycling residents, to include all living units (single- Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, is centers for recyclable. One waste hauler family homes or multi-family homes). approved by the Court, would establish one collects both materials from the property As Commercial service is defined as non- of more new competitors in this market for you can see from the attached brochure, the residential service. Perhaps you should which relief was sought. program has been extremely successful. consider applying our definitions to the Final In your letter, you express concern that the The proposed Final Judgment Order, Judgment Order and force BFI/Allied to Final Judgment, by ordering divestiture of the which requires BFI to sell for their small diversify their ‘‘non-living unit’’ accounts. BFI’s small container commercial waste container commercial waste collection Opening competition up in the commercial/ business, may interfere with BFI’s existing operations, would destroy our LEAP Multi- business arena would allow small waste government franchise contract which also Family Program and would severely impact hauler to compete fairly, particularly includes the disposal of the village’s our LEAP Curbside Program. BFI currently considering the fact that most small waste residential waste. The Village of Lisle fears holds an exclusive contract with the Village haulers do not have the equipment and that requiring Allied to divest only the of Lisle to service all of our residential living manpower needed to handle large-scale franchise commercial waste collection units, both single-family and multi-family, community programs. business would, in effect, split the collection and those services are intertwined. If BFI To reduce municipal garbage, programs business between two firms—the purchaser must diversify itself or just the container must offer recycling opportunities, and the who would have the franchise commercial business, then our contract will be convenience factor of both activities must be waste business; and Allied, which would challenged. very high before people will participate. retain the residential and recycling waste The suggestion that we can re-bid the Thus, most municipal solid waste officials collection services. You believe that this will existing contract to identify a new provider will tell you that refuse removal/collections result in the purchases providing a lower will be a severe hardship for the Village of and recycling programs should not be level of service, or result in additional trucks Lisle. We just spent several months this year separated from each other, either by physical being sent down city streets. completing a Request For Competitive In light of this concern raised by you and location or by different vendors. Programs Proposals For Solid Waste Services, which others, the United States and Allied reached that fall to address this ‘‘marriage’’ lack resulted in an exclusive contract with BFI agreement that instead of the municipal continuity and more often than not fall. effective June 1, 1999. Subsequently, we franchise contracts being divested, Allied We would appreciate it if you would find incurred the expense of mailings to our would be permitted to retain the municipal residents, the time taken to re-educate way to protect our current franchise franchise contracts and divest instead residents on changes to our programs, and agreement with BFI so that our current single additional assets which are not required to be the exposure to higher prices for services for family and multi-family programs remain divested by the proposed modified Final our residents. intact and the Village of Lisle can continue Judgment. These additional assets include As far as competition is concerned, to develop additional methods to reduce the residential and rolloff waste hauling attached please find a copy of my analysis of municipal solid waste stream. business. These assets have been acquired by the three proposals received. Note the wide Sincerely, Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36228 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices by the United States. The United States has Captain, Civil Engineer Corps, U.S. Navy, Sincerely yours, filed a motion with the Court to modify the Navy Public Works Center, Bldg. 1–A, J. Robert Kramer II, proposed Final Judgment which would 201 Decatur Avenue, Great Lakes, IL permit Allied to retain the municipal 60088–5600. Chief, Litigation II Section. franchise contracts initially required to be Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in City of Naperville divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, September 15, 1999. the municipal franchise contracts, which Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., were required to be divested, until the No. CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999) Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, Court’s acceptance of the modification to the Chief Litigation II Section, Anti-Trust Dear Captain Katzwinkel: This letter proposed Final Judgment. Division, United States Department of responds to your letter of September 17, 1999 Thank you for bringing your concerns to Justice, 1401 H Street, Northwest, Suite our attention, and we hope this information commenting on the Final Judgment in this 3000, Washington, DC 20530. case on behalf of the Department of the Navy. will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Regarding United States vs. Allied Waste Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 The Complaint in this case charged, among other things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI Industries, Inc. and Browning-Ferris U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and Industries Inc.; Case 199 CV 01962. this response will be published in the would substantially lessen competition in the Federal Register and filed with the Court. collection or disposal of small container Dear Mr. Kramer: The City of Naperville, as one of the largest municipalities in Sincerely yours, commercial waste in the greater Chicago metropolitan market. The proposed modified Illinois, contracts for waste services for the J. Robert Kramer II, Final Judgment, now pending in federal majority of our 125,000 residents. We Chief, Litigation II Section. district court in Washington, DC., would competitively bid our refuse and landscaping settle the case by requiring the defendants to service contract in 1998 and awarded a five- Department of the Navy divest a number of waste collection routes year contract to Browning-Ferris Industries, September 17, 2000. and waste disposal facilities in the greater Inc. (also known as BFI.) In reviewing the Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if proposed final judgment, we are concerned Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust approved by the Court, would establish one that the proposed final judgment in the Division, U.S. Department of Justice, or more new competitors in this market for antitrust action against BFI will have an 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, which relief was sought. adverse impact on the City’s five-year Washington, DC 20530. In your letter, you express concern that the contract with BFI. The City is also concerned that if BFI is unable to find a successor to Dear Mr. Kramer: I am forwarding Final Judgment, by ordering divestiture of parts of its Naperville contract under the information for your consideration in making BFI’s small container commercial waste specific terms and conditions of the contract, a Final Judgment regarding the merger business, may interfere with BFI’s existing the City may be forced to re-bid all or between Allied Waste Industries (Allied) and government franchise contract which also Browning Ferris Industries (BFI). The includes the disposal of the Great Lakes portions of the City’s largest monetary Department of the Navy contracts for the residential waste. You fear that requiring contract within an unacceptably short time collection and disposal of residential and Allied to divest only the franchise frame of sixty days. I believe that the final commercial solid waste generated at the commercial waste collection business would, judgment, if implemented as presented, will create serious problems for the City of Naval Training Center, Great Lakes, Illinois. in effect, split the collection business Naperville. This installation has a population of some between two firms—the purchaser who The City has three specific concerns 40,000 sailors, families and civilian would have the franchise commercial waste related to the final judgment: employees. Current solid waste services are business; and Allied, which would retain the 1. The final judgment dictates that BFI provided by BFI under two separate residential and recycling waste collection contracts. must sell the only transfer station within services. You believe that this will result in DuPage County. Three years ago, the City The proposed Final Judgment requires that the purchaser providing a lower level of BFI divest the Zion landfill, commercial considered siting a transfer station when the service, or result in additional trucks being nearest landfill closed. We declined because waste collection routes within Lake County, sent down the streets of Great Lakes. and transfer stations in Northern Cook industry experts assured us that private In light of this concern raised by you and haulers would site transfer stations. BFI was County. Historically, the Navy has received others, the United States and Allied reached only two competitive proposals for our waste the only company in the area that pursued agreement that instead of the municipal this goal and it took them until a few months service at this location—Waste Management franchise contracts being divested, Allied and BFI. I am concerned that divesting the ago to open a transfer station. As part of our would be permitted to retain the municipal contract with BFI, we receive collection transfer and commercial collection routes franchise contracts and divest instead from the Zion landfill operations will service at a guaranteed rate per ton utilizing additional assets which are not required to be this transfer station. We are concerned that significantly reduce the competitive position divested by the proposed modified Final of one of only two regional service providers. the sale of BFI’s transfer station and its Judgment. These additional assets include possible unavailability for Naperville’s solid This concern could result in increased cost residential and rolloff waste hauling and decreased service quality due to a lack waste, may result in longer driving distances business. These assets have been acquired by and increased disposal costs. The City needs of competition. Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved Your consideration of this information in written assurance that any successor to by the United States. The United States has Naperville’s contract with BFI will be bound making a Final Judgment is appreciated. For filed a motion with the Court to modify the further information, contact Mr. Mark by the terms and conditions of the contract, proposed Final Judgment which would particularly the cost of $34.75 per ton for the Schultz, Environmental Director at (847) permit Allied to retain the municipal 688–5999, extension 40. cost of landfill, incinerator, or transfer station franchise contracts initially required to be tipping fees. Sincerely, divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate 2. The proposed divestiture of all small E.J. Katzwinkel, the municipal franchise contracts, which container collection services may require the Captain, Civil Engineer Corps, U.S. Navy, were required to be divested, until the City to waive its no-subcontract provision of Commanding Officer, Navy Public Works Court’s acceptance of the modification to the its contract with BFI to accommodate BFI’s Center and Engineering Field Activity, proposed Final Judgment. commitments contained within the final Midwest. Thank you for bringing your concerns to judgment. We believe that to bid small our attention, and we hope this information container collection service separately from U.S. Department of Justice will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the the rest of our services in the future will Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 Antitrust Division work to our economic disadvantage. That U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and yard waste is not included in the decision May 10, 2000. this response will be published in the and is collected at several City sites in small E.J. Katzwinkel, Federal Register and filed with the Court. containers further complicates this situation.

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36229

3. If successors to BFI’s small container waste. The city fears that requiring Allied to New York City to Spoon Ridge Landfill as collection service will not be bound by the divest only the franchise commercial waste previously planned by BFI. As such, the terms and conditions already present in our collection business would, in effect, split the divestiture removes an important potential contract with BFI, the sixty-day divestiture collection business between two firms—the economic development opportunity for the time frame does not provide the City with purchaser who would have the franchise County of Fulton. adequate time to prepare, release and commercial waste business; and Allied, Spoon Ridge Landfill/BFI is the second evaluate bids on the services voided by the which would retain the residential and largest tax payer in the County of Fulton. It final judgment. recycling waste collection services. The city has a current assessed valuation of Finally, as you determine the wisest course believes that this will result in the purchaser $2,292,970.00. It pays and annual tax to the of action to ensure competitiveness providing a lower level of service, or result various taxing districts in the County of throughout the United States, please consider in additional trucks being sent down city Fulton slightly in excess of $232,077.00. that municipalities such as Naperville face streets. It is the understanding of the County of the possibility of rebidding entire collection In light of this concern raised by you and Fulton that Spoon Ridge Landfill was agreements. If Naperville’s agreement with others, the United States and Allied reached designated as a primary landfill site for waste BFI is re-bid, the proposed final judgment agreement that instead of the municipal from the City of New York. Spoon Ridge may impair Allied/BFI’s ability to compete, franchise contracts being divested, Allied Landfill has been closed for the approximate and we believe invalidate the Justice would be permitted to retain the municipal last year. The New York contract previously Department’s goal by resulting in an franchise contracts and divest instead secured by BFI would have caused the environment where there is less competition additional assets which are not required to be reopening and continued operation of Spoon than currently exists. divested by the proposed modified Final Ridge Landfill. If you or your staff would like to discuss Judgment. These additional assets include It is the understanding of the County of the issues raised in this letter further please residential and rolloff waste hauling Fulton that Allied was to receive benefit of contact Mr. David Barber, Director of Public business. These assets have been acquired by the New York contract and would have Works, 630/420–6096. Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved continued with the plan to dispose of the Thank you for your consideration. by the United States. The United States has New York waste at the Spoon Ridge Landfill. Sincerely, filed a motion with the Court to modify the It is the Country’s understanding that the A. George Pradel, proposed Final Judgment which would Spoon Ridge Landfill is proposed to be permit Allied to retain the municipal conveyed to another landfill/waste disposal Mayor, City of Naperville. franchise contracts initially required to be firm known as Republic. It is the cc: U.S. Senator Richard Durbin, divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate understanding of the County that Republic, if Congressman William O. Lipinski, the municipal franchise contracts, which it acquires this site, would have no Congressman Rod Blagojevich, were required to be divested, until the immediate plans to reopen the facility and Congressman Danny Davis, Court’s acceptance of the modification to the would not be accepting any waste from New Congresswoman Judy Biggert, Mr. Peter proposed Final Judgment. York. T. Burchard, City Manager, U.S. Senator Thank you for bringing your concerns to The Spoon Ridge Landfill has previously Peter Fitzgerald, Congressman Luis our attention, and we hope this information entered into an agreement with the County of Gutierrez, Congressman Henry Hyde, will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Fulton for payments of certain sums to the Congressman Dennis Hastert, City Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 County of Fulton as and for or in lieu of a Council Members. U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and solid waste tippage fees. The County of this response will be published in the Fulton is required by state law to have a solid U.S. Department of Justice Federal Register and filed with the Court. waste management plan and implement its Antitrust Division Sincerely yours, terms. The agreement between Spoon Ridge May 10, 2000. J. Robert Kramer II, Landfill and the County of Fulton has generated for the County of Fulton since A. George Pradel, Chief, Litigation II Section. April of 1995; $180,000.00 to implement Mayor, City of Naperville, 400 South Eagle such plan. Street, Naperville, IL 60566–7020. Fulton County Board If the Spoon Ridge Landfill is required by September 14, 1999. Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment the proposed Consent Decree to go to another in (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, landfill operator, such as Republic, there Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. No. Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust does not appear to be much of a likelihood 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). Division, U.S. Department of Justice, that Spoon Ridge Landfill will open, operate, Dear Mr. Pradel: This letter responds to 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, or generate funds for the County of Fulton to your letter of September 15, 1999 Washington, DC 20005. implement its Solid Waste Management Plan. commenting on the Final Judgment in this Re Allied/BFI Consent Decree Case No. The County of Fulton would disagree with case on behalf of the City of Naperville. The 1:99CV01962. a premise upon which the proposed Consent Complaint in this case charged, among other Dear Mr. Kramer: The purpose of this letter Decree has been based. The City of Chicago things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI would is provide comment on the proposed Consent is 200 miles or more away from the Spoon substantially lessen competition in the Decree which requires Allied Waste Ridge Landfill site in Fulton County, Illinois. collection or disposal of small container Industries, Inc. to sell certain assets in There is no direct rail access from Chicago commercial waste in the greater Chicago connection with its acquisition of Browning to Spoon Ridge Landfill. Further, there is no metropolitan market. The proposed modified Ferris Industries, Inc. Specifically, the direct interstate highway from Chicago to Final Judgment, now pending in federal County of Fulton objects to the Department Spoon Ridge Landfill. district court in Washington, DC., would of Justice requirement that Allied divest itself As previously indicated in this letter, settle the case by requiring the defendants to of the Spoon Ridge Landfill located in Spoon Ridge Landfill has been closed for the divest a number of waste collection routes Fairview, Fulton County, Illinois. approximate last year or so, except for and waste disposal facilities in the greater In your analysis of the Chicago market, it opening for a day or two during the summer Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if is stated that Allied’s divestiture of the of 1999 to accept waste. If this facility was approved by the Court, would establish one Spoon Ridge Landfill would insure that the part of the Chicago geographic area, it would or more new competitors in this market for benefits of competition, lower prices and seem that there would be a steady stream of which relief was sought. better service would be preserved. It is the waste coming from Chicago to this site in In your letter, you express concern that the opinion of the County of Fulton that the Fulton County. Real economic facts have Final Judgment, by ordering divestiture of Spoon Ridge Landfill is not an important made the transportation of waste from the BFI’s small container commercial waste waste disposal operation for the Chicago Chicago market to the County of Fulton cost business, may interfere with BFI’s existing market. Requiring the divestiture of the prohibitive. government franchise contract which also Spoon Ridge Landfill would eliminate an The County of Fulton and a number of includes the disposal of the city’s residential opportunity for Allied to send waste from affected taxing districts will likely suffer

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36230 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices extreme if not devastating economic the landfill if it obtained a long-term contract district serves the communities of Ellisville, consequences if the proposed Consent Decree to dispose of New York City’s residential Fairview, London Mills, Maquon, and requires Allied to divest this property to a waste. Rapatee. The enrollment of the school district concern such as Republic. This landfill You stated that the future viability of in grades K–12 as of August 31, 1999 was facility is the second largest tax payer in the Spoon Ridge depends on its ability to attract 429. The current equalized assessed County. If this facility is not reopened, waste from New York City. By requiring valuation of the school district is certainly a fair argument could be made that Allied to divest this landfill to an $27,665,810. The current tax rate of $5.7774 its assessed valuation is over valued. If the independent competitor, ostensibly to help generates $1,598,365 of local revenue for the assessment is reduced, the County of Fulton alleviate competitive problems in the school district. The total budgeted revenue and a certain school district will see adverse Chicago market, the Final Judgment for the school district is $3,717,512. financial consequences. Finally, if this unnecessarily limits Allied’s ability to Therefore, local property taxes represent 43% facility can not have a ready stream of waste, compete for the contract to dispose of New of the total budgeted revenue for the school then, the County of Fulton will be without York City’s waste, and undermines the district. sufficient funds to meet a state mandate chances of Spoon Ridge ever opening again. requiring further implementation of a Solid The fact is that requiring Allied to divest Spoon River Valley CUSD No. 4 Concerns Waste Management Plan. Spoon Ridge to a new competitor in no way The current assessed valuation of the It is respectfully requested that the prevents Allied or any other firm from later Spoon Ridge Landfill is approximately Department of Justice reconsider and amend contracting with the new owner to dispose of $2,000,000 or about 7.2% of the total its Consent Decree with regard to the any New York City’s waste. Indeed, the new assessed valuation of the school district. The requirement that Allied divest itself of the owner would be free to make the landfill’s landfill generates about $115,548 in property Spoon Ridge Landfill. I remain. disposal capacity available to any person taxes for the district which is the equivalent Sincerely yours, who wishes to bid and enhance competition of four (4) full-time teacher salaries. The Board of Education is naturally concerned Mr. Bernard Oaks, for the contract to dispose of New York City’s waste. If the new owner believes, however, with decisions related to Spoon Ridge Chairman of the Fulton County Board. that the space in the landfill is much more Landfill that could have adverse cc: U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin, U.S. valuable to use in competing for the disposal consequences for the school district. We are Senator Peter G. Fitzgerald, Congressman of waste from the city of Chicago, then the concerned that the company that owns the Lane Evans, Governor George H. Ryan, new owner can choose to commit the landfill landfill will have the necessary resources State Senator George P. Shadid, State to competing in that market. Leaving Spoon both in operating capital and viable disposal Representative Michael K. Smith, Mr. Ridge with Allied, which already controls contracts to adequately maintain and operate Thomas VanWeelden, President, Allied nearly 35% of all disposal capacity in the the landfill so that it remains a major source Waste Industries, Inc. greater Chicago metropolitan market, would of property tax income for the school district. ensure that a single firm could dominate The loss of this source of income would U.S. Department of Justice waste disposal, and therefore, set the price of definitely have adverse affects upon the Antitrust Division disposal in the Chicago market. While this quality of education that we now provide to may make the landfill more valuable to the the students of the Spoon River Valley May 10, 2000. local community, it would adversely affect School District. Bernard Oaks, the prices paid by consumers for the disposal Chairman, Fulton County Board, Fulton of their municipal solid waste. Summary County Courthouse, 100 North Main Thank you for bringing your concerns to The Spoon River Valley CUSD No. 4 Board Street, Lewistown, IL 61542. our attention, and we hope this information of Education respectfully requests that the Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Department of Justice re-examine its decision United States v. Allied Waste Industries, Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 requiring that Allied divest itself of the Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and Spoon Ridge Landfill. We ask that the No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). this response will be published in the Department re-evaluate its decision based Federal Register and filed with the Court. Dear Mr. Oaks: This letter responds to your upon what is best for the residents and letter of September 14, 1999 commenting on Sincerely yours, students who would most closely be affected the Final Judgment in this case on behalf of J. Robert Kramer II, by this decision. Fulton County. The Complaint in this case Chief, Litigation II Section. Sincerely, charged, among other things, that Allied’s David D. Smith, acquisition of BFI would substantially lessen Spoon River Valley Schools President, Board of Education. competition in the collection or disposal of September 13, 1999. small container commercial waste in the cc: U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin, U.S. greater Chicago metropolitan market. The Mr. J. Robert Kramer, II, Senator Peter G. Fitzjerald, Congressman proposed modified Final Judgment, now Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust Lane Evans, Governor George H. Ryan, pending in federal district court in Division, U.S. Department of Justice, State Senator George P. Shadid, State Washington, DC., would settle the case by 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, Representative Michael K. Smith, Mr. requiring the defendants to divest a number Washington, D.C. 20005. Thomas VanWeelden, President, Allied of waste collection routes and waste disposal In Re Allied/BFI Consent Decree Case No. Waste Industries, Inc. 1.99CV01962. facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan U.S. Department of Justice market. This relief, if approved by the Court, Dear Mr. Kramer: The purpose of this letter would establish one or more new competitors is to provide comment on the proposed Antitrust Division in this market for which relief was sought. consent decree which requires Allied Waste May 10, 2000. In your letter, you express concern that the Industries, Inc. to sell certain assets in David D. Smith, Final Judgment, by requiring Allied to divest connection with its acquisition of Browning President, Board of Education, Spoon River the Spoon Ridge landfill, is unnecessary for Ferris Industries, Inc. Specifically the Spoon Valley Schools, Community Unit Dist. effective relief and might undermine the tax River Valley Community Unit School District No. 4, Rt. 1, London Mills, IL 61544. base of the local communities. The Spoon No. 4 Board of Education wishes to comment Ridge landfill is a relatively new site and the on the requirement that Allied divest itself of Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in largest landfill in the State of Illinois. BFI the Spoon Ridge Landfill located in Fairview, (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, recently closed the landfill because it found Illinois. Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., that the landfill was unable to attract enough No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). waste from the Chicago area to make it Spoon River Valley CUSD No. 4 Overview Dear Mr. Smith: This letter responds to viable. By closing the landfill, BFI reduced Spoon River Valley CUSD No. 4 is a rural your letter of September 13, 1999 its assessed value, and thus, the taxes it paid school district comprised of 157 square miles commenting on the Final Judgment in this to local communities. BFI intended to reopen in Fulton and Knox Counties. The school case on behalf of the Spoon River County

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36231

Schools. The Complaint in this case charged, Division, U.S. Department of Justice, a position to control pricing within the among other things, that Allied’s acquisition 1401 H Street, Northwest, Suite 3000, market. This would clearly by harmful to the of BFI would substantially lessen Washington, D.C. 20530. Agency and its member local governments by competition in the collection or disposal of Re United States v. Allied Waste Industries, creating an anti-competitive market small container commercial waste in the Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, environment. This, in turn, will increase greater Chicago metropolitan market. The Inc.—Case No. 1:99 CV 01962. costs to the Agency, its 36 member proposed modified Final Judgment, now Dear Mr. Kramer: On behalf of the 36 local municipalities and to the general business pending in federal district court in governments represented by the West Cook community. Washington, DC, would settle the case by County Solid Waste Agency (Cook County, Consequently, the Agency respectfully requiring the defendants to divest a number Illinois) (hereinafter, the ‘‘Agency’’). I am recommends that the proposed Final of waste collection routes and waste disposal writing to offer our comments and objections Judgement be modified to allow Allied to facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan regarding the draft Final Judgement order divest itself of the Relevant Disposal Assets market. This relief, if approved by the Court, that has been filed with the U.S. District and Relevant Hauling Assets in the Chicago would establish one or more new competitors Court for the District of Columbia (‘‘Court’’) Metropolitan Area (collectively the ‘‘Assets’’) in this market for which relief was sought. in the above referenced case. within 180 days after the Final Judgement In your letter, you express concern that the The Agency strongly supports, in has been approved by the Court (rather than Final Judgment, by requiring Allied to divest principle, the proposed Final Judgement the current 60-day limit as specified in the the Spoon Ridge landfill, is unnecessary for directive which requires Allied Waste proposed Final Judgement). Furthermore, the effective relief and might undermine the tax Industries, Inc. (‘‘Allied’’) to divest itself of Agency strongly recommends that the base of the local communities and the Spoon the Relevant Disposal Assets and Relevant proposed Final Judgement be modified to River Valley School District. The Spoon Assets. However, the Agency objects to the require Allied to divest itself of the Assets Ridge landfill is a relatively new site and the time line by which Allied must divest of the individually rather than as a package in order largest landfill in the State of Illinois. BFI Relevant Disposal Assets and Relevant to ensure that all interested parties are recently closed the landfill because it found Hauling Assets. The Agency has begun the provided a fair and equal opportunity to bid that the landfill was unable to attract enough process of pursuing its own interest in on one or more of these assets. waste from the Chicago area to make it purchasing a portion of the Relevant Disposal Specific to this objection is the fact that viable. By closing the landfill, BFI reduced Assets—namely the Browning-Ferris Republic notified the Agency on August 4, its assessed value, and thus, the taxes it paid Industries, Inc. (‘‘BFI’’) Melrose Park Transfer 1999 (only 15 days after the proposed Final to local communities. BFI intended to reopen Station, located at 4700 W. Lake Street, Judgement order was filed with the Court) of the landfill if it obtained a long-term contract Melrose Park, IL 60160 (‘‘Melrose Park its intent to purchase the Melrose Park to dispose of New York City’s residential Facility’’). The purchase of the Melrose Park Facility as part of a larger acquisition of all waste. Facility by a unit of local government such the Assets from Allied pursuant to the The fact is that requiring Allied to divest as the Agency would enhance and foster proposed Final Judgement. The Agency Spoon Ridge to a new competitor in no way competition in the marketplace. Yet the strongly objects to the sale of all of the Assets prevents Allied or any other firm from later proposed time line for the ordered to Republic for all of the reasons stated contracting with the new owner to dispose of divestitures in this case would make it above. In addition, the Agency objects to the any New York City’s waste. Indeed, the new virtually impossible for the Agency to fact that Republic has reportedly executed a owner would be free to make the landfill’s successfully compete for this asset. definitive letter of intent to purchase the disposal capacity available to any person Requiring Allied to divest itself of these Assets, including the Melrose Park Facility, who wishes to bid and enhance competition assets within 60 days after the approval of within days after the proposed Final for the contract to dispose of New York City’s the Final Judgement by the Court creates an Judgement was filed with the Court. This has waste. If the new owner believes, however, unfair and unreasonable bias towards large, not allowed the Agency (or any other that the space in the landfill is much more highly liquid waste hauling firms and denies prospective purchaser) sufficient time to valuable to use in competing for the disposal smaller companies (either individually or in pursue its interest in bidding for the Melrose of waste from the city of Chicago, then the the form of a consortium) and local Park Facility. Given that the Agency, as a new owner can choose to commit the landfill governments sufficient time to conduct statutory unit of local government in Illinois, to competing in that market. This should proper due diligence and arrange for the must follow a strict set of procedures which ensure that the landfill remains a major necessary financing to be able to effectively are designed to protect the public interest source of property tax income for the school bid on the available assets. By denying small when attempting to purchase fixed assets district. Leaving Spoon Ridge with Allied, waste hauling companies and local such as the Melrose Park Facility, and given which already controls nearly 35% of all governments fair access to the opportunity to that the Agency must follow strict procedures disposal capacity in the greater Chicago bid on these assets, the proposed Final in order to secure public debt, it is not fair metropolitan market, would ensure that a Judgement itself serves to restrict and retard or reasonable, nor is it in the best interest of single firm could dominate waste disposal, competition. This is contrary to the intent the public, for the Court to allow Republic to and therefore, set the price of disposal in the and purpose of the proposed Final purchase the Melrose Park Facility in such a Chicago market. While this may make the Judgement. hurried and non-competitive manner. landfill more valuable to the local This bias is of great concern to the Agency Therefore, the Agency respectfully requests community, it would adversely affect the given that competition in the solid waste that the United States exercise its authority prices paid by consumers for the disposal of services industry within the Agency’s as provided for in Article IV. Section A. of their municipal solid waste. jurisdiction has been dramatically reduced in the Final Judgement order and withhold its Thank you for bringing your concerns to recent years as a result of previous approval of the sale of the Assets our attention, and we hope this information consolidation efforts by Allied as well as (particularly the Melrose Park Facility) to will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the Republic Services, Inc. (‘‘Republic’’). For Republic for at least 180 days after the Final Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 example, whereas in 1997 there were eight Judgement has been approved by the Court. U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and non-vertically integrated solid waste This would allow the Agency and any other this response will be published in the companies serving the Agency’s municipal/ interested parties sufficient time to complete Federal Register and filed with the Court. residential waste services needs, today there their due diligence process and secure the Sincerely yours, are only two such firms remaining. necessary financial commitments to fairly By allowing the proposed Final Judgement J. Robert Kramer II, and equitably bid on any or all of the Assets. to stand as drafted, the Court would serve to The Agency’s third point of comment and Chief, Litigation II Section. exacerbate this decline in the number of objection to the proposed Final Judgement is local, independent solid waste companies West Cook County Solid Waste Agency specific to the definition in Article II. Section that are able to compete in the Agency’s H., ‘‘Collection of small container solid August 13, 1999. marketplace, thereby reducing competition to waste.’’ In the context of the use of this Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, only three significant competitors—all of phrase in the proposed Final Judgement, the Chief, Litigation II Session, Anti Trust which would be vertically integrated and in definition would serve to force Allied to

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36232 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices divest itself of a subset of customers from Congressman Rod Blagojevich, Dear Mr. Hansen: This letter responds to which it is now obligated to collect waste. Congressman Henry Hyde, Congressman your letter of August 13, 1999 and Allen P. This subset of customers is part of a larger Danny Davis, David M. Foster, Esq. (for Bonini’s letter of December 9, 1999, group of customers serviced in accordance BFI) Tom D. Smith, Esq. (for Allied) commenting on the Final Judgment in this with legally binding contracts between BFI/ case on behalf of the West Cook County Solid Allied and nine municipalities within the West Cook County Solid Waste Agency Waste Agency (‘‘Agency’’). The Complaint in Agency’s jurisdiction. This issue is also December 9, 1999. this case charged, among other things, that relevant to and will affect dozens of other Mr. J. Robert Kramer, II, Allied’s acquisition of BFI would municipalities throughout the Chicago Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust substantially lessen competition in the Metropolitan Area. Division, U.S. Department of Justice, collection or disposal of small container In addition, since this part of the Final 1401 H Street, Northwest, Suite 3000, commercial waste in the greater Chicago Judgement, as drafted, only applies to Washington, DC 20530. metropolitan market. The proposed modified municipal solid waste, the order would have Re United States v. Allied Waste Industries, Final Judgment, now pending in the federal the effect of causing one company to be Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries district court in Washington, DC., would responsible for collecting waste from the Inc.—Case No. 1: 99 CV 01962. settle the case by requiring the defendants to affected customers who are served by the divest a number of waste collection routes exclusive municipal contract, while Allied Dear Mr. Kramer: The West Cook County and waste disposal facilities in the greater would still be responsible for collecting Solid Waste Agency (Agency) is writing to Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if recyclable from those same customers! As a respectfully request that the Agency be approved by the Court, would establish one practical matter, this part of the order will informed when Allied Waste Industries or more new competitors in this market for force each municipality to void its current submits a potential buyer for approval by the which relief was sought. valid and binding refuse and recycling Department of Justice, concerning the In your letter, you express concern that the collection contract and rebid the very same proposed divested assets located in or Final Judgment, by ordering divestiture of contract or issue two contracts—one for the relevant to the Chicago metropolitan areas BFI’s small container commercial waste collection of small container solid waste marketplace. These assets are: business, may interfere with BFI’s existing only, and one for hand pick-up waste BFI Orchard Hills landfill government franchise contracts which also collection services and all recycling services. BFI Zion landfill includes the disposal of the communities’ Philosophically, then, the Final Judgement BFI Spoon Ridge landfill residential waste. The local communities fear would undermine and interfere with local BFI Active transfer station that requiring Allied to divest only the government’s authority to determine the most BFI Brooks transfer station franchise commercial waste collection appropriate way to protect the health, safety BFI Rolling Meadows transfer station business would, in effect, split the collection and welfare of its community. BFI Melrose Park transfer station business between two firms—the purchase This part of the proposed order would not BFI DuKane transfer station who would have the franchise commercial serve to enhance competition within the All BFI small container commercial waste business; and Allied, which would affected communities, but rather would cause collection routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage retain the residential and recycling waste serious disruption to the municipalities’ McHenry and Will countries, Illinois collection services. The communities fear traditional cost-effective methods of As you may recall, the Agency previously that this will result in the purchase providing competitively procuring waste collection submitted comments concerning the a lower level of service, or result in services for their communities. Furthermore, proposed Final Judgement of August 13, additional trucks being sent down city it would unnecessarily and unduly burden 1999. Since this time, the proposed sale of streets. the affected communities by interfering with the above assets to Republic Services Inc. has In light of this concern raised by you and their existing contracts and forcing them to been terminated and through press accounts, others, the United States and Allied reached rewrite and rebid their contracts for solid another sale to Superior Waste Services has agreement that instead of the municipal waste services. All of this would come at been announced. However, the details of the franchise contracts being divested, Allied considerable expense to the communities. proposed sale to Superior were not would be permitted to retain the municipal Therefore, the Agency respectfully requests disclosed—namely which assets in the franchise contracts and divest additional that the Department of Justice recommend to Chicago metropolitan area are included or assets which are not required to be divested the Court that the definition in Article II. excluded. by the proposed modified Final Judgment. Section H of the proposed Final Judgement In order for the Agency to provide These additional assets include residential to modified to exclude from the definition comments to the Department of the potential and rolloff waste hauling business. These ‘‘any collection of waste from customers that impact on the solid waste market place that assets have been acquired by Superior is being provided subject to the terms of a a potential sale would have, the details of the Services Inc., a purchaser approved by the properly executed, legally binding contract or proposed sale or sales of these assets needs United States. The United States has filed a franchise agreement with a unit of local to be known. Therefore, the Agency motion with the Court to modify the government.’’ Alternatively, in keeping with respectfully requests that the Department proposed Final Judgment which would the precedent set with respect to the City of inform the Agency of all pending sales of the permit Allied to retain the municipal Dallas and Dallas County, TX in Article II. before mentioned assets prior to the franchise contracts initially required to be Section D. Paragraph 5., the proposed Final Department granting approval of these sales. divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate Judgement could be modified universally to Sincerely, the municipal franchise contracts, which limit the divestiture of commercial routes, in were required to be divested, until the Allen P. Bonini, all cases, to only those commercial routes Court’s acceptance of the modification to the that ‘‘serve any nonfranchised or open Solid Waste Director. proposed Final Judgment. competition areas.’’ Mr. Bonini requests that the Agency be U.S. Department of Justice The Agency appreciates the opportunity informed of all pending sales of the assets to provided by the Court to file these comments Antitrust Division be divested pursuant to the proposed Final and objections. If appropriate, the Agency May 10,2000. Judgment. These assets include the three BFI would be available to discuss these matters landfills; five BFI transfer stations; an the BFI in more detail. Timothy R. Hansen, small container commercial routes in Cook, Sincerely yours, Chair, West Cook County Solid Waste Lake, DuPage, McHenry and Will Counties, Agency, President, Village of LaGrange, Timothy R. Hansen, Illinois. He states that the Agency would IL, 1127 S. Mannheim Road, Suite 102, evaluate the potential impact the sales may Chair, West Cook County Solid Waste Agency, Westchester, IL 60154–2551. have on its solid waste marketplace. President, Village of LaGrange, IL. Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in Under the terms of the Final Judgment, the cc: U.S. Senator Richard Durbin, U.S. Senator (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, defendants must sell all of the relevant Peter Fitzgerald, Congressman William Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. disposal and hauling assets described in the O. Lipinski, Congressman Luis Guiterrez, No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). Final Judgment to a purchaser or purchasers

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36233 acceptable to the United States, in its sole generates over 600,000 tons of waste competition in the solid waste collection and discretion. In approving a purchase, we annually. Currently a number of private disposal market. always consider the competitive impact in entities compete for the collection and According to press accounts, Allied has the local market of that purchaser’s hauling of commercial and business waste in entered into an agreement to sell the to-be- acquisition of the hauling or disposal assets. the SWANCC territory. An ever decreasing divested assets to Republic Services Inc. The Orchard Hills and Zion landfills have number of transfer and disposal locations (‘‘Republic’’). If the BFI Active transfer been acquired by Superior Services, Inc. a process that waste. station in Evanston, Illinois, the BFI Brooks purchaser approved by the United States. The Agency is greatly concerned about the transfer station in Northbrook, Illinois the Superior has no current hauling or disposal impact of the proposed consent decree (at BFI Rolling Meadows transfer station in operations in the greater Chicago least as Allied-BFI currently plan to satisfy it) Rolling Meadows, Illinois and the BFI Zion metropolitan market. Groot Industries is a on the commercial hauling and transfer landfill in Zion, Illinois are sold to a single potential purchaser of the Spoon Ridge services offered to the businesses located in company like Republic that already operates landfill and is in the process of conducting our territory. For the reasons described more in northern Chicago metropolitan area will be a due diligence evaluation. The five transfer fully below, we ask that the proposed negatively impacted through the loss of one stations have also been divested with the consent decree be modified (1) to prohibit the significant competitor. The only other approval of the United States—Superior has sale of the BFI transfer stations and landfill remaining major competitor in northern Cook acquired four of the transfer stations, and assets to any entity that currently operates a and Lake Counties would be Waste Groot Industries has acquired one. trnasfer station or landfill in northern Cook Management Inc., with Groot Industries The BFI small container commercial routes or Lake Counties and (2) to permit BFI, or its existing as a minor nonintegrated (no landfill in the five counties have been divested to successor in the merger, to continue to ownership) competitor. Superior except for the municipal franchise provide small container commercial Focusing on the prospective reduction in contracts. These will be retained Allied if the collection service when it does so as part of the number of competing transfer stations in court approves a modification to the Final a franchise or contract for residential waste the SWANCC territory illustrates the Judgment. The United States and Allied have collection. problems that are likely to result if Republic field a motion to have the court modify the buys the disposal assets described above. The Final Judgment to permit Allied to retain the I. The Proposed Sale of Transfer Stations and heavy congestion in the Chicago franchise work which initially had to be Landfill Assets to Republic Services Would metropolitan area (specifically including divested. Reduce Competition and Likely Lead to northern Cook County) reduces to about 10– Thank you for bringing your concerns to Higher Prices 15 miles (for FEL trucks) and 8–10 miles (for our attention and thank Mr. Bonini for Unless there is competition in hauling, roll-off trucks) the distance that a commercial bringing his concerns to our attention. We transfer and disposal services offered to our waste collection firm can travel economically hope this information will help alleviate members and to businesses in the Agency’s to a transfer station. Indeed, BFI’s own them. Pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures territory, the Agency’s interests in a cost transfer station development over the past and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C.16(d), a copy of effective system will not be met, and two years demonstrates the limited economic your comments and Mr. Bonini’s comments residents and businesses will pay travel distance for REL and FEL trucks. The and this response will be published in the unnecessary amounts for this essential three facilities that BFI developed were the Federal Register and filed with the Court. service. Rolling Meadows transfer station, Melrose Sincerely yours, In 1988 twelve private sector firms Park transfer station and the DuKane transfer provided hauling, transfer and disposal J. Robert Kramer II, station. These facilities are all within 15 services in the area; after entry of the miles of each other (see attachment A) and Chief, Litigation II Section. proposed order, it will be four. The demonstrate the reduced economic travel consolidation trend over the last decade has 1 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook time in the Chicago metropolitan area. seen all but one of the independent operators County In the attached map (Attachment B), we in the area acquired by national firms. The have shown the locations and owners of the September 2, 1999. proposed merger involves the joinder of two privately operated transfer stations and Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, Esquire, national firms. The divestiture that the landfills in northern Cook and Lake Counties. Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust combined Allied-BFI proposes to make to As shown in Attachment A, if Republic is Division, U.S. Department of Justice, satisfy the consent decree merely would allowed to purchase all of the proposed 1401 H Street, Suite 3000, Washington, move some of the assets from one large divested Allied-BFI assets in northern Cook DC 20005. national firm in the area to another. and Lake Counties, the number of significant Re Proposed Consent Decree in United States Specifically, in metropolitan Chicago, the competitors for the disposal of solid waste of America v. Allied Waste Industries, proposed consent decree currently would would be reduced from three to two; Groot Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. require that the following divestitures take Industries would remain a minor place: 2 Dear Mr. Kramer: The Solid Waste Agency nonintegrated competitor. of Northern Cook County (SWANCC or the —BFI Zion landfill, Zion, Illinois With the choices of realistic disposal Agency) is a unit of local government formed —BFI Active transfer station, Evanston, options reduced from three to two significant in 1988 by 23 Illinois municipalities having Illinois competitors, price competition will be a total population of 700,000. The Agency’s —BFI Brooks transfer station, Northbrook, role in solid waste management is to provide Illinois 1 If transporting waste 50 miles was economical for the efficient and environmentally sound —BFI Rolling Meadows transfer station, in the Chicago area (as the Department of Justice disposal of waste generated by residences Rolling Meadows, IL suggested generally in ¶ 37 of the Complaint) then and businesses within its member —BFI Melrose Park transfer station, Melrose BFI would have built one large transfer station municipalities. Park, Illinois instead of three to reduce capital costs. In fact, BFI’s Melrose Park transfer station has the capacity to SWANCC member municipalities collect —BFI DuKane transfer station, West Chicago, Illinois handle all of the waste transferred through the three residential waste themselves or by facilities. —All BFI small container commercial contracting with private entities. Most of that 2 In addition, the two nearest transfer stations residential waste passes through a SWANCC- collection routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage, available for use outside of northern Cook and Lake owned transfer station, managed by a private McHenry, and Will counties, Illinois. Counties would be the to-be-divested BFI DuKane contractor, that processes over 250,000 tons These proposed divestitures involve and BFI Melrose transfer stations, which Republic of residential waste annually. That waste is significant assets. Depending on the identity also proposes to buy. The closest landfills would be disposed of in a private sector landfill. of the purchaser, they could increase the Waste Management Woodlands landfill in Kane The concerns expressed in this letter relate competition in the solid waste collection and County and the Waste Management Pheasant Run landfill in Kenosha County, Wisconsin. The nearest to the commercial and business waste stream. disposal markets in the Chicago metropolitan fully integrated competitor would be the Allied We estimate that the commercial and area. On the other hand, the sale of a portion National Transfer Station located in the City of business sector in the Agency’s territory—in of these assets to an existing competitor in Chicago, over 22 miles away through heavy Chicago which over 500,000 persons are employed— the market place could further reduce traffic.

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36234 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices reduced, and the firms that collect and haul inclusion of commercial waste as part of a In order for the Agency to provide commercial and business waste in the residential contract provides benefits for comments to the Department on the potential SWANCC territory will face the prospect of those municipalities by lowering the cost of impact, either negative or positive, on the substantial price increases as a result. residential service and reducing the number solid waste market place that a potential sale Significantly, the Complaint in this matter of large solid waste vehicles in the would have, the details of the proposed sale acknowledges that having only two community. These benefits are likely to be or sales of these assets needs to be known. significant competitors and one minor lost if the commercial component of the In conclusion, we respectfully request that competitor would be unacceptable; see ¶ 50, service is divested as proposed in the consent the Department inform the Agency of all complaining that ‘‘In Chicago, the merger decree. pending sales of the before mentioned assets would reduce from four to three the number As a result, we respectfully request that prior to the Department granting approval of of significant competitors in the disposal of small container commercial collection these sales. MSW * * *’’ service that is part of a municipal franchise Sincerely, For the above reasons, the Agency or contact in northern Cook County be C. Brooke Beal, respectfully requests that the divested assets excluded from the assets of Allied-BFI to be located in northern Cook and Lake Counties divested pursuant to the proposed consent Executive Director. decree. not be sold to a company that already has a U.S. Department of Justice disposal presence, either a transfer station or The Agency appreciates the opportunity to landfill, in that area. Otherwise, the proposed provide these comments and would be Antitrust Division divestiture is likely to have the perverse pleased to provide any additional May 10, 2000. result of itself substantially reducing information that may be helpful. C. Brooke Beal, competition and increasing costs for business Respectfully submitted, Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook and commercial customers in northern Cook C. Brooke Beal, County, 1616 East Gold Road, Des and Lake Counties. Executive Director. Plains, IL 60016. II. The Proposed Divestiture of BFI’s Small Re Common on Proposed Final Judgment in Note: Attachments A & B of the letter dated Container Commercial Collection Routes (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, September 2, 1999 from C. Brooke Beal, Would Disrupt Current Efficient Residential Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Executive Director of Solid Waste Agency of Waste Collection in Several Communities No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999)) Northern Cook County was not able to be A second and distinct problem would published in the Federal Register but a copy Dear Mr. Beal: This letter responds to your result from the provision in the proposed can be obtained from the U.S. Department of letters of September 2, 1999 and December 9, consent decree that would require Allied-BFI Justice, Document Group, 325 7th Street, 1999, commenting on the Final Judgment in to divest all of BFI’s small container NW., Room 215, Washington, DC 20530 or this case on behalf of Solid Waste Agency of commercial waste collection service in the you may call and request a copy at (202) 514– Northern Cook County (‘‘Agency’’). The Chicago metropolitan area. The DOJ defines 2481. Complaint in this case charged, among other this service in the Competitive Impact things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI would Statement as ‘‘* * * the collection of MSW Solid Waste Agency Of Northern Cook substantially lessen competition in the from commercial businesses such as offices County collection or disposal of small container and apartment buildings and retail December 9, 1999. commercial waste in the greater Chicago establishments * * *’’ . metropolitan market. The proposed modified Mr. J. Robert Kramer, III, Esquire, The divestiture of all of BFI’s small Final Judgment, now pending in federal Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust container commercial collection routes district court in Washington, D.C., would Division, U.S. Department of Justice, would have significant impact on the current settle the case by requiring the defendants to 1400 H Street, Suite 3000, Washington franchises and contracts of a number of divest a number of waste collection routes DC 20005. and waste disposal facilities in the greater municipalities in northern Cook County. All Re Proposed Consent Decree in United States municipalities in northern Cook County have of America v. Allied Waster Industries, Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if either franchises or contracts with a single Inc. and Browning Ferris Industries, Inc. approved by the Court, would establish one hauler to collect residential waste— or more new competitors in this market for including, to varying degrees, waste from Dear Mr. Kramer: The Solid Waste Agency which relief was sought. apartment buildings. BFI has four franchises of Northern Cook County (the Agency) is In your September 2nd letter, you express or contracts with SWANCC municipalities writing to request that the Agency be concern that the Final Judgment, by ordering pursuant to which BFI collects waste from informed when Allied Waste Industries divestiture of BFI’s small container apartment buildings as part of the submits a potential buyer for approval commercial waste business, may interfere arrangement. concerning the proposed divested assets with BFI’s existing government franchise Requiring the divestiture of small container located in the Chicago metropolitan area. contracts which also includes the disposal of These assets are: commercial collection service that includes the communities’ residential waste. The local residential waste (i.e., from apartment —BFI Orchard Hills landfill communities fear that requiring Allied to buildings) that is collected as part of a —BFI Zion landfill divest only the franchise commercial waste franchise or contract for residential waste —BFI Active transfer station collection business would, in effect, split the would be burdensome to the municipalities —BFI Rolling Meadows transfer station collection business between two firms—the involved—for example, by increasing the —BFI Melrose Park transfer station purchaser who would have the franchise number of solid waste collection vehicles in —BFI DuKane transfer station commercial waste business; and Allied, the community—and could increase costs —All BFI small container commercial which would retain the residential and due to the loss of route density. Further, it collection routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage, recycling waste collection services. The is likely that the relatively small amounts of McHenry, and Will counties, Illinois. communities fear that this will result in the apartment waste collected separately from As you already know, the Agency purchaser providing a lower level of service, other residential waste after the proposed submitted previous comments concerning the or result in additional trucks being sent down divestitures would need to be combined for proposed consent decree on September 2, city streets. further disposal with waste from unknown 1999. Since this time, the proposed sale of In light of this concern raised by you and sources from outside the municipality. That the above assets to Republic Services, Inc. others, the United States and Allied reached is likely to increase the costs of disposal and has been terminated and through press agreement that instead of the municipal the potential environmental liability of these accounts, another sale to Superior Waste franchise contracts being divested, Allied municipalities. Services has been announced. Furthermore, would be permitted to retain the municipal In addition, two BFI municipal franchises the details of the proposed sale to Superior franchise contracts and divest instead or contracts in northern Cook County provide were not disclosed as to what assets in the additional assets which are not required to be for BFI to collect all residential and Chicago metropolitan area are included or divested by the proposed modified Final commercial waste in the jurisdiction. The excluded. Judgment. These additional assets include

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36235 residential and rolloff waste hauling made up of 36 municipalities and Lake that companies ‘‘drive by’’ landfill sites business. These assets have been acquired by County. The Agency has contracts for waste owned by competitors to dispose of waste at Superior Services Inc., a purchaser approved disposal capacity in landfills owned by their own disposal sites. Vehicles drive by the United States. The United States has Browning Ferris Industries (BFI) and Waste twenty to thirty additional roundtrip miles to filed a motion with the Court to modify the Management. The landfills are located within use their facilities. proposed Final Judgment which would Lake County and nearby in the state of The Chicago market is unique to others permit Allied to retain the municipal Wisconsin. The Agency also works with its within the U.S., because public participation franchise contracts initially required to be members to obtain solid waste collection in the market is facilitated through divested. Allied has agreed to keep separate services for residents and businesses. In the contractual arrangements solicited in a the municipal franchise contracts, which past, the Agency had contracts with BFI for competitive bid process. Public entities, by in were required to be divested, until the recycling services provided to commercial large, do not compete with the private sector Court’s acceptance of the modification of the accounts with the Village of Gurnee. for waste collection opportunities. Public proposed Final Judgment. The Agency is located within one of the entities cannot raise the capital necessary to In your December 9th letter, you requested areas (Chicago) where it is alleged that the develop, operate and maintain a waste that the Agency be informed of all pending combination of BFI and Allied would lessen collection system. Therefore, the industry sales of the assets to be divested to the competition. Currently, BFI serves an consolidation represents a considerable proposed Final Judgment. These assets estimated 42% of the residential population. threat to a competitive market. The new include the two BFI landfills; five BFI Allied serves approximately 9% of the Allied Company will be unable to effectively transfer stations; and the BFI small container residential population. Waste Management participate in this process because of a lack commercial routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage, and one independent private hauler serve the of disposal/transfer capacity. McHenry and Will Counties, Illinois. You remaining residential population. It is my It is unfortunate that this Final Judgement further state that the Agency would evaluate opinion that the commercial accounts in requires the divesture of these assets by the potential impact the sales may have on Lake County reflect a similar distribution of Allied. The Melrose Park, DuKane and its solid waste marketplace. service. Rolling Meadows transfer facilities were Under the terms of the Final Judgment, the The Agency reviewed the proposed Final developed within the last two years. They defendants must sell all of the relevant Judgment regarding the merger between represent, to BFI, the optimum collection and disposal and hauling assets described in the Allied Waste Industries (allied) and BFI. disposal configuration to serve their Final Judgment to a purchaser or purchasers Within Lake County, the proposed final customer base. While Republic has control of acceptable to the United States, in its sole judgment will require BFI to divest the Zion these facilities, Lake County customers will discretion. In approving a purchase, we Landfill and its commercial waste collection lose a choice in waste collection service always consider the competitive impact in a routes. In northern Cook County, BFI will provided by the formerly independent BFI local market of that purchaser’s acquisition of divest transfer stations in Melrose Park, and Allied. The only other waste disposal or the hauling or disposal assets. Rolling Meadows, Brooks-Northbrook and transfer site not controlled by Republic or The Orchard Hills and Zion landfills have Active-Evanston. These transfer stations Waste Management is located in Racine, been acquired by Superior Services, Inc. a serve a portion of southern Lake County. Wisconsin, which is approximately 25 miles purchaser approved by the United States. Further, FBI will divest the DuKane transfer from Lake County. This facility cannot serve Superior has not current hauling or disposal station in DuPage County which serves the southern Lake County in any competitive operations in the greater Chicago Southwest portion of Lake County. situation without a transfer station asset metropolitan market. The five transfer According to press reports and informal located in either Lake or northern Cook stations have been divested with the contacts between the Agency and BFI, these Counties. The travel realities of the approval of the United States—Superior has assets will be sold to Republic Waste metropolitan Chicago area are that travel over acquired four of the transfer stations; and Industries. As part of the sale, Allied will be 10 to 15 miles rarely can be achieved in an Groot Industries has acquired one. allowed to use these divested facilities to efficient manner. The BFI small container commercial routes dispose of waste for a period of two years. It is noted that the Department of Justice in the five counties have been divested to This agreement will enable Allied to (DOJ) took unusual pains to describe the Superior except for the municipal franchise maintain waste collection service to over impacts upon the commercial waste contracts. These will be retained by Allied if 50% of Lake County residential customers. collection market. Yet, the DOJ gave little the court approves a modification to the This represents a population of over 300,000 consideration to the residential collection Final Judgment. The United States and Allied residents. routes which are serviced by essentially the have filed a motion to have the court modify The divestiture brings to Lake County, a same type of vehicles in terms of weight and the Final Judgment to permit Allied to retain waste company with little operating size. The divestiture will inevitably result in the franchise work which initially had to be experience in the County. It also places that these Allied assets being sold to Republic divested. company in a position to effectively replace after the two year period. Municipalities, Thank you for bringing your concerns to the former Allied/BFI Company at the with contracts formerly with BFI or Allied, our attention, and we hope this information expiration of the two-year period. The newly will be faced with renewing or extending will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the merged Allied Company will be unable to those contracts or re-bidding those contracts Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 retain its current level of service in Lake in a competitive environment with one less U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and County without disposal and transfer assets. competitor. this response will be published in the The economic conditions created by the It is an unintended consequence that the Federal Register and filed with the Court. Final Judgment will also affect the company’s Final Judgement will not foster a truly Sincerely yours, ability to add new customers because of the competitive environment. Allied must J. Robert Kramer II, loss of these disposal assets. Allied will be develop additional and controversial waste required to develop new disposal assets in disposal assets within Lake County or Chief, Litigation II Section. Lake County to remain competitive. A more northern Cook County. The cost of these new Solid Waste Agency of Lake County, IL likely scenario is that Allied will sell their assets will be borne by Allied customers. The remaining assets to Republic and cease impact of the transfer vehicles and other September 1, 1999. competitive marketing in Lake County. assets will be borne by the host communities. Mr. J. Robert Kramer II, The realities of today’s waste market lend As the Complaint for Injunctive Relief noted Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust itself to vertical integration of assets. Waste these facilities are expensive and difficult to Division, United States Department of companies rely upon their assets to manage site. Local public opposition can be Justice, 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, the waste collected. Optimization enables strenuous and difficult to overcome. Washington, DC 20530. companies to deliver services at the lowest It seems that a re-examination of the Final Dear Mr. Kramer: The Solid Waste Agency cost to the customer. A review of the waste Judgement is needed to maintain a of Lake County (Agency) is a joint action disposal records, at the two landfills in Lake competitive environment. Allied should be municipal agency formed to manage solid County, reveals little cross utilization of able to maintain at least one or two of its waste in Lake County Illinois. The Agency is assets by competing companies. This means transfer station assets to allow it to compete.

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36236 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

This will diminish the need to develop new environment if Allied is forced to divest Sincerely, transfer/disposal facilities and optimize its these franchise contracts. Lane Evans, service to their customer base. Alternatively, Divestiture of the landfills (Orchard Hills Member of Congress. the Final Judgement can be modified to and Zion) that serve municipalities and require that Allied divest its Chicago assets customers in Lake County has been made to Enclosures. to at least a third party (in addition to a purchaser approved by the United States— Village of Fairview Republic) to foster competition. If the Superior Services Inc., a company with no divestiture is maintained as proposed, current hauling or disposal operations in the August 9, 1999. Republic Waste Industries will effectively greater Chicago metropolitan market. The Mr. J. Robert Kramer, II, replace two solid waste companies. five waste transfer stations have also been Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust Therefore, the proposed settlement is not divested with the approval of the United Division, U.S. Department of Justice, ‘‘within the reaches of the public interest’’. States. Superior has acquired four of the 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, This Agency will provide additional transfer stations and Groot Industries has Washington, DC 20005. information upon request by the Department In re Allied/BFI Consent Decree, Case No. of Justice, Attached is a study of the acquired one. The divestiture of these 1.99CV01962. divestiture, which was provided to the disposal assets should make the new Agency Board of Directors on August 25, purchasers major competitive forces in Lake Dear Mr. Kramer: The purpose of this letter 1999. County and the surrounding countries. is to provide comment on the proposed In light of the concern raised by you and consent decree which requires Allied Waste Very truly yours, others regarding the possible divestiture of Industries, Inc. to sell certain assets in Andrew H. Quigley, municipal franchise contracts, the United connection with its acquisition of Browning Executive Director. States and Allied reached agreement that Ferris Industries, Inc. Specifically, the CC: Richard Durbin, U.S. Senator; Peter instead of the municipal franchise contracts Village of Fairview strenuously objects to the Fitzgerald, U.S. Senator; Philip Crane, U.S. being divested, Allied would be permitted to Department of Justice requirement that Allied Representative; John Porter, U.S. retain the municipal franchise contracts and divest itself of the Spoon Ridge Landfill located in Fairview, Illinois. Representative; Henry Hyde, U.S. divest instead additional assets which are not In your analysis of the Chicago market, it Representative; Dorothy R. Schofield, required to be divested by the propsoed is stated that Allied’s divestiture of the SWALCO Board Chairman, Lake modified Final Judgment. These additional Spoon Ridge Landfill would insure that the Barrington; Marilyn Shineflug, SWALCO assets include residential and rolloff waste benefits of competition, lower prices and Executive Committee Chairman, Antioch; hauling business. These assets have been better service would be preserved. It is the Bill Pailey, SWALCO Legislative acquired by Superior Services Inc., a opinion of the Village of Fairview that the Committee Chairman, Kildeer; Jim Labelle, purchaser approved by the United States. Spoon Ridge Landfill is not an important Lake County Board Chairman; Larry Clark, The United States has filed a motion with the waste disposal operation for the Chicago SWALCO General Counsel. Court to modify the proposed Final Judgment market. Requiring the divesture removes an which would permit Allied to retain the U.S. Department of Justice important potential economic development municipal franchise contracts initially opportunity for the Village of Fairview. Antitrust Division required to be divested. Allied has agreed to Fairview and Fulton County Overview May 10, 2000. keep separate the municipal franchise Andrew H. Quigley, contracts, which were required to be The Village of Fairview is a small west Executive Director, Solid Waste Agency of divested, until the Court’s acceptance of the central Illinois community located in Fulton Lake County, IL, 1300 N. Skokie modification to the proposed Final Judgment. County, nearly 200 miles from Chicago. Highway, Suite 103, Gurnee, IL 60031. Thank you for bringing your concerns to Fairview has a population of approximately our attention, and we hope this information Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in 500 people. (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the At the turn of this century, Fulton County Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 was a prosperous, dynamic area. Agriculture was productive and viable. A large number No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). U.S.C.16(d), a copy of your comments and this response will be published in the of underground coal mines were attracting Dear Mr. Quigley: This letter responds to Federal Register and filed with the Court. immigrant to the area, increasing the your letter of September 1, 1999 commenting Sincerely yours, population and wealth of Fulton County. on the Final Judgment in this case on behalf International Harvester Company was of SWALCO. The Complaint in this case J. Robert Kramer II, growing in Canton, the largest city in the charged, among other things, that Allied’s Chief, Litigation II Section. county. acquisition of BFI would substantially lessen A number of significant changes to the area competition in the collection or disposal of House of Representatives occurred in the 1950’s. Most were negative small container commercial waste in the August 13, 1999. except for Caterpillar’s expansion in Peoria, greater Chicago metropolitan market. The Mr. J. Robert Kramer, Illinois. The Mining operations changed from proposed modified Final Judgment, now shaft to strip-mining. This mining method pending in federal district court in Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1401 H Street NW, Washington, was much more efficient and used a much Washington, DC, would settle the case by smaller work force. During this period, DC 20005 requiring the defendants to divest a number Caterpillar expanded in the Peoria area and Dear Mr. Kramer: I am writing on behalf of of waste collection routes and waste disposal many Fairview and Fulton County workers the Village of Fairview regarding the facilities in the greater Chicago metropolitan were able to secure work at Caterpillar. market. This relief, if approved by the Court, Department of Justice proposed rules that Through the 1960’s and 1970’s, about 2,500 would establish one or more new competitors Allied Waste Industries must sell certain people worked for International Harvester; in this market for which relief was sought. landfills in connection with its acquisition of about 1,000 people worked for several large In your letter, you express concern that the Browning Ferris Industries (BFI). The Village strip mines in Fulton County; and about divestiture of the disposal assets in the of Fairview has expressed objections to the 1,700 people commuted to work for greater Chicago metropolitan market required requirement that Allied divest itself of the Caterpillar in Peoria. by the Final Judgment will lead to less Spoon Ridge Landfill located in Fairview. The economic base of the area diminished competition. You state that the purchaser of Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the in the period between 1980 and 1984. All of these assets will not be competitive because Village of Fairview regarding their concerns the large strip mines were closed. The of a lack of disposal assets—a landfill and/ with the proposed Allied consent decree. I International Harvester Plant in Canton or a transfer station. You also express would appreciate the Department of Justice closed in 1983. Caterpillar reduced concern that municipalities, who have consideration and review of this issue. employment by about 15,000 people in the commercial franchise contracts with BFI or Thank you for your assistance and 1980’s. The net effect was that the number of Allied will be placed in a less competitive attention to this matter. Caterpillar employees in Fulton County

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36237 dropped from about 1,700 people to about in 2001. BFI responded to the request for Honorable Lane Evans, 900 people. Consequently, there was a loss of proposals and named Spoon Ridge Landfill U.S. House of Representatives, 2335 Rayburn over 4,000 well paid jobs in Fulton County as one of the locations at which it would Building, Washington, DC 20515–1317. in the 1980’s. dispose of the New York waste. Included in Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in The overall effect of these events was the response to the request for proposals was (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, devastating to the area. The population an endorsement of the project by the Village Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. declined, property values plummeted, young of Fairview. A copy of the letter from the No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999)). Village of Fairview to the New York people moved away, and the Fairview and Dear Congressman Evans: This letter Department of Sanitation supporting and Fulton County area realized that the responds to your letter of August 13, 1999 endorsing the disposal of New York City prosperity had ended. commenting on the Final Judgment in this waste at Spoon Ridge Landfill is attached. case on behalf of the Village of Fairview. You Project Background The New York Department of Sanitation enclosed a letter from Gerald R. Hilton, awarded BFI the opportunity to negotiate for In 1989, Gallatin National Company president of the Village of Fairview. The the disposal of 3,900 tons per day of New received approval from the Village of the Complaint in this case charged, among other York garbage. BFI hoped to secure a contract Fairview to site a landfill within the Village things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI would from the Department of Sanitation at the end limits. A siting, or host community, substantially lessen competition in the of this year. As BFI further analyzed their agreement was signed which secured for the collection or disposal of small container New York proposal, they reported that the Village a tipping fee of $1.00 per ton of commercial waste in the greater Chicago Spoon Ridge Landfill appeared to be the most garbage disposed at the landfill. The landfill metropolitan market. The proposed modified efficient and logical location for the disposal was sited on a 3,000 acre tract of derelict, Final Judgment, now pending in federal of New York waste. unreclaimed strip-mine property which, at district court in Washington, DC., would If New York waste were disposed at the that time, generated a paltry $5,000.00 in settle the case by requiring the defendants to Spoon Ridge Landfill, the economic benefits property taxes. The landfill was permitted by divest a number of waste collection routes to the VIllage of Fairview and the the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and waste disposal facilities in the greater surrounding area would be tremendous. The in 1991 and opened for business in May, Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if estimated host community tipping fees 1993. approved by the Court, would establish one would be approximately $1,000,000.00 per Gallatin planned to take advantage of the or more new competitors in this market for year. Property taxes approaching $250,000.00 impending closure of Chicago area landfills which relief was sought. per year and approximately 40 good paying and provide a large regional landfill for the I have responded directly to Mr. Hilton jobs would also be secured for the area. In Chicago market. This plan failed when some addressing his concerns. A copy of my order for Allied to executive the New York of the Chicago market landfills expanded, response to Mr. Hilton is enclosed. Thank proposal which it inherited from BFI, Allied garbage volumes dropped due to recycling, you for bringing the Village of Fairview’s must retain ownership of Spoon Ridge and Gallatin had no market hauling presence. concerns to our attention. Pursuant to the Landfill. The failure to competitively transport waste Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 from the Chicago market to Fairview led to Summary U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and the demise of Gallatin National Company and The Village of Fairview strongly objects to those of Mr. Hilton, and this response will be the sale of its landfill to BFI. the Department of Justice requirement that published in the Federal Register and filed BFI purchased the landfill from Gallatin Allied divest itself of the Spoon Ridge with the Court. National Company in December, 1994. It was Landfill. Two companies, Gallatin National Sincerely yours, understood that BFI needed the landfill and BFI, have failed to make the landfill because its sole operating Chicago area J. Robert Kramer II, competitive in the Chicago market. landfill, Mallard Lake, was rapidly filling up. Chief, Litigation II Section. Therefore, Spoon Ridge Landfill should not Further, BFI’s two other Chicago market be considered important in minimizing the U.S. Department of Justice landfills located in Davis Junction and Zion Department of Justice anti-competitive were closed and having difficulty obtaining concerns for the market. Antitrust Division siting approval for expansion. The Spoon The economic development opportunity May 10, 2000. Ridge Landfill in Fairview was intended to for the Village of Fairview and surrounding Gerald R. Hilton, be the long term Chicago market disposal site area from the receipt of New York garbage at for BFI. President, Village of Fairview, P.O. Box 137, Spoon Ridge Landfill is staggering. With a Fairview, IL 61432. Chicago market changes occurred shortly population of just 500 in an economically Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in after the purchase of the Spoon Ridge depressed county, the millions of dollars in (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, Landfill by BFI. It was determined that the revenue realized from this project would Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Mallard Lake Landfill had more site life than provide a once in a lifetime financial boost No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999)). previously predicted. Also, BFI’s landfills to the area. located in Davis Junction and Zion both Therefore, it is respectfully requested that Dear Mr. Hilton: This letter responds to received expansion siting approval. the Department of Justice reconsider and your letter of August 9, 1999 commenting on Additionally, BFI’s competitors obtained change its consent decree with regard to the the Final Judgment in this case on behalf of expansion siting approval for landfills close requirement that Allied divest itself of the the Village of Fairview. The Complaint in to the Chicago market. These changes Spoon Ridge Landfill. this case charged, among other things, that resulted in a glut of landfill air space in the Allied’s acquisition of BFI would Sincerely, Chicago market and rendered Spoon Ridge substantially lessen competition in the Landfill unable to compete. Village of Fairview collection or disposal of small container In June, 19998, BFI decided to close Spoon Gerald R. Hilton, commercial waste in the greater Chicago Ridge Landfill after reportedly losing President. metropolitan market. The proposed modified millions of dollars and determining that the Final Judgment, now pending in federal cc: U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin; U.S. facility could not, at least in the short term, district court in Washington, DC., would Senator Peter G. Fitzgerald; Congressman compete in the Chicago market. settle the case by requiring the defendants to Lane Evans; Governor George H. Ryan; divest a number of waste collection routes New York City State Senator George P. Shadid; State and waste disposal facilities in the greater In 1998, the Department of Sanitation of Representative Michael K. Smith; Mr. Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if the City of New York solicited a request for Thomas VanWeelden, President, Allied approved by the Court, would establish one proposals for the disposal of approximately Waste Industries, Inc. or more new competitors in this market for 13,000 tons per day of residential garbage. U.S. Department of Justice which relief was sought. This request for proposals was made In your letter, you express concern that the pursuant to a court order to close the Fresh Antitrust Division Final Judgment, by requiring Allied to divest Kills Landfill in the borough of Staten Island May 10, 2000. the Spoon Ridge landfill, is unnecessary for

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36238 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices effective relief and might undermine the tax Village of Fairview strenuously objects to the Village a tipping fee of $1.00 per ton of base of the local communities. The Spoon Department of Justice requirement that Allied garbage disposed at the landfill. The landfill Ridge landfill is a relatively new site and the divest itself of the Spoon Ridge Landfill was sited on a 3,000 acre tract of derelict, largest landfill in the State of Illinois. BFI located in Fairview, Illinois. unreclaimed strip-mine property which, at recently closed the landfill because it found In your analysis of the Chicago market, it that time, generated a paltry $5,000.00 in that the landfill was unable to attract enough is stated that Allied’s divestiture of the property taxes. The landfill was permitted by waste from the Chicago area to make it Spoon Ridge Landfill would insure that the the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency viable. By closing the landfill, BFI reduced benefits of competition, lower prices and in 1991 and opened for business in May, its assessed value, and thus, the taxes it paid better service would be preserved. It is the 1993. to local communities. BFI intended to reopen opinion of the Village of Fairview that the Gallatin planned to take advantage of the the landfill if it obtained a long-term contract Spoon Ridge Landfill is not an important impending closure of Chicago area landfills to dispose of new York City’s residential waste disposal operation for the Chicago and provide a large regional landfill for the waste. market. Requiring the divestiture of the Chicago market. This plan failed when some You stated that the future viability of Spoon Ridge Landfill will eliminate an of the Chicago market landfills expanded, Spoon Ridge depends on its ability to attract opportunity for Allied to send waste from garbage volumes dropped due to recycling, waste from New York City. By requiring New York City to Spoon Ridge as planned by and Gallatin had no market hauling presence. Allied to divest this landfill to an BFI. As such, the divestiture removes an The failure to competitively transport waste independent competitor, ostensibly to help important potential economic development from the Chicago market to Fairview led to alleviate competitive problems in the opportunity for the Village of Fairview. the demise of Gallatin National Company and Chicago market, the Final Judgment the sale of its landfill to BFI. unnecessarily limits Allied’s ability to Fairview and Fulton County Overview BFI purchased the landfill from Gallatin complete for the contract to dispose of New The Village of Fairview is a small west National Company in December, 1994. It was York City’s waste, and undermines the central Illinois community located in Fulton understood that BFI needed the landfill changes of Spoon Ridge ever opening again. County, nearly 200 miles from Chicago. because its sole operating Chicago area The fact is that requiring Allied to divest Fairview has a population of approximately landfill, Mallard Lake, was rapidly filling up. Spoon Ridge to a new competitor in no way 500 people. Further, BFI’s two other Chicago market prevents Allied or any other firm from later At the turn of this century, Fulton County landfills located in Davis Junction and Zion contracting with the new owner to dispose of was a prosperous, dynamic area. Agriculture were closed and having difficulty obtaining any New York City’s waste. Indeed, the new was productive and viable. A large number siting approval for expansion. The Spoon owner would be free to make the landfill’s of underground coal mines were attracting Ridge Landfill in Fairview was intended to disposal capacity available to any person immigrants to the area, increasing the be the long term Chicago market disposal site who wishes to bid and enhance competition population and wealth of Fulton County. for BFI. for the contract to dispose of New York City’s International Harvester Company was Chicago market changes occurred shortly waste. If the new owner believes, however, growing in Canton, the largest city in the after the purchase of the Spoon Ridge that the space in the landfill is much more county. Landfill by BFI. It was determined that the valuable to use in competing for the disposal A number of significant changes to the area Mallard Lake Landfill had more site life than of waste from the city of Chicago, then the occurred in the 1950’s. Most were negative previously predicted. Also, BFI’s landfills new owner can choose to commit the landfill except for Caterpillar’s expansion in Peoria, located in Davis Junction and Zion both to competing in that market. Leaving Spoon Illinois. The mining operations changed from received expansion siting approval. Ridge with Allied, which already controls shaft to strip-mining. This mining method Additionally, BFI’s competitors obtained nearly 35% of all disposal capacity in the was much more efficient and used a much expansion siting approval for landfills close greater Chicago metropolitan market, would smaller work force. During this period, to the Chicago market. These changes ensure that a single firm could dominate Caterpillar expanded in the Peoria area and resulted in a glut of landfill air space in the waste disposal, and therefore, set the price of many Fairview and Fulton County workers Chicago market and rendered Spoon Ridge disposal in the Chicago market. While this were able to secure work at Caterpillar. Landfill unable to compete. may make the landfill more valuable to the Through the 1960’s and 1970’s, about 2,500 In June, 1998, BFI decided to close Spoon local community, it would adversely affect people worked for International Harvester; Ridge Landfill after reportedly losing the prices paid by consumers for the disposal about 1,000 people worked for several large millions of dollars and determining that the of their municipal solid waste. strip mines in Fulton County; and about facility could not, at least in the short term, Thank you for bringing your concerns to 1,700 people commuted to work for compete in the Chicago market. our attention, and we hope this information Caterpillar in Peoria. will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the New York City The economic base of the area diminished Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 in the period between 1980 and 1984. All of In 1998, the Department of Sanitation of U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and the large strip mines were closed. The the City of New York solicited a request for this response will be published in the International Harvester Plant in Canton proposals for the disposal of approximately Federal Register and filed with the Court. closed in 1983. Caterpillar reduced 13,000 tons per day of residential garbage. Sincerely yours, employment by about 15,000 people in the This request for proposals was made J. Robert Kramer II, 1980’s. The net effect was that the number of pursuant to a court order to close the Fresh Chief, Litigation II Section. Caterpillar employees in Fulton County Kills Landfill in the borough of Staten Island dropped from about 1,700 people to about in 2001. BFI responded to the request for Village of Fairview 900 people. Consequently, there was a loss of proposals and named Spoon Ridge Landfill August 9, 1999. over 4,000 well paid jobs in Fulton County as one of the locations at which it would in the 1980’s. dispose of the New York waste. Included in Mr. J. Robert Kramer, II, the response to the request for proposals was Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust The overall effect of these events was devastating to the area. The population an endorsement of the project by the Village Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of Fairview. A copy of the letter from the 1401 H Street, NW, Suite 3000, declined, property values plummeted, young people moved away, and the Fairview and Village of Fairview to the New York Washington, D.C. 20005. Fulton County area realized that the Department of Sanitation supporting and In Re Allied/BFI Consent Decree Case No. prosperity had ended. endorsing the disposal of New York City 1.99CV01962 waste at Spoon Ridge Landfill is attached. Dear Mr. Kramer: The purpose of this letter Project Background The New York Department of Sanitation is to provide comment on the proposed In 1989, Gallatin National Company awarded BFI the opportunity to negotiate for consent decree which requires Allied Waste received approval from the Village of the disposal of 3,900 tons per day of New Industries, Inc. to sell certain assets in Fairview to site a landfill within the Village York garbage. BFI hoped to secure a contract connection with its acquisition of Browning limits. A siting, or host community, from the Department of Sanitation at the end Ferris Industries, Inc. Specifically, the agreement was signed which secured for the of this year. As BFI further analyzed their

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36239

New York proposal, they reported that the metropolitan market. The proposed modified Mr. Joel Klein, Spoon Ridge Landfill appeared to be the most Final Judgment, now pending in federal Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department efficient and logical location for the disposal district court in Washington, DC, would of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, of New York waste. settle the case by requiring the defendants to N.W., #3109, Washington, DC 20530. If New York waste were disposed at the divest a number of waste collection routes Dear Mr. Klein: Enclosed you will find a Spoon Ridge Landfill, the economic benefits and waste disposal facilities in the greater copy of a letter from a constituent who is to the Village of Fairview and the Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if concerned about an order issued by the surrounding area would be tremendous. The approved by the Court, would establish one Department of Justice that requires the sale estimated host community tipping fees or more new competitors in this market for of those Spoonridge landfill to Republic would be approximately $1,000,000.00 per which relief was sought. Waste. The order was issued in conjunction year. Property taxes approaching $250,000.00 In your letter, you express concern that the with the buyout of B.F.I. by Allied Waste. per year and approximately 40 good paying Final Judgment, by requiring Allied to divest Please provide an explanation of this jobs would also be secured for the area. In the Spoon Ridge landfill, is unnecessary for decision to Mr. Taylor, and send a copy of order for Allied to execute the New York effective relief and might undermine the tax your respond to David Lieber in my proposal which it inherited from BFI, Allied base of the local communities. The Spoon Washington office. must retain ownership of Spoon Ridge Ridge landfill is a relatively new site and the Thank you for your time and Landfill. largest landfill in the State of Illinois. BFI consideration. Summary recently closed the landfill because it found Sincerely, that the landfill was unable to attract enough The Village of Fairview strongly objects to waste from the Chicago area to make it Richard J. Durbin, the Department of Justice requirement that viable. By closing the landfill, BFI reduced United States Senator. allied divest itself of the Spoon Ridge its assessed value, and thus the taxes it paid Landfill. Two companies, Gallatin National to local communities. BFI intended to reopen Barry Taylor and BFI, have failed to make the landfill the landfill if it obtained a long-term contract August 11, 1999. competitive in the Chicago market. to dispose of New York City’s residential Therefore, Spoon Ridge Landfill should not Dear Sir: I am writing you in an effort to waste. enlist your help in maintaining the financial be considered important in minimizing the You stated that the future viability of Department of Justice anti-competitive stability of the village of Fariview Illinois. Spoon Ridge depends on its ability to attract The United States Department of Justice has concerns for the market. waste from New York City. By requiring The economic development opportunity issued an order in the buyout of B.F.I. by Allied to divest this landfill to an Allied Waste which would require the sale of for the Village of Fairview and surrounding independent competitor, ostensibily to help area from the receipt of New York garbage at Spoonridge landfill to Republic Waste. They allievate competitive problems in the Spoon Ridge Landfill is staggering. With a claim the retention of Spoonridge by Allied Chicago market, the Final Judgment population of just 500 in an economically would create a monopoly situation in the unnecessarily limits Allied’s ability to depressed county, the millions of dollars in Chicago market. This is not true, Spoonridge compete for the contract to dispose of New revenue realized from this project would was originally built to service the Chicago York City’s waste, and undermines the provide a once in a lifetime financial boost metro area. But changes in the industry made chances of Spoon Ridge ever opening again. to the area. this an unprofitable proposition. The fact is that requiring Allied to divest Therefore, it is respectfully requested that B.F.I. then changed their strategy and Spoon Ridge to a new competitor in no way the Department of Justice reconsider and decided to seek refuse from all over the prevents Allied or any other firm from later change its consent decree with regard to the country. This move was endorsed by both the contracting with the new owner to dispose of requirement that Allied divest itself of the village and county boards. As it began to look any New York City’s waste. Indeed, the new Spoon Ridge Landfill. like the plan was working (B.F.I. hearing a owner would be free to make the landfill’s Sincerely, contract with New York city) the sale took disposal capacity available to any person place and the justice department stepped in. Village of Fairview, who wishes to bid and enhance competition It now appears Republic Waste will be Gerald R. Hilton, for the contract to dispose of New York City’s purchasing Spoonridge. With Republic waste. If the new owner believes, however, President. having ample landfill space in the Chicago that the space in the landfill is much more market we believe Spoonridge will be cc: U.S. Senator Richard J. Durbin, U.S. valuable to use in competing for the disposal indefinitely mothballed. Senator Peter G. Fitzjerald, Congressman of waste from the city of Chicago, then the Fairview and B.F.I. had been participating Lane Evans, Governor George H. Ryan, new owner can choose to commit the landfill in a public private partnership, which has State Senator George P. Shadid, State to competing in that market. Leaving Spoon been a great help to the village in providing Representative Michael K. Smith, Mr. Ridge with Allied, which already controls Thomas VanWeelden, President, Allied nealry 35% of all disposal capacity in the needed services to the citizens. The fees paid Waste Industries, Inc. greater Chicago metropolitan market, would by B.F.I have enabled the village to install a new water system. This was made necessary U.S. Department of Justice ensure that a single firm could dominate waste disposal, and therefore, set the price of because the E.P.A. had determined our water Antitrust Division disposal in the Chicago market. While this to be unfit to drink. If the landfill is mothballed and the revenues to the village May 10, 2000. may make the landfill more valuable to the are lost it will cause a severe budge crisis. Gerald R. Hilton, local community, it would adversely affect the prices paid by consumers for the disposal We are against monopolies and the high President, Village of Fairview, P.O. Box 137, prices they cause. But we feel that the Fairview, IL 61432. of their municipal solid waste. Thank you for bringing your concerns to Department of Justice has not gotten the Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in our attention, and we hope this information correct picture in this case. If the order (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, will help alleviate them. Purusant to the stands we feel the only ones to suffer will be Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 the citizens of he Fairview area. The loss of No. 99 CA 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999)., U.S.C. 169d), a copy of your comments and the landfill revenue and the possible Dear Mr. Hilton: This letter responds to this response will be published in the reduction in property taxes will endanger the your letter of August 9, 1999 commenting on Federal Register and filed with the Court. village, school system and the other taxing the Final Judgment in this case on behalf of bodies that depend on these funds. It is our Sincerely yours, the Village of Fairview. The Complaint in hope that you will help persuade the this case charged, among other things, that J. Robert Kramer II, Department of Justice to take a closer look at Allied’s acquisition of BFI would Chief, Litigation II Section. this situation. As a small village we are trying substantially lessen competition in the to provide quality of life without putting collection or disposal of small container United States Senate undo strain on the taxpayers. We hope you commercial waste in the greater Chicage October 22, 1999. can help us achieve our goal.

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 36240 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Thank You, In your letter, you express concern that the Re Proposed Consent Decree in United States Barry Taylor, Final Judgment, by requiring Allied to divest of America v. Allied Waste Industries, Fairview Village Trustee. the Spoon Ridge landfill, is unnecessary for Inc. and Browning Ferris Industries, Inc. effective relief and might undermine the tax (Civil No. 1:99CVO1962). Barry Taylor base of the local communities. The Spoon Dear Mr. Kramer: We respectfully request Ridge landfill is a relatively new site and the August 8, 1999. that the Solid Waste Sector of the McHenry largest landfill in the State of Illinois. BFI County Department of Planning & Subject: J Robert Kramer re Allied/BFI recently closed the landfill because it found Development (Department) be informed of all consent decree. that the landfill was unable to attract enough pending sales of the following assets prior to Dear Sir: I am writing you to protest a waste from the Chicago are to make it viable. your Division granting final approval of the ruling by your agency that was meant to By closing the landfill. BFI reduced its sales. The details of the proposed sale or prevent a monopoly from being formed in the assessed value, and thus, the taxes it paid to sales of these assets would be used by this Chicago area. As a small part of this order local communities. BFI intended to reopen Department to evaluate the potential impact Allied is ordered to sell the Spoonridge the landfill if it obtained a long-term contract the sales may have on our solid waste market landfill in Fairveiw Illinois. The result of this to dispose of New York City’s residential place. If an impact has been determined, the action will not effect the price of waste waste. Department would submit comments, either disposal in the Chicago area, but will instead You stated that the future viability of negative or positive, for your review prior to devestate a small rural community in west Spoon Ridge depends on its ability to attract final approval. The assets of concern in the central Illinois. The Spoonridge landfill was waste from New York City. By requiring Chicago Metropolitan area are: built to service the Chicago metro area, but Allied to divest this landfill to an • Two (2) BFI Landfills; this never became finacialy competitive. independent competitor, ostensibly to help • Five (5) Transfer Stations; and B.F.I. then changed their strategy to attract alleviate competitive problems in the • All BFI small container commercial waste from other parts of the country. This Chicago market, the Final Judgment collection routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage, move was endorsed by both the village and unnecessarily limits Allied’s ability to McHenry, and Will counties, Illinois. county boards. As this process was nearing complete for the contract to dispose of New Thank you, in advance, for your assistance completion with a contract from New York York City’s waste, and undermines the in this matter. I may be reached at (815) 334– city we are derailed by a ruling from your chances of Spoon Ridge ever opening again. 4560 or by e-mail at agency. The sell of this facility to Republic The fact is that requiring Allied to divest [email protected]. Waste will, we fear this will leave the site Spoon Ridge to a new competitor in no way Sincerely, mothballed and eliminate the finacial benefit prevents Allied or any other firm from later to the villiage. These funds are being used to contracting with the new owner to dispose of Leonore Buckley, pay for a new water system for the villiage any New York City’s waste. Indeed, the new CPG, Solid Waste Coordinator. which was forced upon us by the E.P.A. owner would be free to make the landfill’s Your agency’s ruling is going to force the U.S. Department of Justice disposal capacity available to any person village of Fairview into near bankruptcy, who wishes to bid and enhance competition while in no way changing the balance of Antitrust Division for the contract to dispose of New York City’s waste disposal in the Chicago area. I plead May 10, 2000. waste. If the new owner believes, however, with you to have your people review and dig Leonore Buckley, a little deeper into this issue, before they that the space in the landfill is much more valuable to use in competing for the disposal Solid Waste Coordinator, Department of make the citizens of Fairview pay a high Planning and Development, McHenry price for Spoonridge being lumped into the of waste from the city of Chicago, then the new owner can choose to commit to landfill County Government Center, Annex Chicago area without any basis in fact. Building A, 2200 North Seminary Thank You, to competing in that market. Leaving Spoon Ridge with Allied, which already controls Avenue, Woodstock, IL 60098. Barry Taylor, nearly 35% of all disposal capacity in the Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in Village Trustee, Fairview Il. greater Chicago metropolitan market, would (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, ensure that a single firm could dominate Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. U.S. Department of Justice waste disposal, and therefore, set the price of No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). Antitrust Division disposal in the Chicago market. While this Dear Ms. Buckley: This letter responds to may make the landfill more valuable to the your letter of December 14, 1999 commenting May 10, 2000. local community, it would adversely affect on the Final Judgment in this case on behalf Barry Taylor, the prices paid by consumers for the disposal of the Department of Planning and Fairview Village Trustee, 580 Main Street, of their municipal solid waste. Development of McHenry County. The Box 261, Fairview, IL 61432.. Thank you for bringing your concerns to Complaint in this case charged, among other Re Comment on Proposed Final Judgment in our attention, and we hope this information things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI would (United States v. Allied Waste Industries, will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the substantially lessen competition in the Inc. and Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 collection or disposal of small container No. 99 CV 1962 (D.D.C., July 21, 1999). U.S.C. 16(d), a copy of your comments and commercial waste the greater Chicago Dear Mr. Taylor: This letter responds to this response will be published in the metropolitan market. The proposed modified your letters of August 8 and 11, 1999 Federal Register and filed with the Court. Final Judgment, now pending in federal commenting on the Final Judgment in this CC: Office of the Honorable Richard J. district court in Washington, DC., would case on behalf of the Village of Fairview. The Durbin, ATTN.: David Lieber, United settle the case by requiring the defendants to Complaint in this case charged, among other States Senate, 364 Russell Senate Office divest a number of waste collection routes things, that Allied’s acquisition of BFI would Building, Washington, DC 20510–1304. and waste disposal facilities in the greater substantially lessen competition in the Sincerely yours, Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if approved by the Court, would establish one collection or disposal of small container J. Robert Kramer II, commercial waste in the greater Chicago or more new competition in this market for metropolitan market. The proposed modified Chief, Litigation II Section. which relief was sought. In your letter, you request that the Final Judgment, now pending in federal McHenry County Department of Planning Department of Planning and Development district court in Washington, DC., would and Development settle the case by requiring the defendants to (‘‘Department’’) be informed of all pending divest a number of waste collection routes December 14, 1999. sales of the assets to be divested pursuant to and waste disposal facilities in the greater Mr. J. Robert Kramer, III, Esquire, the proposed Final Judgment. These assets Chicago metropolitan market. This relief, if Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust include the two BFI landfills; five BFI approved by the Court, would establish one Division, U.S. Department of Justice, transfer stations; and the BFI small container or more new competitors in this market for 1401 H Street, Suite 3000, Washington, commercial routes in Cook, Lake, DuPage, which relief was sought. DC 20005. McHenry and Will Counties, Illinois. Your

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36241 further state that the Department would Superior has no current hauling or disposal the franchise work which initially had to be evaluate the potential impact the sales may operations in the greater Chicago divested. have on its solid waste marketplace. metropolitan market. The five transfer Thank you for bringing your concerns to Under the terms of the Final Judgment, the stations have also been divested with the our attention, and we hope this information defendants must sell all of the relevant approval of the United States—Superior has will help alleviate them. Pursuant to the disposal and hauling assets described in the acquired four of the transfer stations, and Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 Final Judgment to a purchaser or purchasers Groot Industries has acquired one. U.S.C. 16(d), as copy of your comments and acceptable to the United States, in its sole The BFI small container commercial routes this response will be published in the discretion. In approving a purchase, we in the five counties have been divested to Federal Register and filed with the court. always consider the competitive impact in Superior except for the municipal franchise Sincerely yours, the local market of that purchaser’s contracts. These will be retained by Allied if J. Robert Kramer II, acquisition of the hauling or disposal assets. the court approves a modification to the The Orchard Hills and Zion landfills have Final Judgment. The United States and Allied Chief, Litigation II Section. been acquired by Superior Services, Inc. a have filed a motion to have the court modify [FR Doc. 00–13019 Filed 06–06–00; 8:45 am] purchaser approved by the United States. the Final Judgment to permit Allied to retain BILLING CODE 4410±11±M

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07JNN2 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part III

Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 11 et al. Type Certification Procedures for Changed Products; Final Rule

VerDate 112000 19:52 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR2 36244 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1995 before the compliance dates Randall Petersen, Certification published in this document. Federal Aviation Administration Procedures Branch (AIR–110), Aircraft The FAA will consider all comments Certification Service, Federal Aviation received, and will publish in the 14 CFR Parts 11, 21, and 25 Administration, 800 Independence Federal Register a summary of the Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591, disposition of those comments and, if [Docket No. 28903; Amdt. No. 11±45, 21± telephone (202) 267–9583. appropriate, changes to the rule that 77, 25±99] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: may result from consideration of those comments. RIN 2120±AF68 Compliance Dates Comments must include the Type Certification Procedures for This final rule requires that major regulatory docket or amendment Changed Products changes to transport category airplanes number and must be submitted in and restricted category airplanes that triplicate to the address above. All AGENCY: Federal Aviation have been certified using transport comments received, as well as a report Administration (FAA), DOT. category standards, be evaluated under summarizing each substantive public ACTION: Final rule; request for the new rules beginning 18 months from contact with FAA personnel on this comments. today’s date of publication in the rulemaking, will be filed in the public Federal Register. Major changes to all docket and will be considered by the SUMMARY: This document amends the other category aircraft and engines and FAA. The docket is available for public procedural regulations for the propellers are required to be evaluated inspection before and after the comment certification of changes to type under the new rules beginning 30 closing date. certificated products. These months from today’s date of publication Commenters who want the FAA to amendments affect changes in the Federal Register. acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this final rule accomplished through either an Comments Invited amended type certificate or a must include a preaddressed, stamped supplemental type certificate. The In the NPRM, the FAA certified that postcard with those comments on which amendments are needed to address the the proposed rule would not have a the following statement is made: trend toward fewer products that are of significant economic impact on a ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 28903.’’ The completely new design and more substantial number of small entities. postcard will be date-stamped by the products with multiple changes to The FAA has revisited the question of FAA and mailed to the commenter. previously approved designs. This final the potential impact on small entities Availability of Final Rule rule action will enhance safety by and has determined that an analysis applying the latest airworthiness under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of An electronic copy of this final rule standards, to the greatest extent 1980, as amended, is required. This may be downloaded, by using a modem practicable, for the certification of analysis and a complete analysis of and suitable communications software, significant design changes of aircraft, potential costs and benefits are set out from: the FAA regulations section of the aircraft engines, and propellers. in the Regulatory Evaluation Summary FedWorld electronic bulletin board portion of this preamble. As stated in DATES: service (telephone: (703) 321–3339), or Effective June 7, 2000. this final rule document, the FAA Mandatory compliance dates are the Government Printing Office’s (GPO) determined that there could be a electronic bulletin board service December 10, 2001 for transport significant impact on a substantial category airplanes and restricted (telephone: (202) 512–1661). number of small entities. Additionally, Internet users may reach the FAA’s category airplanes that have been the cost analysis of the regulatory web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ certified using transport category evaluation has undergone a substantial arm/nprm/nprm.htm, or the GPO’s web standards, and December 9, 2002 for all revision, and comments on the entire page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara, other category aircraft and engines and regulatory evaluation are requested. for access to recently published propellers. Comments on the Since this rule is being adopted rulemaking documents. information collection requirements and without prior notice and prior public Any person may obtain a copy of this the Regulatory Evaluation section, comment on the increased information final rule by submitting a request to: which includes the regulatory flexibility collection requirements listed in the FAA, Office of Rulemaking, Attention: analysis, must be submitted on or before Paperwork Reduction Act section of this ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, August 7, 2000. document, interested persons are also SW, Washington, DC 20591; or by ADDRESSES: Comments for this final rule invited to submit such written data, telephoning (202) 267–9680. Individuals should be mailed or delivered, in views, or arguments, as they may desire, requesting a copy of this final rule triplicate, to the Federal Aviation relating to the information collection should identify their request with the Administration, Office of the Chief requirements. amendment number or docket number. Counsel, Attn: Rules Docket (AGC–200), Pending the evaluation of the public Persons interested in being placed on Docket No. 28903, Room 915G, 800 comments, the FAA has decided to the mailing list for future rulemaking Independence Avenue, SW, proceed with due diligence. This rule documents should request from the Washington, DC 20591. Comments differs from the NPRM and has been above office a copy of Advisory Circular submitted must include the regulatory revised to address the concerns of the No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed docket or amendment number. majority of small entities likely to be Rulemaking Distribution System, that Comments may also be sent affected by the rule. The FAA will describes the application procedure. electronically to the following Internet consider and respond to comments on address: 9–NPRM–[email protected]. the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Comments may be filed or examined in the information collection requirements Fairness Act Room 915G on weekdays, except that are subject to review by the Office The Small Business Regulatory Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and of Management and Budget (OMB) Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 5:00 p.m. under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996, requires the FAA to comply with

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36245 small entity requests for information or amendments need to be applied to applicable: Part 23 for normal, utility, advice about compliance with statutes changed products. acrobatic, and commuter category and regulations within its jurisdiction. In order to achieve this goal, the FAA airplanes; part 25 for transport category Therefore, any small entity that has a published a proposed rule (Notice No. airplanes; part 27 for normal category question regarding this document may 97–7; 62 FR 24288, May 2, 1997) to rotorcraft; part 29 for transport category contact their local FAA official. Internet amend the procedural regulations for rotorcraft; part 31 for manned free users can find additional information on the certification of changes to type balloons; part 33 for aircraft engines; SBREFA on the FAA’s web page at certificated products whether the part 35 for propellers; and part 21 http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm change is accomplished through an (§ 21.17(b) and (f)) for special classes of and may send electronic inquiries to the amended type certificate or through a aircraft and primary category aircraft, following Internet address: 9–AWA– supplemental type certificate. The respectively. [email protected]. FAA’s purpose in including The airworthiness standards in these supplemental type certificates (STC) parts of the regulations may be amended Background was to ensure that all significant as needed to reflect continually Statement of the Problem changes to a type certificated product changing technology, correct design would follow the same procedure. A deficiencies, and provide for safety Under the regulations in effect prior related purpose was to avoid creating a enhancements. An applicant for a type to the early 1940’s, an applicant for a loophole that would allow a type certificate is required under current changed product, such as an alternate certificate (TC) applicant to choose the § 21.17, with certain exceptions, to engine installation, was required to STC process thereby avoid complying show that the product meets the apply for a new type certificate and with later amendments. applicable airworthiness standards that comply with the standards current at are in effect on the date of the History of Type Certification the time of application. This did not application. The exceptions include present an unreasonable burden on the Title 49 U.S.C. 44701 authorizes the instances in which the Administrator applicant then because the FAA Administrator to promote safety of specifies otherwise, or in which the airworthiness standards did not change flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by applicant either elects or is required appreciably over short periods of time. prescribing minimum standards under specific circumstances to comply That is, the standards current at the time governing the design and construction with later effective amendments. In of an application for a change were of aircraft, aircraft engines, and addition, the Administrator may essentially the same as those with propellers as may be required in the prescribe special conditions. which the original product had to interest of safety, and such minimum Under § 21.16, special conditions may comply. Since the early 1940’s, standards governing appliances as may be prescribed if the Administrator finds however, rapid changes in technology be required in the interest of safety. that the existing airworthiness standards have resulted in significant changes in Under 49 U.S.C. 44704, the FAA may do not contain adequate or appropriate the airworthiness standards over issue type certificates, including safety standards because of novel or relatively short periods of time. supplemental type certificates, for unusual design features of the product Therefore, an applicant for an extensive aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and to be type certificated relative to the change to a type certificated product, certain appliances. design features considered in the which required a new type certificate, The general certification procedures applicable airworthiness standards. could be faced with complying with for products (aircraft, aircraft engines, Also, under § 21.21(b)(1), if any safety standards that varied and propellers) and parts are set forth in applicable airworthiness standards are considerably from the standards for the 14 CFR part 21 (part 21). As described not complied with, an applicant may original product. To relieve this in §§ 21.13 and 21.15, any interested nevertheless be entitled to a type situation, the FAA’s predecessor agency person may apply for a type certificate certificate if the Administrator finds that required an application for a new type by submitting an application those standards not complied with are certificate only if the change was quite accompanied by the required compensated for by factors that provide extensive. documentation to the FAA. Sections an equivalent level of safety. Such In recent years, a trend has developed 21.16 through 21.21, 21.101, and 21.115 determinations are commonly referred towards fewer products that involve specify certain regulations and to as ‘‘equivalent safety findings’’ and substantial design changes that would designate the applicable airworthiness are made with respect to the level of require a new type certificate. In many standards for type certification of both safety intended by the applicable cases, over a period of time, a series of new and changed products. The term standard. In addition, under changes could permissively be made to ‘‘changed product’’ is used throughout § 21.21(b)(2), an applicant may be a product by amending its original type part 21 and throughout this preamble to denied a type certificate if the certificate such that the resultant model include changes that are made through Administrator finds an unsafe feature or is substantially different from the an amended type certificate, as well as characteristic of the aircraft for the original model. Although each changed those made under a supplemental type category in which type certification is product in such a series of changes may certificate. A person who is not the type requested, even though the aircraft may differ little from its immediate certificate holder has only the STC comply fully with the applicable predecessor, the changes could option while the type certificate holder airworthiness standards. collectively result in a product with has the option of applying either for an Taken together §§ 21.16, 21.17, and considerable differences from the amended type certificate or for an STC. 21.21 designate the applicable original product. As a result, many Section 21.17 designates the airworthiness regulations for type changed aeronautical products have not applicable regulations for the issuance certification and accommodate those been required to demonstrate of type certificates. In order to be issued circumstances when the airworthiness compliance with all the recent a type certificate, the applicant must standards do not adequately cover the airworthiness standards. This rule is show that the product complies with the design features of a product. These intended to clarify under what airworthiness standards contained in sections recognize and balance the conditions more recent airworthiness one of the following 14 CFR parts, as following four important considerations:

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36246 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

(1) The FAA is obligated, under 49 certificate must comply with either the Trends in Type Certification of Changes U.S.C. 44701, to keep the airworthiness regulations incorporated by reference in In recent years, a trend has developed standards required in the interest of the type certificate or the applicable toward fewer products that are of safety, (i.e., parts 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33 regulations in effect on the date of completely new designs, which would and 35) as current as practicable. application, plus any other amendments require new type certificates. Over a (2) The type certificate applicant the Administrator finds to be directly period of time, a series of changes to an needs to know, early in a certification related. The ‘‘regulations incorporated original product may have been made so program, what the applicable by reference’’ are the regulations that that the current model is considerably airworthiness standards will be in order were the certification basis for the different from the original model. to finalize the detailed design of its original issuance of the type certificate Although each changed product in such product and to enable the applicant to or any later regulations that were the a series of changes may differ little from make reasonable performance certification basis for any changes to the its immediate predecessor, the changes guarantees to its potential customers. original type certificate. could result collectively in a product (3) In the interest of safety, rapid If an applicant chooses to show technological advances presently being compliance with the regulations in with substantial differences from the made by the civil aircraft industry effect on the date of the application for original product. Another trend in manufacturing is to necessitate that the FAA be able to issue the change, the applicant must also keep products in production over special conditions to address novel or comply with any other amendments that several decades. Some currently unusual design features that it has not are directly related. In some instances, yet had an opportunity to address in the a regulation may have been amended to manufactured airplanes have, for airworthiness standards through the become less stringent, while a related example, evolved from airplane models general rulemaking process, or to regulation has become more stringent. originally type-certificated 25 years ago. address novel or unusual design In this situation, an applicant must also This does not imply that those airplanes features that were not considered by the comply with the related more stringent are ‘‘unsafe,’’ because they do, in appropriate airworthiness standards regulation. Current § 21.101(a) does not practice, have features that address the applicable to changes to type otherwise require compliance with later intent of most of the current certificates. amendments and does not grant the airworthiness standards. However, (4) It is also important to allow Administrator the authority to require current procedural regulations (part 21) flexibility in design. Wherever possible, compliance with later regulations as a do not require that changed products the airworthiness standards of 14 CFR method to increase the level of safety of demonstrate compliance with all the Chapter 1, subchapter C, are a product. current airworthiness standards. intentionally written as performance An applicant for a change to a type The basic premise behind the FAA’s standards, and the procedural certificated product is responsible for current policies for the procedures and regulations permit design changes over showing that the product, as altered, not airworthiness standards for type the operational life of a product. just the change itself, complies with the certification is that the highest possible existing certification basis, because degree of safety in the public interest History of Type Certification of Changes areas that have not been changed may should be achieved by products being Part 21 designates the applicable be affected by the change. However, the certificated at any given time. In dealing airworthiness standards for changed applicant need not resubstantiate those with this premise, the FAA has had to products. Section 21.19 describes the areas of the product where the original continually weigh the desire for the circumstances in which an applicant for substantiation has not been invalidated highest level of safety with the cost to type certification of a changed product by the change. the manufacturers, operators, and must apply for a new type certificate. As Current § 21.101(b) pertains to traveling public for achieving the previously discussed, before the early changes for which the regulations highest possible degree of safety in the 1940’s, an applicant for a changed incorporated by reference do not public interest. This balance between product, such as an airplane with an provide adequate standards. Such safety and cost has been exacerbated by alternative engine installation, was changes generally involve features that the introduction of highly sophisticated required to apply for a new type were not envisaged at the time the products whose development and certificate. For the reasons already regulations incorporated by reference manufacture have become enormously described, by the early 1940’s, an were adopted and are, therefore, novel expensive. As already stated, this is one application for a new type certificate or unusual with respect to those reason manufacturers choose to produce was required only if the change was regulations. For these changes, the more and more changed products that, quite extensive. applicant must comply with regulations by the FAA regulations, are not required Under § 21.101, the original type in effect on the date of application for to have new type certificates. certificate may be amended to include the change as found necessary to The FAA maintains that the issue changes to the product when the provide a level of safety equal to that should not be whether a product is applicant demonstrates that it complies established by the regulations produced under a new type certificate with the same airworthiness standards incorporated by reference. In this case, or a changed one. The issue is whether as the original product plus appropriate the applicant is not able to select any or not the level of safety of the product, special conditions, and the change does amendment of the regulation it chooses embodied in the airworthiness not warrant making a new application between those incorporated by reference standards it complies with, is as high as for a type certificate under § 21.19. and those in existence on the date of the practicable. In addition, to require areas Because § 21.101(a) and (b) are application. When regulations in effect unaffected by the change to comply incorporated by reference in § 21.115, on the date of application for the change with the later standards could not only these procedures are equally applicable fail to provide adequate standards, the be unreasonably costly but could reduce to persons applying for supplemental applicant must comply with special the level of safety of the product due to type certificates. conditions to provide a level of safety unforeseen developmental problems. Section 21.101(a) requires that an equal to that established by the The manufacturers are constantly applicant for a change to a type regulations incorporated by reference. issuing service information that

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36247 describes approved alterations that revisions to part 25 for newly designed FAA, and the FAA would decide users may make to improve the level of airplanes were required for the existing whether or not to issue a proposal based safety of the product. fleet and were implemented in the on the ARAC recommendations. When establishing the highest operating regulations, such as part 121. The working group presented to practicable level of safety for a changed ARAC a recommended NPRM and product, the FAA has determined that it Recent FAA Actions associated advisory material concerning is appropriate to assess the service In addition to the safety the type certification procedures for history of a product, as well as the later considerations previously described, changes to aeronautical products, airworthiness standards. It makes little there has also been a growing changed products, and products already sense to mandate changes to well international concern that some in service. ARAC, in turn, submitted understood designs, whose service changed products are given an unfair these documents, dated October 14, experience has been acceptable, merely competitive advantage over those that 1994, as recommendations to the FAA. to comply with new standards. The are of new design and must comply The rulemaking proposed by the FAA clear exception to this premise is if the with later standards. in Notice No. 97–7 reflects the ARAC new standards were issued to address a Because of these concerns, beginning recommendations in the type deficiency in the design in question, or in 1989 the FAA participated in an ad certification procedures for changed if the service experience is not hoc committee sponsored by the products with mostly minor changes in applicable to the new standards. This Aerospace Industries Association of the preamble to the proposed rule. The consideration of airworthiness America, known as the International Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) have standards and service experience should Certification Procedures Task Force published similar proposed changes. form the basis for developing the (ICPTF). In addition to the FAA, this That document was circulated for certification basis for a change in a task force included representatives of public comment on June 10, 1996, in product. the European Joint Aviation Authorities, NPA 21–7. While it can be argued that, for Transport Canada Civil Aviation At the same time the FAA issued consistency, new airworthiness Authority (TCCAA), Aerospace Notice No. 97–7, the FAA announced standards should apply across-the-board Industries Association of America, Air the availability of a proposed to the entire aircraft fleet, application of Transport Association of America, companion advisory circular (AC) for new standards would not be practical in General Aviation Manufacturers public comment. While the FAA’s every case. Although newly designed Association, International Air Transport proposed AC was based on a draft aircraft are required to meet all Association, The European Association submitted by the ARAC, the FAA’s applicable current airworthiness of Aerospace Industries (AECMA), version was significantly reorganized standards, in many cases a product Aerospace Industries Association of and rewritten except for the proposed being changed, for which only an Canada, Air Line Pilots Association, and appendices which were identical to amended type certificate is needed, is Association of European Airlines. those recommended by the ARAC. Also, required to meet only the standards The ICPTF was organized to develop the FAA stated in Notice No. 97–7 that referenced in the original type the philosophy and the necessary while the ARAC recommended that the certificate or in an amended type regulatory text and advisory material safety benefit resource evaluation guide certificate. Thus, there may be a that would provide for the included in the proposed AC (Appendix considerable difference between the implementation of later regulatory 2) be considered an acceptable means of standards required for a new product amendments applicable to aeronautical showing compliance with the and for a product undergoing change. A products undergoing change, products exceptions of proposed § 21.101(b), the product undergoing change that met the in production, and products in service. FAA included this guide for information applicable standards at the time of The specific tasks of the ICPTF were: (1) purposes only. The FAA stated, ‘‘The original or amended type certification is develop the type certification safety benefit resource guide does not currently required to meet more philosophy for changes to aeronautical describe some of the kinds of issues that current airworthiness standards, except products, including revisions to the the applicant would address, and the in those instances where retroactive regulations and associated advisory FAA would consider, in determining regulations have been issued or the material; (2) develop the necessary the certification basis in accordance applicant elects to comply with later guidance information on the use of with the proposed rule.’’ amendments. ‘‘service experience’’ in the type After the comment period on Notice In recent rulemakings, the FAA has certification process; and (3) develop a No. 97–7 closed, the FAA tasked the carefully considered whether method to evaluate the safety impact ARAC to review the public comments corresponding retroactive action is and cost effectiveness of revisions to the and to recommend to the FAA a warranted whenever a change to the airworthiness standards. disposition of the comments and a draft airworthiness standards for type In order to develop future proposed final rule document. This final rule certification was proposed. In those safety standards by using a system-type reflects most of the work of the ARAC cases where it has been determined that analysis, the FAA chartered a committee under this task. This work was an across-the-board safety benefit of safety experts, known as the Aviation accomplished largely through a series of commensurate with the cost could be Rulemaking Advisory Committee ARAC working group meetings held achieved, the rulemaking has also (ARAC), on February 5, 1991. This between August of 1997 and July of included a proposal to change the committee established the International 1998. Because of an FAA imposed relevant operating regulations to require Certification Procedures Working deadline date of September 1, 1998, the newly manufactured airplanes or Group, which consisted of the original working group members submitted their airplanes in service, or both, to comply ad hoc committee formerly known as comments to the ARAC based on a draft with the new standards, regardless of the ICPTF. The task assigned to this final rule dated August 4, 1998. The whether such compliance would be working group was to present to ARAC August 4, 1998, draft was based on the required as a condition of type various proposals pursuant to its area of working group’s previous recommended certification. For instance, some of the expertise. ARAC then had the option to disposition of comments and on regulations implemented in recent submit these recommendations to the discussions and agreements reached at

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36248 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations the final working group meeting held on changes as necessary to conform to the No. 97–7 and the JAA’s NPA 21–7, the July 7–8, 1998. The ARAC, at FAA’s final rule language and to international FAA included the comments received request, forwarded a report that harmonization. by the JAA in the FAA public docket included this draft and the comments to and the ARAC reviewed the relevant Discussion of Comments Received on the FAA at the August 24, 1998, issues comments on NPA 21–7. Except for the the NPRM meeting. At the time of the report, issue of applicability to aircraft consensus had not been reached on the The FAA received over 90 comments modifiers, the comments on NPA 21–7 draft final rule. Because many of the on the NPRM. Commenters included were mostly from the same entities that comments received from working group aircraft manufacturers and operators, commented on this rulemaking and members and from the full ARAC organizations representing these groups, these comments did not differ members before and at the August 24 foreign entities, and individuals. significantly from the comments on meeting duplicated comments that were More than half of the comments focus FAA’s Notice No. 97–7. Therefore, this made on the NPRM, the FAA has not on the issue of applicability of the document does not separately address attempted to deal separately and proposed rule changes to supplemental the comments received on NPA 21–7. repetitively in this preamble with these type certificates (STC’s) and type General and Miscellaneous Comments post-comment period ARAC comments. certification amendments for small part 23 airplanes, particularly older Comments: One commenter, in FAA Rulemaking on Changed Products airplanes. Virtually all of these reference to the preamble section This rulemaking amends the type commenters state that the proposed rule ‘‘Recent FAA Actions,’’ says that the certification procedures for changes to and advisory circular were designed for FAA’s mandate, under 49 U.S.C. type certificated products to bring the transport category aircraft by persons § 44701, is to promote safety and safety certification basis for significantly involved in manufacturing or using regulations. This commenter says that changed products (whether the change transport category aircraft. These the FAA has no mandate or legal basis is by amended type certificate, commenters urge that non-transport for ‘‘making regulations designed to supplemental type certificate, or category aircraft not be included in the manipulate competitive forces or amended supplemental type certificate) final rule. Several request an extension marketplace decisions.’’ closer to the current regulations. The of, or reopening of, the comment period, Fairchild Aircraft Inc. (Dornier) also intent is to ensure that when an stating that the in-service modifier states its concern that the real problem essentially new product is developed community was not involved in the being addressed by the FAA is not a through a series of changes, the final development of the NPRM and asserting safety problem, but rather the potential product achieves a level of safety that much of this community was not for an unfair trade advantage. similar to that of a comparable new even aware of the NPRM until after the Hiller Aircraft expresses opposition to product. comment period closed. (For further the proposal and states that current By this rulemaking, the FAA requires detail, see discussion of comments §§ 21.16, 21.19, and 39.1 already all proposed changes for all type- under the heading ‘‘Applicability to provide the FAA with ‘‘the regulatory certificated products to comply with the General Aviation Aircraft and to flexibility to prescribe applicable rules latest amendments of the airworthiness Supplemental Type Certificates.’’) for any newly proposed design, any standards, unless one of the stated Many of the commenters request that design being considered for change and exceptions applies. The long term result the preamble and advisory circular be any design found to be unsafe through of this rule change will be that a rewritten to reflect more closely the field experience.’’ Hiller says that the changed product will have a recommendations by the Aviation proposal would be administratively certification basis that provides a Rulemaking Advisory Committee burdensome on the FAA and similar level of safety to that provided (ARAC). Many of these commenters manufacturers, while not providing the by the certification basis of a new type state that one of the main purposes of FAA with any additional regulatory certificate for the same product, except this NPRM was to achieve power. Fairchild also concludes that the as provided in the rule. harmonization with the Joint Aviation proposed rule would only create more As discussed more fully later in this Authorities (JAA) and that to the extent bureaucratic paperwork, and increase preamble, the final rule contains an the FAA departed from the ARAC the cost of the certificated product approach that was not discussed in the recommendation, harmonization was without compensating increases in NPRM. This approach should help lost because the JAA Notice of Proposed safety. minimize the procedural burden for Amendment (NPA) was very closely FAA Response: While international applicants for amended type certificates aligned with the ARAC recommended concern over potential unfair and STC’s for aircraft (other than a document. (For further detail, see competitive advantages that could result rotorcraft) with a maximum weight of discussion of comments under ‘‘ARAC if different standards are applied to 6,000 pounds or less and for non- Recommendation and Harmonization’’ similar changed products, was cited as turbine rotorcraft with a maximum and ‘‘Rewrite of AC from ARAC Draft.’’) one of the triggering events for this weight of 3,000 pounds or less. Comments that suggest specific rulemaking, that concern was not the As stated, the FAA will issue an substantive changes to the proposed basis for justifying the changes proposed advisory circular based on this rule language are summarized and in Notice No. 97–7. As the NPRM rulemaking. This advisory circular will addressed under the section-by-section preamble described at some length, and provide guidance on determining the portion of this preamble. as summarized in the Background certification basis for changed Many commenters made specific section of this preamble, the FAA’s aeronautical products, including comments on the proposed advisory justification for the proposed change identifying the conditions under which circular. These comments are not was a safety justification, namely, to it will be necessary to apply for a new discussed in this document but are ensure that significantly changed type certificate. For the reasons being considered by the FAA. products comply with later discussed below, this final advisory In view of the harmonization goal of requirements that apply to new circular will follow the draft AC this rulemaking and the intended close products to the maximum extent originally proposed by the ARAC, with relationship between the FAA’s Notice practicable.

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36249

With respect to the possible increased through a retroactive design Potential for Adverse Safety Effect administrative burden on the FAA, this requirement, or to previously Comments: One commenter predicts rule will, to some extent, decrease the manufactured aircraft through an that the likely effect of enacting the FAA’s administrative burden. Under the operating rule. However, that proposed rule will be that no changes to present rule, the FAA must demonstrate determination is not the same as the existing aircraft designs will be that the regulations incorporated by determination that must be made when incorporated due to the increased cost reference in the type certificate are not the FAA receives an application for a of certification. As a result, no safety adequate to achieve the established changed product. The determination of improvements would occur. level of safety when an applicant which amendments should be applied Representatives of the in-service applies for a change to a type certificate. depends on the safety benefits to be modifier community make the same Under the proposed and final rule realized from the proposed change, and point with respect to safety language, except for certain specified the design, operational, and other cost improvements that would require an smaller aircraft, the initial burden will burdens. Therefore, the FAA does not STC. (See discussion under be on the applicant to show that it agree that the generalized normal ‘‘Applicability to General Aviation should not be required to comply with retroactive and retrofit determinations Aircraft and to Supplemental Type the regulations in effect on the date of are sufficient for dealing with specific Certificates’’). the application because it meets one of changed products. FAA Response: The FAA does not the stated exceptions. As stated in the agree that this rule will be a NPRM, compliance with the regulations Consistency of Application within FAA disincentive. The FAA recognizes the in effect on the date of application impact on airlines and independent where required by this rule will Comments: Raytheon suggests that in modification companies of the enhance the level of safety for the conjunction with the implementation of changed product. The burdens on the this rule the FAA should consider an requirement to have the data in order to applicants are unavoidable if the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) determine significance. However, the objectives of the rule are to be achieved. oversight program that would include FAA needs, in the interest of safety, to Advisory Circular 21.101–XX that will (1) annual review of ACO’s and new ensure that all significant changes move be issued prior to the mandatory changes to type certificated products; (2) to the latest certification basis for compliance dates of this rule will quarterly report submittal from ACO’s affected areas when the change would contain guidance intended to reduce the stating amendment level of rules contribute materially to the level basis administrative burden on both the mandated for incremental changes; and of safety of the changed product and applicant and the FAA. (3) feedback from the FAA Directorate if would be practical. it sees a consistent pattern from one Retroactive and Retrofit Requirements ARAC Recommendation and ACO where the later rule amendments Harmonization Comments: The European Association are not being imposed. Raytheon’s of Aerospace Industries (AECMA) states recommendations are intended to Comments: The most common issue that the ‘‘key point in ensuring steps ensure more equitable compliance discussed by the commenters (who were forward in safety is to clearly define the requirements to avoid giving some not focused on the in-service modifier/ applicability of the new standards at the region or manufacturer an economic STC issue) related to the differences time of the rule elaboration.’’ advantage. Raytheon also recommends between the FAA NPRM and Applicability to changed, newly that the FAA implement an appeal accompanying draft AC and the ARAC manufactured or in-service aircraft may process for an applicant who strongly documents, and the resulting lack of be mandated through appropriate disagrees with an ACO decision. harmonization with the JAA NPA which amendments to CFR §§ 23.2, 25.2, 27.2 the commenters state is closer to the FAA Response: One of the tasks and 29.2 (special retroactive ARAC recommendation. assigned to the ARAC was to assist the requirements), or to the operational The United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation FAA in developing follow-up training regulations (for instance part 121, Authority (CAA) states that in the for both government and industry to subpart J). NPRM the FAA policy appears to be AECMA also states that the facilitate implementation of this final moving towards accepting previously methodology used to assess possible rule. It is the FAA’s intent that all FAA certificated products with a greater level retroactive applicability of new employees called on to implement this of change before requiring certification standards should follow the principles final rule will receive appropriate as a new product. CAA comments of AC 21.101–XX, Appendix 2, with the training and implementation support the need to positively limit the necessary adjustments for each category documents, such as internal orders and extent to which manufacturers should of product. In addition, the handbooks. The FAA will also be allowed to change products without harmonization process should be implement other appropriate follow-up being required to certificate a product to extended to the retroactive actions to ensure that the rule is being the latest airworthiness standards. CAA requirements. While promoting the implemented uniformly throughout the suggests that the harmonization of FAA implementation of the real safety FAA. and JAA requirements remains improvements, this approach would The ability of an applicant to appeal incomplete until it is clearly understood allow the manufacturers to clearly an ACO certification decision would not by both FAA and JAA the extent to anticipate the requirements applicable be changed by this rule. If not sooner which the criteria for a changed product to their products, instead of entering resolved by the FAA appeals process is to be applied in a particular instance. into case by case non-public discussions (through the accountable Directorate), The General Aviation Manufacturers with possible unequal treatment. such a decision would be, ultimately, Association (GAMA) submitted the FAA Response: Whenever the FAA adjudicated as part of a certificate complete ARAC recommendation dated adopts a new design requirement, it denial. A certificate denial is a ‘‘final October 14, 1994, with its comment and determines whether to apply that order of the Administrator,’’ appealable requests that the FAA reconsider the requirement to previously type to a U.S. Court of Appeals pursuant to original ARAC recommendation in certificated, but changed products, 49 U.S.C. § 46110. developing the final rule. Other

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36250 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations commenters that state their concern that focused on a problem involving the costly changes each time the in-service the FAA’s NPRM and draft advisory manufacture of transport category product is upgraded under STC circular were significantly different aircraft, not the alteration of general procedures. GAMA adds that the re- from the original ARAC aviation aircraft. The in-service modifier entry into production of airplanes with recommendation (and therefore community argues that the older the older type certificates would be different from JAA’s NPA 21–7) are the aircraft, the more the burden would prevented because ‘‘product changes European Association of Aerospace increase on STC applicants and the less dictated by the FAA would be so Industries (AECMA), Pratt and Whitney relevant would be the problems and extensive that changed products would Canada, Bombardier, and the Aerospace examples used to justify the rule not be cost effective due to the expense Industries Association. change. of such changes.’’ EAA states that the FAA Response: A number of the 3. Notice No. 97–7 gave no indication change ‘‘will block safety improvements commenters suggest rewording of the that it would affect applicants for in general aviation aircraft by creating NPRM preamble to make it consistent supplemental type certificates and none such a difficult barrier to approving with the document submitted by the of the stated justification warranted Supplemental Type Certificates (STC’s) ARAC to the FAA. The FAA has changing the rules for STC’s. that few improvements will be considered the substance of these 4. Nowhere in Notice No. 97–7 is attempted on older aircraft designs.’’ comments and where appropriate, they there any statement to indicate a These commenters believe that the rule are addressed in this final rule problem with STC’s. The entire could have exactly the opposite of the preamble. In general, the differences discussion of the problem, the intended effect by discouraging general between Notice No. 97–7 and the regulatory history, and recent FAA aviation aircraft owners from improving document submitted to the FAA by the actions used aircraft manufacturing their aircraft. ARAC involved additional preamble examples and mostly examples GAMA and AOPA state that, if language included by the FAA to clarify involving transport category airplanes. present type certificate holders were the intent of the proposed changes. With 5. Little or no consideration was given prevented from resuming production one exception the proposed rule to the potential impact of the proposed due to economic reasons, the result language in Notice No. 97–7 was rule and associated advisory material on would be a lack of spare parts and identical to the rule language general aviation aircraft production or technical assistance needed by current recommended by the ARAC. The draft on the STC process. For example, the airplane owners for the continued AC, which is a non-binding tool to aid finding under the Regulatory Flexibility airworthiness of their airplanes. compliance, is discussed later in this Act that the proposed amendments GAMA says that the proposal would, preamble. would not have a significant economic in effect, ‘‘render the type certificates for impact on a substantial number of small older out-of-production airplanes Applicability to General Aviation entities ignores the potential impact on valueless due to the extensiveness of Aircraft and to Supplemental Type persons seeking STC’s for general mandated FAA product changes....’’ Certificates aviation aircraft. AOPA states that the ‘‘proposed changes Comments: Over half of the comments 6. Substantively, and therefore of would have a tremendous negative received focus exclusively on the most significance, the proposed change impact on the fledgling revitalization of question of the applicability of the would shift the burden from the FAA to the general aviation industry in this proposed changes to aircraft that are not the applicant to prove whether a country by rendering nearly all existing certificated under part 25 (i.e., to non- proposed change should comply with out of production type certificates transport category aircraft, frequently type design amendments that have virtually valueless.’’ referred to by commenters as ‘‘general occurred after the original type NATA states that the NPRM fails to aviation aircraft’’) and the applicability certificate was issued. The in-service specifically limit the application of the to supplemental type certificates in modifier comments and representatives rule and expresses concern that the rule general. Most of these commenters state state that this change in burden from a requirements could be applied to that part 23 aircraft should be entirely ‘‘bottom up’’ approach to a ‘‘top down’’ unintended areas such as maintenance. excluded from this rulemaking. The approach would add significant costs to FAA Response: The ARAC specific substantive statements are numerous small businesses which apply recommended an exception from the summarized below. for the majority of current STC’s. The most burdensome impact of this The thrust of the comments from the in-service modifiers also dispute the rulemaking for a significant segment of general aviation and in-service modifier relevance of FAA Order 8110.4 that aircraft that are mostly used in general communities received in the public established a top-down approach as a aviation operations. The FAA has docket fell into one or more of the matter of policy in 1990. The in-service adopted, in this final rule, a process that following categories: modifiers state that this order cannot be will apply to changes to these aircraft. 1. The in-service modifier community used to justify the rule changes Therefore, as is more fully discussed was not aware until late in the comment proposed in Notice No. 97–7 because it and explained in the section by section period that the ARAC recommendation was not enforceable since the rule was discussion of § 21.101, changes to and the resulting FAA Notice No. 97–7 not changed and further because the aircraft (other than rotorcraft) with a would affect it at all. Several request an FAA has not previously sought to apply maximum weight of 6,000 pounds or extension of the comment period. this policy to STC’s. For these reasons, less and non-turbine powered rotorcraft 2. The basis for Notice No. 97–7 was this community was not even aware of with a maximum weight of 3,000 developed and recommended by an its existence. pounds or less, will be evaluated ARAC working group composed entirely Specific written comments on the starting with the latest certification basis of representatives of manufacturers of STC issue can be summarized as for changes to a type certificate (whether transport category aircraft and their follows: through an amendment or an STC). This counterparts in the represented civil GAMA, EAA, NATA, and AOPA state exception should address the concerns aviation authorities. The in-service that the proposal would be burdensome of most of the in-service modifiers listed modifier community believed that the for older general aviation airplanes that above. Reduction of the potential costs ICPTF/ARAC working group was would have to undergo significant and from this change are discussed in the

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36251

Regulatory Evaluation Summary portion a third party. Section 21.19 states that There should not be a difference in the of this preamble. certain changes will require a new type certification basis for a change to a type- While it is unfortunate that the in- certificate. Subpart D of part 21 certificated product between these two service modifier community may not prescribes ‘‘procedural requirements for methods of approval, amended type certificate, or supplemental type certificate. have recognized the potential impact on the approval of changes to type it of this rulemaking, the in-service certificates.’’ Subpart E covers 5. In the Regulatory Evaluation modifier community had full supplemental type certificates, which Summary the following sentence opportunity to participate in the ARAC § 21.113 states must be applied for by appears: process from the date that the FAA any person ‘‘who alters a product by The formalization of this policy by tasked the ARAC. The fact that in- introducing a major change in type regulation would expedite decisions about service modifier interests may not have design, not great enough to require a the certification basis of proposed changed been fully represented in the ARAC new application for a type certificate products and, therefore, would provide working group is not because in-service under § 21.19 . . . except that the manufacturers and modifiers with earlier and modifiers were excluded but because holder of a type certificate for the more dependable information on which to they elected not to participate until after product may apply for amendment of base their product development decisions. the NPRM was issued. the original type certificate.’’ Section In view of the opportunity provided The working group distributed its 21.115, which Notice No. 97–7 by the ARAC process before and after draft NPRM and AC to all ARAC proposed to amend, states that an issuance of Notice No. 97–7 and the members on August 30, 1994, for review applicant for an STC must ‘‘show that number of references to STC’s and and consideration. The ARAC met on the altered product meets applicable modifiers throughout the NPRM October 13 and unanimously passed the airworthiness requirements’’ of § 21.101, preamble, the in-service modifier proposals as written, with no that is, the same requirements that community had adequate notice of the substantive comments or changes. would apply to the holder of the type potential impact of Notice No. 97–7 and Among the organizations present at the certificate. Thus, persons familiar with adequate opportunity to participate. In October 13 meeting were several in- part 21, as are the representatives of the the Regulatory Evaluation Summary service modifier community major in-service modifiers that portion of this preamble the FAA has representatives, such as, Aviation commented on Notice No. 97–7, know revisited the question of the potential Repair Station Association (ARSA), that each proposed rule that affects impact on small entities and has National Air Transportation Association ‘‘changes’’ under part 21 has potential determined that an analysis under The (NATA), Experimental Aircraft broad application. Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as Association (EAA), General Aviation Notice No. 97–7 contained numerous amended, is required. This analysis and Manufacturers Association (GAMA), statements that made it clear that the a complete analysis of potential costs and the Airline Suppliers Association proposed amendments to existing and benefits are set out in the (ASA). Regulatory Evaluation Summary portion Furthermore, while the FAA decided regulations would affect persons other of this preamble. not to extend or reopen the comment than transport category type certificate period, as previously noted, holders. For example: Transport Category Aircraft STC’s representatives of the ARAC working 1. Section 21.115, which applies to all applicants for an STC, is referenced Comments: ATA says that the group and the FAA met with proposal’s requirement for an applicant representatives of in-service modifiers early in the ‘‘History of Type Certification’’ section of the preamble. to prove that a proposed change to be on several occasions during the ARAC accomplished under an STC does not working group meetings to dispose of 2. In the ‘‘History of Type invoke a new safety standard will the comments to the NPRM. Certification of Changes’’ section of the consume time and resources without Additionally, representatives from the preamble the following sentence improving airworthiness. ATA says that General Aviation community met with appears: the current STC process is effective in the Associate and the Deputy Associate Because § 21.101(a) and (b) are ensuring that changes to an aircraft Administrators for Regulation and incorporated by reference in § 21.115 these design are airworthy and recommends Certification to express their concern procedures are equally applicable to persons that the FAA exclude STC’s from the with the conduct of the working group applying for supplemental type certificates. proposed rule. meetings. Their concerns were 3. In the ‘‘Recent FAA Actions’’ FAA Response: As discussed in the addressed and a record of these portion of the preamble the following preamble to the NPRM Notice No. 97– meetings are reflected in the docket. sentences appear: The STC issue and potential 7, the FAA has determined that an applicability to non-transport category The ICPTF was organized to develop the application for a design change through airplanes were addressed in Notice No. philosophy and the necessary regulatory text the STC process should be certificated 97–7. Section 21.1(a) of part 21 and advisory material that would provide for to the same level of safety as an the implementation of later regulatory prescribes procedural requirements ‘‘for application for the same change through amendments applicable to aeronautical an amended type certificate. The FAA’s the issue of type certificates and products undergoing change, products in changes to those certificates; the issue of intent is to establish an airworthiness production, and products in service. certification basis that is not dependent production certificates; the issue of (Emphasis added.) airworthiness certificates; and the issue The working group presented to ARAC an on whether the applicant is applying for of export airworthiness approvals.’’ NPRM and associated advisory material an amended or a supplemental type (Emphasis added.) Supplemental type concerning the type certification procedures certificate. certificates are not mentioned in § 21.1 for changes to aeronautical products, Section-by-Section Discussion or throughout part 21 because the word changed products, and products already in service. (Emphasis added.) ‘‘changes’’ is clearly used to cover all Section 11.11 possible changes to a type certificated 4. In the section by section discussion Current § 11.11 lists special product whether made by the type of § 21.115 the following sentence conditions required as prescribed under certificate holder, the aircraft owner, or appeared: § 21.101(b)(2) as an FAA record that is

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36252 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations maintained in current docket form in the NPRM proposed to eliminate the would allow compliance with an earlier the Office of the Chief Counsel. To specific reference to a change to engines amendment. The primary purpose of remain consistent with the changes to using different principles of propulsion, this proposed change was to ensure that § 21.101, described later, the NPRM that kind of change normally would be products being changed in a significant proposed to amend § 11.11 to refer to considered so extensive that a manner meet the latest airworthiness § 21.101(c) (now § 21.101(d)) instead of substantially complete investigation of standards wherever practicable. § 21.101(b)(2). The NPRM also proposed compliance would be required. Thus, it Under this approach, the starting revisions to make the section read should be noted that new § 21.19 does basis is the applicable regulations in easier. not necessarily change how one would effect on the date of the application for There were no substantive comments evaluate ‘‘extensive’’ in each case. the change. The burden is on the on this section and it is adopted as Instead, new § 21.19 eliminates the legal applicant to prove that compliance with proposed with the cross-reference presumption that certain changes are earlier regulations would provide an change described above. automatically ‘‘extensive.’’ acceptable safety level. Under the Current § 21.19(c) describes another Section 21.19 current regulation, the starting basis is specific change in which the applicant the regulations incorporated by Current § 21.19(a) states that any must apply for a new aircraft engine reference in the type certificate. In this person who proposes to change a type certificate. This change is in the case, the burden is on the FAA to find product must make a new application principle of operation. In addition, that later amendments are directly for a type certificate if the Administrator current § 21.19(d) describes specific related to the proposed change, or that finds that the proposed change in changes in which the applicant must there are other reasons (e.g., the design, configuration, power, power apply for a new propeller type regulations incorporated in the type limitations (engines), speed limitations certificate. The NPRM proposed to certificate do not provide adequate (engines), or weight is so extensive that delete these types of changes from standards with respect to the proposed a substantially complete investigation of § 21.19. Under proposed § 21.101, with change) for requiring compliance with compliance with the applicable certain exceptions, these types of later amendments. regulations is required. In addition, changes and all areas, systems, The FAA points out that current part current paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) list components, equipment, and appliances 21 and amendments resulting from this other specific types of changes that affected by the changes would have to rulemaking, only address ‘‘major’’ type mandate a new application for a type comply with the regulations in effect on design changes under § 21.93. ‘‘Minor’’ certificate. Notice No. 97–7 proposed to the date of application for the change to design changes are ‘‘approved’’ under include only the general language of the type certificate. § 21.95, and are not considered to be the current paragraph (a) into the new Comments: CAA recommends that changes to a type certificate that are § 21.19, while the previously listed this section (§ 21.19) be cross-referenced covered under § 21.101. specific changes would be subject to in § 21.101(a). Comments: The comments that case-specific evaluations to determine One commenter recommends that address the substantive issue of the whether they are substantial. wing modifications be added to the list safety justification for, and potential Current § 21.19(b) describes specific of design changes listed in the changes for which the applicant must cost of, changing from an original or preamble. This would be written as: previously amended certification basis apply for a new aircraft type certificate. ‘‘New wing (external geometry, These include (1) changes in the approach to a current amendments structure, and performance.)’’ approach were addressed earlier in the number of engines or rotors; and (2) FAA Response: The CAA comment is changes to engines or rotors using General and Miscellaneous Comments discussed under § 21.101(a). The list of section of this preamble. different principles of propulsion, or to design changes typically regarded as rotors using different principles of The CAA says that § 21.101(a) should substantial that were referenced in the be amended to cross reference § 21.19 to operation. Historically, these types of NPRM preamble have not been included changes have fallen into one of two clarify that this section applies only in this document. However, they will be when a new type certificate is not categories—those that were not addressed in the forthcoming Advisory extensive enough to require a new required under § 21.19. The CAA Circular. Section 21.19 is adopted as suggested rewording the paragraph to application for a type certificate, as proposed. evidenced by the large number of read as follows: exemptions that have been granted over Section 21.101(a) Where the Administrator finds that an the past quarter century, or those that Current § 21.101(a) states that if a application for a new type certificate is not were so extensive that a new application person applies for a change in a type required under § 21.19 and except as was required because a complete certificate, the product must comply provided in paragraph (b).... investigation of compliance was with either the regulations referenced in Raytheon recommends that proposed required. Accordingly, as was discussed the type certificate or the applicable paragraph (a)(1) of § 21.101 be rewritten in the NPRM preamble, the provisions regulations in effect on the date of the so that the word ‘‘and’’ after the term of current § 21.19(b) are not needed and application for the change, if elected by ‘‘changed product’’ is deleted. were not included in the proposal. the applicant, plus any other FAA Response: The FAA does not Recently, the FAA considered a amendments the Administrator finds to agree with the CAA’s suggested petition for exemption from 14 CFR be directly related. rewording as § 21.19 stands on its own § 21.19(b)(2), to replace turbopropeller In Notice No. 97–7, the FAA proposed and there is no need for a cross- engines with turbofan engines on a to amend § 21.101(a) to require an reference to it in § 21.101. As rewritten, transport category airplane. The applicant for a change to a type the ‘‘and’’ in § 21.101(a)(1) is not petitioner argued that the certification certificate to comply with the applicable included. The general phrase, basis for the changed airplane should be regulations in effect on the date of the ‘‘airworthiness requirements applicable developed using the approach proposed application for the change and with to the category of product’’ has been in the NPRM. In responding to the parts 34 and 36, unless the applicant substituted for the references to parts petition, the FAA pointed out that while falls within one of the exceptions that 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, and 35. As

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36253 adopted, § 21.101(a), with minor A proposed advisory circular CAA comments, as it did on the JAA revisions for clarification, replaces contained a safety benefit resource proposal that the phrase ‘‘For each area, proposed § 21.101(a)(1) and (2) without evaluation guide, which was system, component, equipment, or substantive changes. recommended by the ARAC to be an appliance’’ should be replaced with acceptable means of compliance with Section 21.101(b) ‘‘For each feature of the product.’’ CAA the ‘‘impractical’’ exception of proposed acknowledges that this change, if Proposed § 21.101(b) provided § 21.101(b)(3), but which was included adopted, would require extensive exceptions to the regulation in proposed by the FAA for purposes of information interpretive material to clarify what the paragraph (a), that, when met, would only. word ‘‘feature’’ means. allow the applicant to comply with For the reasons discussed in more FAA Response: There is very little earlier amendments to the regulations. detail below, proposed § 21.101(b) is language difference, and no substantive When choosing the amendment level of adopted with minor clarification difference, between the FAA’s proposed a regulation, all regulations associated changes, but without substantive rule language and the language in JAA’s with any relevant paragraphs in that changes. NPA 21–7. Nonetheless, for reasons amendment level would have to be Comments: Erickson Air-Crane Co. discussed below, § 21.101(b) has been included. The amendment level chosen recommended a change in the wording rewritten for clarification. The ARAC may not predate either the latest of the rule to make it clearer that ‘‘You working group had numerous certification basis or anything required don’t comply with the amendment discussions as to the meaning of by the retroactive sections, that is, alone, but rather the entire regulation at ‘‘nonsignificant’’ in the proposed rule. §§ 23.2, 25.2, 27.2, or 29.2. a given amendment level.’’ The working group focused particularly The intent of the proposed change on the draft Advisory Circular (AC) was to apply the applicable regulations FAA Response: The FAA does not agree that an applicant would always circulated for public comment at the in effect on the date of the application same time as Notice No. 97–7 because to those areas, systems, components, have to comply with an entire amendment level. The proposal was to the draft AC contained language equipment, and appliances significantly explaining ‘‘nonsignificant.’’ The ARAC affected by the change, unless the require compliance only with the relevant portions of a particular recommended that some of the Administrator finds that compliance proposed AC language be included in with a regulation would not, (1) amendment level. Comments: CAA states that the the final rule to make it clear, in contribute materially to the level of determining whether a change would be safety of the changed product, or (2) objective of the certification policy for nonsignificant, that an applicant would would be impractical. For those areas, changed products should be to ensure, go back to the latest certification basis systems, components, equipment, and as far as is practicable, that a changed and not the original certification basis. appliances not significantly affected by product will achieve the same level of The draft AC provided that the the change, or otherwise excepted, safety as a new product introduced following are nonsignificant: continued compliance with the concurrently. CAA states that the proposal, Notice No. 97–7, will not ‘‘Changes that do not modify the regulations incorporated by reference in general characteristics of the product in the type certificate would be considered achieve this objective for the following reasons: that: (1) The general configuration and acceptable. principles of construction are retained; Proposed paragraph (b)(1) stated that (a) The proposed § 21.101(b)(2) allows and (2) The assumptions used for the applicant would be allowed to areas not affected by the change being certification of the basic product remain demonstrate compliance with earlier considered to continue to use superseded valid and the results can be extrapolated regulations, but not earlier than the airworthiness requirements, some of which to cover the changed product.’’ regulations incorporated in the latest may have been amended with the objective of improving the general level of safety. The In view of the ARAC discussions, the certification basis, if the effect of the FAA has decided that it would be proposed change is not significant, fact that a product is a changed product, rather than a new product, should not be the helpful to use the affirmative term taking into account earlier design reason for allowing it to continue to use ‘‘significant’’ rather than the negative changes and previous updating of the outdated safety standards indefinitely. Even term, ‘‘nonsignificant’’ and to more fully type certification basis. for areas not affected by the changes there explain in the rule itself the term Proposed paragraph (b)(2) stated that needs to be a point beyond which a changed ‘‘significant.’’ As adopted § 21.101(b)(1) the applicant may show compliance product is required to comply with the latest reads as follows: with earlier regulations for those areas, standards where amendments have been systems, components, equipment, and made as part of an initiative to improve (b) If paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this appliances that are not affected by the general safety levels in such areas. section apply, an applicant may show that change. (b) The proposed § 21.101(b)(3) allows the the changed product complies with an earlier Proposed paragraph (b)(3) stated that, continued use of superseded airworthiness amendment of a regulation required by paragraph (a) of this section, and of any other if compliance with a regulation in effect requirements where compliance ‘‘would not contribute materially to the safety of the regulation the Administrator finds is directly on the date of the application for the changed product.’’ Although NPRM 97–7 related. However, the earlier amended change would not contribute materially acknowledges the need to assess the regulation may not precede either the to the level of safety of the product to accumulative effect of a number of small corresponding regulation incorporated by be changed, or would be impractical, changes on the level of safety, the text of reference in the type certificate, or any the applicant may demonstrate Paragraph (b)(3) is written in terms of the regulation in §§ 23.2, 25.2, 27.2, or 29.2 of compliance with an earlier amendment effect of a single change . . . there is a need this chapter that is related to the change. The of a regulation provided that the to establish the datum as the original design applicant may show compliance with an amended regulation does not precede standard of the product originally earlier amendment of a regulation for any of certificated. the following: either the corresponding regulation in (1) A change that the Administrator finds §§ 23.2, 25.2, 27.2, or 29.2 of this CAA believes that § 21.101(b) is not to be significant. In determining whether chapter, or the corresponding regulation difficult to understand and should be re- a specific change is significant, the incorporated by reference in the type drafted and cross-referenced to Administrator considers the change in certificate. paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3). context with all previous relevant design

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36254 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations changes and all related revisions to the This commenter also expressed to each significant change, each area applicable regulations incorporated in the concerns regarding the use of the service affected by the change, and each type certificate for the product. Changes that history of an already changed product instance where compliance would meet one of the following criteria are when analyzing the ‘‘impractical’’ contribute materially to the level of automatically considered significant: exception to application of the latest safety of the product and would be (i) The general configuration and the principles of construction are not retained; regulations to a change of that product. practical. In addition, special conditions and Specifically, the commenter is may be required in accordance with the (ii) The assumptions used for certification concerned that, when a later rule existing regulations. Nothing more is of the product to be changed do not remain addresses hazards or failures in very necessary for the safety enhancement of valid. small probabilities and a product changed products. This language should help both the change is certificated using that later Regarding the second comment, proposed § 21.101(b)(3) was not applicant and the FAA reviewer to amendment, the older version of that intended to replace the issue paper determine whether the effect of a change product may have not yet reached the process, but to change the standards of is significant, when considered in total exposure to the hazard or failure certification, allowing an applicant to context with all previous changes to the addressed by the later rule. In this case, use earlier regulations if compliance design and all related changes to the the service history of the older version with the latest regulation has been latest ‘‘certification basis.’’ Again, the of the product would ‘‘bask in the glow’’ determined to be impractical or would overall intent of this rulemaking is to of the uneventful service history of the newer version that complies with the not contribute to the level of safety. An ensure that products developed through later amendment, making it appear that individual’s right to request an a series of changes, achieve a level of compliance with the latest amendments exemption from any rule has not been safety similar to that of a comparable would be unwarranted. eliminated. As a result of the issue new product. The final rule language Additionally, this commenter states paper process, the applicant may still makes it clear that, in determining that the preamble discussion of decide to petition for an exemption. whether a change is significant, the FAA ‘‘impractical’’ mentions both a cost This final rule does not change the will consider the latest amendments to analysis and a benefit-resource applicant’s ability to apply for that the airworthiness standards adopted evaluation and states that the applicant exemption. after the most recent type certification will only be able to provide a cost The commenter’s concerns with basis. analysis and that there would not be respect to service history are This is particularly important because enough data to make a comparison. unwarranted. First, as was noted in the a subsequent amendment of a regulation This commenter does not believe the preamble to the NPRM, the service can indicate an important change in the use of a cost/benefit analysis to be history that would be considered in emphasis in an area of the regulations. practical as a tool to determine if a later deciding whether to invoke an For example, if the regulations have rule should be applied under the exception to compliance with a later been amended in an affected area, then proposed § 21.101. The commenter amendment would be the applicable the assumptions used for certification of states that if such an approach is used service experience. In the case cited by the product may no longer be valid. The then the FAA should at least eliminate the commenter, the relevant, service FAA considers these changes in the rule the proposed AC Appendix 2 as it experience applicable to a change to the language to be clarifying since they are appears biased and without later version of the product would be consistent with the intent of Notice 97– justification. the service experience of that later 7 and with the explanations given in the The ARAC working group had version, which complies with the later accompanying draft Advisory Circular. numerous discussions on the limited amendment. The relevant, service Comments: One commenter states that applicability of the data in Appendix 2 experience applicable to a change to the the FAA should reconsider its proposal of the draft AC because this data was older version of the product would be to delete the existing § 21.101(b)(1) that drawn from, and therefore only the service experience of that older allows the FAA to apply later applicable to, transport category version, which doesn’t comply with the regulations without regard to the airplanes. The ARAC recommended that later amendment. Second, as explained exceptions in proposed § 21.101(b)(1), data be developed for other airplanes in this preamble and the preamble to the (2), and (3). This commenter provides and for rotorcraft. The ARAC also NPRM, the starting point of the analysis an example of a transport category recommended delayed compliance in determining whether the latest airplane with an early certification basis dates to allow time for development of amendments should be applied to an built with independent round dial this data. already changed product is the changed instruments. The commenter notes that FAA Response: The FAA construes product’s latest certification basis. a number of rules were added that the first comment to mean that the In response to the last comment, the applied to replacing independent round exceptions in proposed § 21.101(b)(1), preamble to Notice No. 97–7 referenced dial instruments with a multifunction (2), and (3) are too broad, so as to overly a safety benefit resource evaluation display or an electronic flight limit FAA discretion to impose later guide as part of the draft advisory instrument system. The commenter requirements. With respect to the circular. The guide was developed by suggests that the proposed rule would example, the FAA notes that such a the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory preclude compliance with the added design change would be significant, and Committee, and was included in the rules for that kind of design change. that it would be difficult, if not draft circular for information purposes This commenter suggests that impossible, for the applicant to only. In consideration of comments proposed § 21.101(b)(3) is not an demonstrate that one of the exceptions received and after further discussion improvement over the issue paper applies. Therefore, compliance with the with the ARAC, the FAA has process, where that applicant would later regulations would most likely be determined that, in theory, a safety have an opportunity to apply for an required. The FAA has found that the benefit resource evaluation guide could exemption from the rule, which the public interest is satisfied by limiting be used by the applicant to demonstrate applicant did not agree with, through a the situations of required compliance that compliance with the later public notice process. with the latest airworthiness standards amendment would be impractical. An

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36255 applicant who elects to make a showing Comments: Raytheon states that the terms are too broad and not descriptive using this guide would be required to intent of the word ‘‘impractical’’ in of the concept. submit data on potential benefits and proposed § 21.101(b)(3) ‘‘should be FAA Response: Since the basis for an costs that would justify compliance defined as not providing added value exception under proposed § 21.101(b)(2) with an amendment level in effect (perceived or actual) to the operator, is a finding that the area, system, before the date of the application for a manufacturer, or traveling public, or not component, etc. is not affected by the change. As mentioned earlier, the achieving the desired effect, as in non- change, the FAA does not agree that burden of the initial showing of costs meritorious or ineffectual.’’ Raytheon there is a need for a periodic review of and benefits rests with the applicant. suggests, ‘‘Perhaps impractical could be the ground for the exception, nor does The FAA will consider the analysis defined as ‘without value enhancement,’ the FAA agree that economic burden is along with other factors in its to stress that any change required as a a factor in this determination. With assessment and determination of the result of a new regulation which doesn’t respect to whether compliance with the appropriate amendment level. A safety result in a value enhancement may, later regulation would be impractical, benefit resource evaluation guide, with analytical substantiation, be the FAA cannot agree that the terms therefore, will likely be retained in the exempted from compliance.’’ ‘‘cost effective/not cost effective’’ would final advisory circular as a tool to assist FAA Response: There is little, if any, be more descriptive. While costs and the applicant in developing arguments difference between the FAA’s benefits stated in dollar terms are as to the appropriate certification basis. explanation of compliance that would essential ingredients, a safety benefit The safety benefit resource evaluation not contribute materially to the level of resource analysis involves more than guide recommended by the ARAC could safety and Raytheon’s understanding of costs. not be endorsed as a sole means of compliance that would be The benefit-resource analysis is a determining the amendment level ‘‘impractical.’’ The question of whether composite evaluation of four elements because the process cannot be proven compliance with a later regulation that are key to determining the through any rational financial analysis would be impractical arises only after it contribution to safety made by meeting determination. In addition, the guide has been determined that compliance a particular rule. The four critical includes factors that are not relevant in with the later regulation would elements are: determining applicable regulations. For ‘‘contribute materially to the level of (1) The frequency of occurrence of the example, the guide suggested a change safety of the changed product. . . .’’ The hazard the rule is intended to mitigate. to a single production item could be cost burden introduced by (2) The potential severity of the certificated differently than the same impracticality is considered in relation hazard. (3) How well the configuration being change to multiple production items. In to the potential safety benefit. In order to show impracticality the applicant certificated will mitigate the hazard by determining whether a regulation considers whether the cost to meeting the rule. should apply, the FAA considers the incorporate the change, plus the cost of (4) What resources are required if the level of safety, not the quantity of the subsequent operation of the changed design must meet the rule. While cost is production items as the basis. product, would not be commensurate one element of this evaluation, all four Comments: AECMA states that few of with the potential increase in safety. elements must be considered in the changes proposed during the life of Comments: One commenter states that evaluating the application of a rule. a product are really significant and that if an applicant is granted an exception Furthermore, because application of the therefore, it is an administrative burden under proposed § 21.101(b)(2) rule will set appropriate standards for to require elaboration and (unaffected areas) it should be subject to the product design and the design documentation of a justification for mandatory periodic FAA reviews of change, the concern of the comment application of one of the exceptions in safety related issues for airplanes that regarding length of production where no § 21.101(b) for each change. This continue in production under the same design change is proposed is beyond the commenter emphasized an established type certificate. This commenter states scope of this rulemaking. procedure described in the Action that for airplanes that have continued in Notice A8110.23, ‘‘requiring application production for many years and at Section 21.101(c) (New) of the latest requirements only for substantial quantities, the claim of Section 21.101(c) in this final rule changed parts of the product and excessive economic burden may be contains the previously mentioned affected area warranted equivalent invalid and that a reasonable time exceptions for aircraft (other than results with less bureaucratic burden.’’ period for periodic reviews would be rotorcraft) of 6,000 pounds or less FAA Response: FAA’s Action Notice ten years, starting from the date the maximum weight, as defined in 8110.23, which was replaced by Order exception was first granted. The § 23.25(a), and non-turbine rotorcraft of 8110.4, was an interim action intended commenter recommends that mandated 3,000 pounds or less maximum weight, to move applicants in the direction of changes should be incorporated in as defined in § 27.25(a). Inclusion of the regulations in effect on the date of newly produced airplanes within three these exceptions will address some of the application for a change. Neither years after the review. Furthermore, the the concerns expressed by the aircraft document has, nor were they intended FAA should consider expected size of modifiers who commented on Notice to have, the regulatory impact of the the future market when considering No. 97–7. rule language proposed in Notice No. granting an exception for production The primary impact of the exception 97–7. These documents were, however, airplanes. language in § 21.101(c) will be that the directed at all derivative aircraft, On the topic of ‘‘impractical’’ this starting point for determining the engines, and propellers where a change commenter believes the concept is applicable regulations for a changed is significant, but not so extensive as to acceptable, although balancing safety product will continue to be, as in require a new type certificate. The with economics is not something readily current § 21.101, the regulations action notice and subsequent order acceptable to the public at large. The incorporated by reference in the type applied to all changed products whether commenter states ‘‘cost-effective/not certificate, rather than the regulations in the approval method was an amended cost-effective’’ should be used instead of effect on the date of application for the type certificate or an STC. ‘‘practical/impractical’’ since the latter change. To ensure that later regulations

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36256 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations are applied when appropriate, more complex large aircraft, the final extension of the original application as § 21.101(c) contains language that result should be the same. The level of provided in § 21.17(c) and (d). allows the administrator ‘‘to designate safety for both types will be enhanced This section is adopted as proposed, an amendment to the regulation because the most appropriate except that paragraph (e)(2) has been incorporated by reference that applies to airworthiness standards will be used. clarified. New paragraph (e)(2) allows the change and any regulation that the the applicant to select a new date. The Section 21.101(d) Administrator finds is directly related, new application date may not precede unless the Administrator also finds that Section 21.101(d) (proposed the date the change is approved by more compliance with that amendment or § 21.101(c)) retains the provisions of than the time period established under regulation would not contribute current § 21.101(b)(2) concerning paragraph (e). For example, a person materially to the level of safety of the special conditions. This paragraph applies for a change to a transport changed product or would be addresses novel or unusual design category airplane in 2000. In 2003, the impractical.’’ features where the Administrator finds applicant decides that the project Thus, as adopted, for the excepted that the regulations incorporated by cannot be completed by 2005 (the time aircraft the starting point for reference in the type certificate do not period required by paragraph (e)). The determining the applicable regulations provide adequate standards. For a applicant, however, decides that the will be the latest certification basis product that has a novel or unusual project can be completed by 2007. rather than those regulations in effect on design feature, the applicant must Under paragraph (e)(2), the applicant the date of application for the change. comply with the regulations in effect on may elect 2002 (2007 minus 5 years In this case, the FAA would make the the date of the application for the equals 2002) as the new certification finding that applying later amendments change and any necessary special basis date. is necessary. The later amendments conditions ‘‘to provide a level of safety Section 21.101(f) would not be applied, however, if the equal to that established by the Administrator also finds that one of the regulations incorporated by reference in Section 21.101(f) (proposed exceptions applies. This part of the rule, the type certificate for the product.’’ For §§ 21.101(e)(1) and (2)) requires the like other regulations, leaves the burden consistency with the other proposed certification basis for a change to a on the applicant to demonstrate that changes to § 21.101, this proposed product certificated under predecessor compliance with those later paragraph stated that an applicant for a regulations be established in the same amendments would not contribute change must comply with any special manner as that for a change to a materially to the level of safety, or conditions, and amendments to those certification basis for a product would be impractical. For example, the special conditions, if any, that provide certificated under parts 23, 25, 27, 29, burden is on an applicant for a pilot a level of safety equal to that established 31, 33, or 35. certificate to provide the evidence on by the regulations in effect on the date Changes to products type certificated which the Administrator finds that he or of the application for the change. under §§ 21.21 and 21.29 and changes to she is qualified to hold a certificate. The provisions of current § 21.101(c), aircraft type certificated under §§ 21.24, Historically FAA and its predecessor concerning the replacement of 21.25, 21.27, as well as special classes agencies have treated light airplanes and reciprocating engines with of aircraft (where regulations from the small non-turbine rotorcraft differently turbopropeller engines, have been airworthiness standards listed in from other classes of aircraft. Aircraft of removed because a change of this nature Chapter 1 are a part of the certification 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight would usually be considered a basis) would be required to comply with and non-turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 significant change, and compliance with the requirements of § 21.101(a). pounds or less maximum weight are the regulations in effect on the date of Comments: Pratt & Whitney Canada usually of less complex design than the application of the change would, states that neither the proposed larger aircraft. In addition design therefore, be required. Canadian regulation nor the related JAA changes to these aircraft usually are of Comments: CAA recommends that the NPA 21–7 contain requirements similar less complexity. Furthermore, the words ‘‘established by the regulations’’ to this proposal and recommends that certification requirements for these be replaced with the words ‘‘intended the FAA consider tasking ARAC to aircraft are many times less complex by the regulations.’’ address this issue in the interest of than those for larger aircraft. Examples FAA Response: The phrase ‘‘intended harmonization, if a safety concern of this are simplified design load criteria by the regulations’’ is not appropriate exists. and performance requirements. rule language. Except for the change Bombardier and Transport Canada The exception in § 21.101(c) is from paragraph (c) to paragraph (d) this believe extending the applicability of premised on the assumption that the section is adopted as proposed. this requirement to restricted category lesser complexity of design, design aircraft (§ 21.25) would be contrary to changes, and requirements will allow Section 21.101(e) the ARAC recommendation. Bombardier the FAA Aircraft Certification Office Section 21.101(e) (proposed advises that the ARAC proposal (ACO) to more easily identify the § 21.101(d)) sets a limit of five years on excluded this category of aircraft current airworthiness standards an application for a change to a type because ‘‘compliance with the appropriate for the areas of the product certificate for a transport category ‘applicable’ regulations (whether earlier affected by the proposed change. aircraft, and sets a limit of three years or latest) was not required for the Nonetheless, § 21.101(c) also allows the on an application for a change to a type original model when justified with the applicant to submit data on which the certificate for all other products. The regulating Authority.’’ ACO could decide to allow one or more durations for these amended or The Aerospace Industries Association of the exceptions to requiring the latest supplemental type certificate (AIA) asserts that § 21.101(f) (proposed airworthiness standards. applications are the same as those for § 21.101(e)) contains the same Most importantly, although the applications for the corresponding type requirements as § 21.101(a). AIA process for determining the appropriate certificates. If an application for a believes these sections ‘‘make no level of safety for these aircraft and design change expires, an applicant may exception for products originally rotorcraft will be different from the file a new application or apply for an certificated to regulations that existed

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36257 prior to the codification of the modifiers must obtain supplemental airplanes for which the regulations applicable part(s) of 14 CFR nor for type certificates under § 21.115. Because referenced in the type certificate predate products certificated as restricted, the provisions of § 21.115 incorporate subsequent amendments. Section surplus military, or other unique types.’’ by reference the provisions of current 25.2(c) has been revised consistent with AIA recommends this proposal be § 21.101(a) and (b), the provisions to the changes to § 21.101(a). eliminated. amend the type certificate are Comments: Raytheon believes that Transport Canada recommends the essentially the same as the provisions §§ 23.2, 27.2, and 29.2 should be paragraph be revised in a manner for supplemental type certificates. To amended to use the same language as similar to proposed § 21.101(a)(1), align the provisions of proposed § 25.2. which specifically states ‘‘each changes to § 21.101 and appropriate FAA Response: Current §§ 23.2, 27.2, regulation that is applicable to the references to those changes in proposed and 29.2 do not contain references to changed product.’’ § 21.115, the paragraph designators (a) § 21.101 no change is needed in these FAA Response: The intent of and (b) have been removed. sections. proposed paragraph (e)(1) was to ensure By deleting the paragraph designators that the predecessor regulations (former the FAA, in effect, proposed to require Paperwork Reduction Act CAR’s, etc.) would continue to be the applicants for a supplemental type This rule contains information starting basis for aircraft that were certificate to show that the modified collections that are subject to review by originally type certificated under earlier product complies with the applicable OMB under the Paperwork Reduction regulations. The recodification of the regulations in effect on the date of the Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. section 3507(d)). regulations did not remove application for the STC is met. As previously stated, comments on the airworthiness requirements under Comments: Virtually all of the information were not invited at the which products were type certificated. commenters who commented on proposed rule stage and therefore are Therefore, the FAA agrees, in part, with proposed § 21.115 (including the oral being invited in this final rule AIA in that proposed paragraph (e)(1) is comments from the in-service modifiers document. The Department of redundant. Proposed paragraph (e)(1) represented at the ARAC working group Transportation has submitted the has not been adopted. meetings) opposed this proposal and the information requirements associated However, § 21.101(f)(proposed substantive change proposed in with this rule to the Office of § 21.101(e)(2)) is still needed to address § 21.101(a) that requires that STC Management and Budget (OMB) for its aircraft type certificated under §§ 21.24, applicants make a finding of compliance review. The title, description, and 21.25, 21.27, and special classes of with later applicable regulations. These number of respondents, frequency of the aircraft covered by § 21.17(b). The commenters recommend no changes to collection, and estimate of the annual airworthiness requirements applicable the current requirements for an STC. total reporting and recordkeeping to the category of aircraft in effect on the FAA Response: As mentioned earlier burden are shown below. date of the application for the change under the discussions in § 21.101(b), the Title: Type Certification Procedures must include any airworthiness FAA has provided an exception, in for Changed Products. requirements that the Administrator § 21.101(c), for aircraft of 6,000 pounds Summary: This rule will constitute a finds to be appropriate for the type or less maximum weight and non- reporting burden for applicants seeking certification of the aircraft in accordance turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds or an amended Type Certificate or a with those sections. less maximum weight. The primary Supplemental Type Certificate for The FAA has determined that some impact of this exception will be that the changes to aeronautical products. This restricted category aircraft should starting point for determining the rule requires applicants, with some comply with the requirements of this applicable regulations for a changed exceptions, to comply with the latest rulemaking action and the reference to product will continue to be the regulations in effect on the date of the § 21.25 has been retained. Although regulations incorporated by reference in application for the design changes of Transport Canada has somewhat the type certificate. The administrator aircraft, aircraft engines, and propellers. comparable ‘‘restricted category’’ may designate an amendment to the Compliance with the latest regulations provisions in their regulations, the JAA regulation incorporated by reference will not be required: have no comparable provisions in their that applies to the change and any (1) if the change is not significant, regulations. However, the FAA does regulation that the Administrator finds (2) for those areas or components not certificate some restricted category is directly related, unless the affected by the change, aircraft using airworthiness standards Administrator also finds that (3) if such compliance would not and has determined that this compliance with that amendment or contribute materially to the level of requirement is needed to ensure that the regulation would not contribute safety, or aircraft certificated using regulations materially to the level of safety of the (4) if such compliance would be from parts 23, 25, 27, and 29 are changed product or would be impractical. included in the rule. The requirements impractical. The applicant for most product of proposed § 21.101(e)(2) have been The exception applies to both changes now will incur an additional revised and retained as § 21.101(f) in the amended and supplemental type incremental administrative cost to final rule. Due to the revision of certificates. This is because there is no document an analysis based on the § 21.101(f), the language to which legal difference between the number of latest certification basis and identify to Transport Canada referred is no longer products that can be modified using an the FAA those regulations they will or in the paragraph. amended type certificate versus using will not be complying with, based on supplemental type certificates. the above four criteria. This analysis is Section 21.115 part of the applicant’s compliance A type certificate holder may obtain Section 25.2 review document. approval for a change by amending the Current § 25.2(c) incorporates by Applicants for product changes to original type certificate under § 21.101, reference the provisions of current non-turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds or by obtaining a supplemental type §§ 21.101(a) and (b) concerning special or less maximum weight, or other certificate under § 21.115. Other retroactive requirements applicable to aircraft of 6,000 pounds or less would

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36258 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations not necessarily be required to perform application ($664) to be smaller than the these proposed amendments and foreign this analysis. For such applications, the average for all applicants ($728.) regulations. FAA would make an initial finding to For the 20-year study period, The final rule results, primarily, from require compliance with appropriate incremental small business a recommendation harmonized with the regulations. In that case, the applicant administrative costs under the rule are aviation authorities of Canada and may decide to demonstrate compliance projected to total $30,059,321 with a Europe. Transport Canada and the Joint with those regulations, or may perform 1998 present value of $13,938,179. Aviation Authorities have proposed the analysis to demonstrate that The agency solicits public comment similar corresponding changes to compliance is not warranted. on the information collection regulations governing type certification Use of: Because the rule shifts most of requirements to: procedures for changed products. the responsibility from the FAA to the (1) evaluate whether the collection of Economic Evaluation, Regulatory applicant to evaluate and demonstrate information is necessary for the proper Flexibility Determination, International the applicable certification basis for performance of the functions of the Trade Impact Assessment, and product changes, the applicant must agency, including whether the Unfunded Mandates Assessment produce additional documentation information will have practical utility; when submitting an application to the (2) evaluate the accuracy of the Proposed changes to Federal FAA. The FAA will review all agency’s estimate of the burden of the regulations must undergo several documentation provided with the collection of information, including the economic analyses. First, Executive amended TC or STC application and validity of the methodology and Order 12866 directs that each Federal determine the certification basis for the assumptions used; agency shall propose or adopt a changed product. (3) enhance the quality, utility, and regulation only upon a reasoned Respondents: Any individual or clarity of the information to be determination that the benefits of the business entity desiring to submit an collected; and intended regulation justify its costs. application for a change to a TC or an (4) minimize the burden of the Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act STC; i.e., a current TC or STC holder, collection of information on those who of 1980, as amended, requires agencies a manufacturer, or a modifier of are to respond, including through the to analyze the economic impact of aeronautical products. use of appropriate automated, regulatory changes on small entities. Frequency: Approximately 2,860 electronic, mechanical, or other Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 applications are received by the FAA technological collection techniques or U.S.C. §§ 2531–2533) prohibits agencies annually. Of these, an average of 1,649 other forms of information technology, from setting standards that create applications per year result in (e.g.. permitting electronic submission unnecessary obstacles to the foreign certificates being issued. The difference responses). commerce of the U.S. And fourth, the of 1,211 applications per year represents Individuals and organizations may Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 an estimate of the applications that are submit comments on this information (Pub. L. 104–4) requires agencies to initiated but are never completed; e.g., collection requirements by August 7, prepare a written assessment of the withdrawn, canceled, or inactive. The 2000, and should direct them to the costs, benefits and other effects of sum of the 1,649 annual applications address listed in the ADDRESSES section proposed or final rules that include a completed for certification, and 75 of this document. Federal mandate likely to result in the percent of the 1,211 applications not Persons are not required to respond to expenditure by State, local, or tribal completed, equals the administrative a collection of information unless it governments, in the aggregate, or by the equivalent of 2,557 applications per displays a currently valid OMB control private sector, of $100 million or more year. number. The burden associated with annually (adjusted for inflation). Annual Burden Estimate: The full this rule has been submitted to OMB for In conducting these analyses, the FAA regulatory evaluation forecasts costs review. The FAA will publish a notice has determined that this rule: (1) would over a 20-year period, beginning in the in the Federal Register notifying the generate benefits that justify its costs; year 2000, and assumes a 3 percent public of the approval number. and is ‘‘a significant regulatory action’’ annual increase in applications. For all Information collection requirements under Executive Order 12866 and under applicants, the first year administrative to other sections of part 21 have the regulatory policies and procedures costs of the rule are projected to equal previously been approved by the Office of the Department of Transportation (44 $1,975,530 (1998 present value of Management and Budget (OMB) FR 11034, February 26, 1979), (2) would $1,725,504) divided by an overhead rate under the provisions of the Paperwork have a significant economic impact on of $105 an hour, which equals 18,815 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. a substantial number of small entities; total annual hours. 3507(d)), and have been assigned OMB (3) would not constitute a barrier to Using the 1500-employee size Control Number 2120–0018. international trade; and (4) does not standard, small firms are projected to contain a significant intergovernmental International Compatibility incur 56.6 percent of those costs, or private sector mandate. These equaling $1,118,679 with a 1998 present In keeping with U.S. obligations analyses, available in the docket, are value of $977,098. The small business under the Convention on International summarized below. proportion of expected administrative Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to costs (56.6 percent) is lower than the comply with International Civil Response to Economic Comments proportion of applications expected Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards Comment: The Air Transport from small business (62.1 percent) and Recommended Practices to the Association (ATA) and a private aircraft because a significantly higher maximum extent practicable. owner both raise due process concerns proportion of the administrative The FAA has reviewed corresponding based on the failure of the FAA to exceptions under the rule are projected ICAO Standards and Recommended quantify the costs and benefits of the for small business applicants. This Practices and Joint Aviation proposal in the Notice of Proposed disproportionate exception rate also Airworthiness Authorities regulations, Rulemaking (NPRM). While the NPRM causes the average increased where they exist, and has identified and stated that the FAA was not able to administrative cost per small business discussed similarities and differences in quantify the costs and benefits of this

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36259 proposal, the NPRM also stated that the (3) if such compliance would not 4. Estimated the incremental benefits would exceed the costs. In contribute materially to the level of administrative work that would be previous rulemakings the FAA was able safety of the changed product, or caused by the final rule. The review to justify part 25 amendments (4) if such compliance would be team also estimated the additional applicable to new type designs, but impractical; i.e., would result in costs administrative work for those failed to satisfy reasonable cost-benefit that would not be commensurate with applications that would actually be criteria essential to making them the safety benefit that would be derived. excepted by the rule’s small-aircraft applicable to derivatives, new Applicants for changes to most provision. These estimates were needed production units, or the existing fleet. products would incur the incremental to measure the amount of relief that Based on this, ATA doubts that the administrative cost of evaluating and would be afforded by this exception. benefits of the proposal exceed the demonstrating to the FAA the 5. Estimated the proportional split costs, and, in general, holds that applicability of these four conditions to between the certification projects that government should not adopt their product changes. The final rule, would and would not be required to regulations for which the costs and unlike the proposed rule, would make meet later regulations. For those projects benefits have not been quantified. an exception to this administrative that would not be required to meet later FAA Response: The FAA’s assessment responsibility for applicants for changes requirements, the responses were used that the proposed rule would be cost- to either: (1) non-turbine rotorcraft of to measure the distribution of beneficial was, and is, based on the 3,000 pounds or less maximum weight, conditions that would lead to that provision of the rule that, in the final or (2) other aircraft of 6,000 pounds or determination. Conversely, for those instance, compliance with later less. For such applications, the FAA projects that would be required to meet regulations will not be required if such would maintain the administrative later regulations, these responses were compliance ‘‘. . .would not contribute responsibility of demonstrating that the used to categorize the relative cost materially to the level of safety of the certification basis for a changed product impact of meeting those regulations. For 227 of the 250 sample project changed product or would be should incorporate the latest applications, the ACOS data system impractical.’’ In the discussion of this airworthiness standards. provision, the NPRM further explained contained sufficient information for the that ‘‘compliance with a later Survey Methodology FAA review team to estimate answers for the five-part evaluations described amendment would be considered The evaluation of this rule was based above. Insufficient data were available ’impractical’ when the applicant can on a sample of records from the FAA’s to assess the remaining 23 project establish that the cost of the design Aircraft Certification Office Subsystem records, which were removed and were change and related changes necessary to (ACOS) database. The ACOS system is not considered further. demonstrate compliance with the used to track FAA certification projects amendment would not be at the individual certification office Costs commensurate with the resultant safety level. All pertinent (amended and benefit.’’ The following procedure was used to supplemental) certification actions, estimate the administrative costs of the Executive Order 12866, which is the where the date of application was 1994 basis for federal regulatory evaluation, rule. First, the sample data were or later, were selected and combined tabulated to determine the proportional explicitly recognizes that costs and into a single database. That filter benefits may not always be quantifiable. distributions of results for each item resulted in a set of 13,448 project area in the sample. This distribution for The Order states that, ‘‘costs and records, from which, a random sample benefits shall be understood to include the sample project applications was of 250 project records were selected for then expanded to represent the both quantifiable measures (to the detailed review and analysis. These fullest extent that these can be usefully characteristics that would be expected sample project records were then used for all affected applications in a year. estimated) and qualitative measures of to forecast the expected distribution of costs and benefits that are difficult to The ACOS data show that an average of characteristics for future amended and 2,860 applications for amended or quantify, but nevertheless essential to supplemental certification actions under consider.’’ supplemental type certificates are the final rule. received into the system each year. Of Discussion of Costs and Benefits The 250 sample project records were these, an average of 1,649 applications The costs imposed by the final rule evaluated by a team of field-experienced per year result in certificates being will be incurred by future applicants for FAA certification employees. Based on issued. The difference of 1,211 amended and supplemental type the data provided for each project in the applications per year represents an certificates for aeronautical products. sample, the review team assessed the estimate of the applications that are Two categories of costs may be imposed: following five areas for each sample initiated but are never completed; e.g., (1) administrative costs, and (2) the record: withdrawn, canceled, or inactive. costs of compliance with later 1. Categorized the number of The regulatory evaluation assumes regulations. employees in the firm submitting each that the additional administrative efforts The final rule will require applicants application. This information was used caused by the final rule would apply to to comply with the regulations in effect to evaluate the potential effects of the all projects that are completed, and that on the date of the application for the rule on small entities. 75 percent of that additional change, as compared to the latest 2. Assessed the weight and type of the administrative effort would actually certification basis of the product to be affected aeronautical product in order to take place for the ‘‘never completed’’ changed, unless one of several estimate the proportion of applications projects. The sum of the 1,649 annual conditions is met. Compliance with the that would fall within the final rule’s applications completed for certification, later set of regulations will not be specified exceptions for certain small and 75 percent of the 1,211 applications required: aircraft. not completed, equals the (1) if the change is not significant, 3. Estimated the existing administrative equivalent of 2,557 (2) for those areas or components not administrative effort for each applications per year. The projected affected by the change, application under current procedures. numbers of applications, by category,

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36260 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations were then computed by multiplying the administrative costs may still incur the applying later regulations to 651 percentage distributions of the sample incremental costs of complying with certification projects. Similarly, 64 data by this administrative equivalent of later, and likely more stringent, projects were projected to incur cost 2,557 applications per year. regulations. increases of 11 to 25 percent, and 24 Next, the annual increased hours of A second important difference projects would have cost increases of administrative work that will be caused between the calculations for over 25 percent. Annual impact by the rule was computed by administrative costs versus compliance estimates were projected over the entire multiplying the matrix of 2,557 costs concerns the base number of study period through the year 2019, applications by the respective average affected applications. The previous again assuming a 3 percent growth. increases in administrative hours per computations of administrative costs It would be informative to have more application, as determined from the included a proportion (75 percent) of detailed compliance impact estimates review team evaluations of Item 4. This those applications that were never than the broad categorizations of methodology projects that the rule will finalized, and where no amended or relative percentages that were possible impose a total additional 17,218 supplemental type certificate was using the sample review methodology applicant hours of administrative work issued. By comparison, any additional employed in this evaluation. However, per year. By comparison, the rule’s compliance requirements resulting from the scope of projects that will be exception provision for small aircraft this rule would only apply in situations affected by this rule is wide, and applications is projected to preclude an where an amended or supplemental reliable measures of the sample project additional 3,985 hours of applicant type certificate is actually issued. As production levels were not available for administration from being imposed. such, the compliance cost calculations this evaluation. Therefore, in an effort to The increased annual administrative are based on the average 1,649 amended provide useful information, without costs of the rule were then computed by and supplemental certificates issued portraying a higher degree of confidence multiplying the incremental each year, as reported from the ACOS than is supportable, estimates were administrative hours, from above, by a data. Using this base number, the made of the future annual compliance unit cost factor of $105 per hour. This annual numbers of certifications that cost impacts of the rule per assumed factor is intended to be a representative, would be subject to the rule over the 20- $100,000 unit of project size. This fully burdened labor rate for the highest year study period were forecast, based assumed average project size is a direct skill level necessary to make and on a 3 percent growth rate. factor to the resulting projected support the determinations called for The expected annual numbers of compliance costs, and alternate under the rule. These calculations certification projects that would have to assumptions are readily calculable. project a base annual administrative meet later regulations were estimated While this analysis uses a compliance burden of approximately $1.8 million. from the sample results. Item 5 from the cost of $100,000 for a single project, the The administrative costs of the rule team evaluation areas assessed the were then projected over a 20-year study FAA believes there is a wide range of simulated effect of the rule on the compliance costs. For example: period. For computational simplicity, certification basis of each sample all administrative costs were assumed to 1. A $100 thousand dollar project. An project. The percentage distribution of emergency medical service system for a begin in the year 2000, even though the that assessment follows. effective date of the rule will vary by helicopter over 3,000 pounds. This modification includes a litter/restraint product type. The computations Percent of assumed an annual 3 percent increase in samples system, medical equipment (oxygen, certification applications, and ventilator, air pump, defibrillator, etc.), accordingly, a 3 percent annual increase Rule would not invoke later and an auxiliary electrical system. in attributable costs. The initial year regulations: 2. A $20 to $50 thousand dollar 2000 cost was computed from the $1.8 Change would be not sig- project. An improved stainless steel nificant ...... 49.3 million base annual administrative exhaust system for a twin-engine Change would not con- general aviation aircraft. burden described above and inflated at tribute materially to safe- 3 percent annually from 1997 to the year ty or would be imprac- 3. A $15 thousand dollar project. The 2000. These calculations predict that the tical ...... 9.7 purchase and installation of an avionics 20-year administrative costs of the rule Rule would invoke later regula- instrument system. For a simple will total $53.1 million, with a 1998 tions: sensitivity test, the compliance cost present value of $24.6 million. Parallel Compliance costs would estimate is directly related to changes in calculations were made for the costs increase less than 10% 36.1 the assumed $100,000 compliance cost that will be excepted under the rule’s Compliance costs would per project. If, for example, the project increase 10%±25% ...... 3.5 cost for small business is better provision for certain small aircraft. This Compliance costs would exception will preclude an estimated increase over 25% ...... 1.3 represented by $20,000, then the $12.3 million in applicant compliance cost estimates should be administrative costs over the study Total ...... 100.0 reduced by 80 percent. period, with a 1998 present value of The unit-project-size cost estimates $5.7 million. This regulatory evaluation uses the were computed as the product of: (1) the In addition to the administrative costs three compliance impact level relevant number of annually affected detailed above, additional costs will be percentages to project the annual projects described above, (2) an imposed by the rule’s conditional numbers of applications where later assumed median value for the requirements for compliance with later regulations would be invoked and percentage impact ranges at each of the certification regulations. It is important additional compliance costs could three impact levels, and (3) the assumed to note that the final rule’s exception for result. Separate estimates were made for $100,000 unit project size. For example, small aircraft only applies to the each of the three ranges of compliance the year 2000 cost estimate for projects administrative burden of proof under impact. This procedure projected that, in the less-than-10-percent cost impact the rule. Accordingly, applications that in the first year, cost increases of less category was computed as the product are excepted from the rule’s incremental than 10 percent would result from of:

VerDate 112000 19:52 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36261

(1) the projected 651 affected projects by the change, (3) if such compliance compliance and administrative costs from Table 7, would not contribute materially to the (scenario ‘‘(c)(2)’’ above). The (2) an assumed mid-range cost impact level of safety of the changed product, calculations in this regulatory analysis of 5 percent, and (4) or in the final analysis, if such are based on the assumption that, if the (3) the assumed unit project level of compliance would be impractical. FAA determines that a later regulation $100,000. Compliance with later regulations will should apply, the applicant will This subcalculation produces a cost be considered impractical if the demonstrate compliance with the later impact estimate of $3,255,000 for applicant can show that such regulation, and will not attempt to projects in the ‘‘less-than-10-percent’’ compliance would result in costs that demonstrate that one of the exceptions cost impact category in the year 2000, as are not consistent with the possible in § 21.101 applies, e.g., that compliance shown in Table 8. When applied to all safety benefits. Since each action taken with the later regulation would be 3 cost impact categories, and summed, under the rule will be cost-beneficial, impractical or would not contribute this methodology produces an annual the FAA has determined that the materially to the level of safety. compliance cost impact of $4.8 million benefits of the rule will justify its costs. However, one needs to consider the in the year 2000. Total twenty-year following. The applicant will make their compliance costs, at the $100,000 unit Smaller Aircraft Exception Provision own educated determination as to the project level, are projected to equal The exception in § 21.101 for non- applicability of the later regulation, and $128.0 million, with a 1998 present turbine rotorcraft under 3000 pounds will decide to accept compliance with value of $59.4 million. and for other aircraft under 6000 that regulation only when they are In summary, the 20-year pounds places the burden on the FAA relatively certain that the administrative administrative costs of the rule are to make an initial determination costs of demonstrating that one of the projected to total $53.1 million, with a whether or not to require the applicant § 21.101 exceptions applies and will 1998 present value of $24.6 million. to demonstrate compliance with a later exceed the costs of demonstrating Parallel compliance costs, assuming a airworthiness standard. The compliance with the later regulation. $100,000 unit project level, equal $128.0 certification basis for the change could Thus, this regulatory analysis somewhat million, with a 1998 present value of be approved in several ways: over-estimates total compliance costs in $59.4 million. An additional $12.3 (a) If the FAA determines that no later that it assumes that applicants will million ($5.7 million, 1998 present regulation is to be applied, the applicant always forego their opportunities to value) in applicant administration costs would demonstrate compliance with the convince the FAA that compliance with will be averted by the small-aircraft existing certification basis, and there the later regulation would be exception provision in the rule. would be no administrative or impractical or would not contribute Benefits compliance costs associated with materially to the level of safety. By the application of this changed products same token, that assumption results, The directly attributable benefit of rule. somewhat, in an under-estimation of the this final rule is the augmented safety (b) If the FAA determines that a later total administrative costs. Only when an that will result in those cases where regulation is to be applied, the applicant applicant has decided that compliance future changed products will be can accept that determination, and, costs are likely to actually exceed required to comply with later, more while there would be compliance costs administrative costs, will the applicant stringent airworthiness standards than associated with accepting the FAA choose to expend the resources to make those that would be required in the determination, there would be no the ‘‘impracticality,’’ ‘‘contribution to absence of this rule. These benefits administrative costs. safety,’’ or other arguments. cannot be accurately predicted and (c) If the FAA determines that a later Furthermore, an applicant is more likely quantified, but the rule includes regulation is to be applied, the applicant to choose to make those arguments provisions to assure that any actions could submit a technical analysis to when there is a persuasive technical taken pursuant to it will be cost- demonstrate that, for example, foundation for them. Therefore, this beneficial. compliance with the later regulation regulatory analysis over-estimates The benefits of amendments to the would be impractical or would not compliance costs by including those airworthiness standards are evaluated at contribute materially to the level of costs that would tend to be avoided by the time of those amendments. Some safety of the product. In that case— the more efficient expenditure of amendments are based on the FAA’s (1) If the FAA agrees with the administrative resources. And, by the evaluation of accidents or incidents; applicant’s technical analysis, the same token, the administrative costs other amendments are based on the applicant would demonstrate that are ‘‘unaccounted for’’ due to the FAA’s evaluation of probable or likely compliance with the existing above under-estimation are more likely safety problems that may not be certification basis, and, while there to be spent in realistic efforts to avoid attributable to a specific accident. The would be no compliance costs, there even higher compliance costs. The net changed products rule is FAA’s would be administrative costs. effect is that this regulatory evaluation proactive approach to addressing safety (2) If the FAA does not agree with the over-estimates total costs. issues before they arise. The FAA does applicant’s technical analysis, the not have to wait for an accident to applicant would demonstrate Regulatory Flexibility Analysis justify a rule. compliance with the later regulation, The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 As noted previously, the rule will and there would be resultant (5 U.S.C. 601–612) establishes, ‘‘as a require compliance with all later administrative and compliance costs. principle of regulatory issuance that regulations where such compliance will Thus, in practice, the total costs to agencies shall endeavor, consistent with contribute materially to the level of applicants for changes to the smaller the objective of the rule and of safety. The rule will not require aircraft could be a combination of ‘‘no applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and compliance with later regulations: (1) if costs’’ (scenario ‘‘(a)’’ above), informational requirements to the scale the change in the aeronautical product compliance costs only (scenario ‘‘(b)’’ of the business, organizations, and is not significant, (2) for those areas or above), administrative costs only governmental jurisdictions subject to components of the product not affected (scenario ‘‘(c)(1)’’ above), and regulation.’’ To achieve that principle,

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36262 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations the Act requires agencies to solicit and However, current procedural regulations components not affected by the change, consider flexible regulatory proposals (part 21) do not require that changed (3) if such compliance would not and to explain the rationale for their products demonstrate compliance with contribute materially to the level of actions. The Act covers a wide range of all current airworthiness standards. safety of the changed product, or (4) if small entities, including small The FAA maintains that the issue such compliance would be impractical; businesses, not-for-profit organizations, should not be whether a product is i.e., would result in costs that would not and small governmental jurisdictions. produced under a new type certificate be commensurate with the safety benefit Agencies must perform a review to or an amended one, or changed under that would be derived. determine whether a proposed or final a supplemental type certificate. Nor Applicants for changes to most rule will have a significant economic should the certification basis of a products would need to evaluate and impact on a substantial number of small changed product turn on the fact that demonstrate to the FAA the entities. If the determination finds that the product is to be modified or initially applicability of these four conditions to it will, the agency must prepare a operated by a small (as opposed to a their product changes, if compliance to regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as large) entity. The issue is whether or not regulations other than the most current described in the Act. the level of safety of the product, is to be required. The skill level However, if an agency determines that embodied in the airworthiness necessary to make these determinations a proposed or final rule is not expected standards it complies with, is as high as will vary widely with the scale and to have a significant economic impact practical. engineering complexity of the on a substantial number of small individual product change involved. In 2. A Succinct Statement of The entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act general, these skills would include a Objectives Of, and Legal Basis For, The provides that the head of the agency working knowledge of the pertinent Proposed Rule may so certify, and an RFA is not aviation regulations, the ability to required. The certification must include The objective of this rule is to evaluate and approve technical data, a statement providing the factual basis enhance safety by applying the latest and a combination of training and for this determination, and the airworthiness standards, to the greatest responsible experience in the field or reasoning should be clear. extent practical, for the certification of fields of engineering pertinent to the Recently, the Office of Advocacy of significant design changes to aircraft, product change. In assessing the the Small Business Administration aircraft engines, and propellers. administrative costs of this rule, the (SBA) published new guidance for The legal basis for the rule derives regulatory evaluation assumes a fully Federal agencies responding to the from Title 49, U.S.C. 44701 which burdened labor rate of $105 per hour for requirements of the Small Business authorizes the FAA Administrator to the highest skill level necessary to make Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996. promote safety of flight of civil aircraft and support the determinations called Following the SBA guidance, the FAA in air commerce by prescribing, in part, for under the rule. conducted the required review of this minimum standards governing the rule and determined that, based on the design and construction of aircraft, 4. An Identification, to The Extent cost assumptions described above, it aircraft engines, and propellers, as may Practicable, of All Relevant Federal will have a significant impact on a be required in the interest of safety. Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or substantial number of small entities. Under 49 U.S.C. § 44704, the FAA may Conflict With The Rule Accordingly, a full regulatory flexibility issue type certificates, including The FAA is unaware of any federal analysis was conducted and is supplemental type certificates, for rules that would duplicate, overlap, or summarized as follows. aircraft, aircraft engines, and propellers. conflict with the final rule. 1. A Description of The Reasons Why 3. A Description of The Projected 5. A Description and An Estimate of The Action By The Agency Is Being Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Number of Small Entities To Which The Considered Compliance Requirements of The Rule Will Apply In recent years, a trend has developed Proposed Rule, Including an Estimate of This rule will apply to future toward fewer products that are of The Classes or Types of Small Entities applicants for amended and completely new designs, which would That Will Be Subject to The supplemental type certificates for require new type certificates. Over a Requirement and The Type of changed aeronautical products. FAA period of time, a series of changes to an Professional Skills Necessary For regulations are typically directed toward original product may have been made so Preparation of The Report or Record some closely identified industry or that the current model is considerably As detailed previously in the occupation; such as domestic air different from the original model. regulatory evaluation, the requirements carriers or private pilots. By Although each changed product in such imposed by this rule will affect future comparison, the applicants under this a series of changes may differ little from applicants for amended and rule are not uniquely defined, and may its immediate predecessor, the supplemental type certificates for be found in a wide variety of industries. collective changes can result in a changed aeronautical products. The rule In assessing this rule, the FAA product with substantial differences will impose both administrative identified 63 industry groups in 19 from the original product. requirements (with certain exceptions) different four-digit standard industrial Another trend in manufacturing is to and compliance requirements. It will classifications (SIC) that would keep products in production over require applicants to comply with the reasonably include applicants for several decades. Some currently regulations in effect on the date of the certifications to changed aeronautical manufactured airplanes have evolved application for the change, as compared products. These industries are listed as from airplane models originally type- to the latest certification basis of the Table 9 of the appendix to the full certificated 25 years ago. This does not product to be changed, unless one of regulatory evaluation. imply that those airplanes are unsafe, several conditions is met. Compliance The Small Business Administration because they do, in practice, have with the later set of regulations will not (SBA) provides descriptive national data features that address the intent of most be required: (1) if the change is not for the year 1995 on U.S. firms, of the current airworthiness standards. significant, (2) for those areas or aggregated at the four-digit SIC level.

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36263

These data include the numbers of excepted applications would be applications from all firms.2 In turn, this firms, numbers of establishments, submitted by small firms. An estimated higher incidence rate also produces employment, annual payroll, and 417 of the total annual 1,588 small- higher small business costs per estimated receipts by employment size business applications would qualify for certification action if it is assumed that of firm. Information for the 19 industry this exception, and the remaining 1,171 the scale and complexity of small classifications identified under this rule would not. business and large business certification projects are the same. In the absence of were combined to produce the following In addition to the administrative reliable project size estimates, the distributions. requirements for applications that are regulatory evaluation has employed a submitted, the rule will also invoke Annual receipts uniform $100,000 project size as a unit Number of Percent of certain regulatory compliance employees firms per employee factor to facilitate decision-making. ($1,000's) requirements for the proportion of However, the FAA does not believe that applications that are completed and the projects submitted by small and 1Ð99 ...... 83.2 148.0 certificated. Some 1,649 of the total 100Ð499 ...... 8.0 163.9 large businesses are typically equal in 500 or more .... 8.8 207.6 applications are completed annually as scale and complexity. amended or supplemental type While this analysis uses a compliance Total ...... 100.0 Avg: 200.1 certificates and would be subject to the cost of $100,000 for a single project, the rule’s compliance provisions. Of these, FAA believes there is a wide range of The SBA also provides small business an estimated 1,024 will be from small compliance costs. For example: size standards for each industry. The 19 firms. 1. A $100 thousand dollar project. An industry groups that could include firms emergency medical service system for a Regulatory Flexibility Cost Analysis affected under this rule fall into four helicopter over 3,000 pounds. This separate SBA standards for small The full regulatory evaluation modification includes a litter/restraint business definition: 500, 750, 1000, or forecasted costs over a 20-year period, system, medical equipment (oxygen, 1500 employees. As part of the beginning in the year 2000, and ventilator, air pump, defibrillator, etc.), evaluation for this rule, the FAA assumed a three-percent annual increase and an auxiliary electrical system. 2. A $20 to $50 thousand dollar analyzed the employment size of firms in applications. For all applicants, the project. An improved stainless steel for a random sample of 227 first year administrative costs of the rule exhaust system for a twin-engine supplemental and amended type are projected to equal $1,975,530 (1998 certification projects. The size general aviation aircraft. present value $1,725,504). Using the 3. A $15 thousand dollar project. The distribution of these samples is 1500-employee size standard, small presented below. purchase and installation of an avionics firms are projected to incur 56.6 percent instrument system. For a simple Cumulative of those costs, equaling $1,118,679 with sensitivity test, the compliance cost Number of Percent of a 1998 present value of $977,098. The employees samples percent of estimate is directly related to changes in samples small business proportion of expected the assumed $100,000 compliance cost administrative costs (56.6 percent) is per project. If, for example, the project 1Ð100 ...... 44.1 44.1 lower than the proportion of cost for small business is better 101Ð500 ...... 12.3 56.4 501Ð750 ...... 2.6 59.0 applications expected from small represented by $20,000, then the 751Ð1000 ...... 1.8 60.8 business (62.1 percent) because a compliance cost estimates should be 1001Ð1500 .... 1.3 62.1 significantly higher proportion of the reduced by 80 percent. 1501 or more .. 37.9 100.0 administrative exceptions under the With the above sensitivity test in rule are projected for small business mind and using the $100,000 project Total ...... 100.00 ...... applicants. This disproportionate size cost, small business applications exception rate also causes the average are expected to incur a year 2000 As presented in the table, depending increased administrative cost per small compliance cost of $3,582,317 (with a on which size standard is applied, business application ($664) 1 to be 1998 present value of $3,128,934).3 This between 56.4 percent to 62.1 percent of smaller than the average for all represents an average increase of $3,198 the changed-product applications that applicants ($728.) For the 20-year study per project, assuming a unit $100,000 would be affected by this rule will be period, incremental small business base project size.4 Over the twenty-year submitted by small businesses. To administrative costs under the rule are study period, small business simplify discussion, the remainder of projected to total $30,059,321 with a compliance costs under this scenario are this analysis is based on the 62.1 1998 present value of $13,938,179. projected to total $96,006,280 (with a percent proportion and uses the under 1998 present value of $44,532,108). 1500-employee size standard. As The regulatory evaluation also details estimated in the full regulatory the incremental costs expected under Affordability Analysis evaluation, the FAA expects the the rule for compliance with later If the assumed $100,000 unit of administrative equivalent of 2,557 regulations. Based on the evaluation of project size is also assumed to be the applications will be submitted each sample applications, 48 percent of the average size for a small-business project, year, and 1,588 of those would be from future certifications from small business small firms. firms would be required to meet some 2 Note that the ‘‘small aircraft’’ exception under The final rule, unlike the original measure of additional later regulations. the rule will not alter compliance decisions nor This proportion is higher than the alleviate their costs. rule, includes an administrative 3 For computational simplicity, the regulatory exception for applications related to parallel figure of 41 per cent for evaluation overstates initial annual compliance certain small aircraft. Based on the costs by assuming that all such costs would occur sample of projects that were analyzed 1 Note that these are average costs per application, in the year that the project is approved. In reality, for this rule, 16.7 percent of all not per affected application. Based on the sample, they would occur over several years. 36 percent of all small business applications would 4 Aircraft operators or modifiers typically do not applications would fall under this meet the ‘‘small aircraft’’ exception under the rule amortize the incremental cost of $3,200 for a exception, and 97.4 percent of the and incur no incremental administrative costs. modification totaling $100,000 or more.

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36264 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations the increased administrative cost per survey assessment predicts that small changes can result in a model that is project ($664) can be added to the business applicants will substantially different from the original increased compliance cost per project disproportionately incur the additional model, yet that product is not required ($3,198) to provide an expected average costs of complying with later to demonstrate compliance with all the increase of $3,862 per project. The regulations as a result of the rule. The recent airworthiness standards. relative effect of these costs per small sample survey predicts that the rule will The second evident alternative would firm is a function of: (1) the size require 48 percent of small business be to retain the existing certification (receipts) of that firm, and (2) the applications, as compared to 29 percent process for changes to small aircraft, number of project applications that a of large business applications, to since the bulk of these applications are firm submits/completes per year.5 The comply with later regulations. submitted by small firms. Again, the FAA opposes this alternative since it following table presents the average Competitiveness Analysis impact of the rule as a percentage of a would leave the existing problem for a firm’s annual receipts, for various As discussed above, it appears that segment of the industry and would assumptions on firm size and annual there will be proportionally higher create an unacceptable inequity across number of projects. For example, a firm compliance costs imposed by the rule aircraft model sizes. with 5 projects per year would incur on small than on large businesses. This As an alternative to full exclusion additional costs of 5 times $3,862; or information is not sufficient, however, from the rule, the FAA has included a to determine the impact of the $19,310 for the year. If that firm ´ small-aircraft exception for the employs 10 people, with each employee competitiveness of small business vis-a- administrative responsibilities of the producing an average $148,000 of vis large entities. There is a wide final rule, but not for its compliance receipts per year (from the ‘‘annual divergence in the characteristics and provisions. This exception was receipts per employee’’ factors reported ultimate consumer of products. There is specifically added to address small above in paragraph 5) the firm’s total a fundamental difference among large, business concerns that arose from the receipts would equal $1.48 million. For fixed-wing commercial aviation, general proposed rule. The exception will apply this example combination of employees aviation, and rotorcraft. Also, the to applicants for changes to either: (1) and projects, the $19,310 one-year products that are produced by the non-turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds impact of the rule would equal 1.30 companies that are subject to the rule or less maximum weight, or (2) other percent of the $1.48 million estimated are not homogeneous. The wide range of aircraft of 6,000 pounds or less. For annual receipts of the firm. As a matter products that would be certificated changes to such products, the FAA (i.e., of context, it should be noted that FAA under this rule includes major aircraft the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) analysis of the ACOS data shows that 52 components such as wings, diversely processing the application) may make an initial determination that one or percent of applications were submitted unique avionics, and small more later airworthiness standards by firms that only submitted one subassemblies such as seat fasteners. should be part of the certification basis application in that year. Also, many of the larger companies in this field are assemblers of products that of the changed product. If the ACO makes that determination, the applicant AVERAGE IMPACT OF RULE AS A often are produced by small companies. As such, the large companies may be may submit technical analyses to PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL RECEIPTS customers rather than competitors to the convince the ACO that compliance with the later regulation(s) would be Annual No. of projects affected small companies. impractical or would not contribute Employees Business Closure Analysis 1510 materially to the level of safety of the The FAA believes that the average product. However, as discussed 10 ...... 0.26% 1.30% 2.61% impact of the rule gauged by the cost of previously in this summary, the 100 ...... 0.02% 0.12% 0.24% the rule per year relative to an affected regulatory analysis makes the 1000 ...... 0.00% 0.01% 0.02% firm’s average annual receipts is likely conservative assumption that the to be low. In cases where the potential applicant will forgo the administrative Disproportionality Analysis costs would be prohibitive, firms may costs of those technical analyses and As discussed in the cost and decide not to proceed with the intended incur the compliance costs (estimated to affordability analyses above, a higher change. This would prevent cash flow be twice that of administrative costs) proportion of total certification problems, losses, and business closure attributable to the later regulation(s). applications is received from small in the short run. However, a series of Based on the sample survey, 16.7 businesses (62.1 percent) than from decisions not to certify new products percent of all project applications would large businesses (37.9 percent). This is could affect long run business viability. qualify for this exception, and 97.4 not surprising given the relative Based on the sample of 250 applications percent of the excepted applications proportions of numbers of small and analyzed by the FAA, the agency would come from small firms (fewer large businesses. By comparison, the believes that the vast majority of than 1500 employees). In point of fact, small business proportion of expected applications would not impose high 81.6 percent of the exceptions would go administrative costs (56.6 percent) will enough compliance costs to threaten to firms with less than 100 employees. be lower than the proportion of business closure of small business. The value of applicant costs that will be averted by the small-aircraft applications expected from small Description of Alternatives businesses (62.1 percent) because a exception is detailed in the full significantly higher proportion of the Three primary alternatives were regulatory evaluation. The expected administrative exceptions under the considered in crafting this rule. The first value of all exceptions in the first year rule are projected for small business would be to take no new rulemaking of the rule (year 2000) is calculated at applicants. By comparison, the sample action and to retain the changed- $457,224. Over the 20-year study product certification process as it now period, the value of exceptions totals to 5 FAA analysis of the ACOS data shows that 52% exists. The FAA opposes this alternative $12.3 million with a 1998 present value of applications were submitted by firms that only because it would not address the of $5.7 million. Again, over 97 percent submitted one application in that year. problem whereby a series of cumulative of this relief will go to small businesses.

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36265

The small-aircraft exception provision is The Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 14 CFR Part 21 predicted to reduce the rule’s 2531–2533) prohibits agencies from Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety, Type administrative burden on small setting standards that create certification businesses by 27.6 percent from the unnecessary obstacles to the foreign level that would exist without it. The commerce of the U.S. This final rule 14 CFR Part 25 total small business cost burden imposes additional safety requirements Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety, Type (administrative and compliance costs) for aviation products that are registered certification will be 6 percent lower as a result of this in the U.S. Thus, this final rule does not exception. create any unnecessary obstacles to the Adoption of Amendments Other alternatives were considered, foreign commerce of the U.S. Accordingly, the FAA amends parts but were determined not to be Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 11, 21, and 25, Chapter 1 of Title 14, practicable. These included (1) Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: requiring applicants for changes to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates comply with the latest regulations, with Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), codified PART 11ÐGENERAL RULEMAKING no exceptions; and (2) requiring a as 2 U.S.C. 1501–1571, requires each PROCEDURES complete recertification at certain Federal agency, to the extent permitted intervals (10 years). 1. The authority citation for part 11 by law, to prepare a written assessment continues to read as follows: Compliance Assistance of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency rule that may Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40103, The FAA will issue an advisory result in expenditures by State, local, 40105, 40109, 40113, 44110, 44502, 44701– circular based on this rulemaking. The and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 44702, 44711, 46102. circular will provide examples and or by the private sector of $100 million 2. Section 11.11 is amended by guidance for determining the removing the first sentence and adding certification basis of changed or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. two sentences, in its place, to read as aeronautical products. Small businesses follows: and other applicants may follow this This rule does not meet the thresholds guidance in developing their own of the Act. Therefore, the requirements § 11.11 Docket. arguments as to the appropriate of Title II of the Act do not apply. Official FAA records relating to certification basis of their changed Executive Order 13132, Federalism rulemaking actions are maintained in products. The circular will be available current docket form in the Office of the from the FAA’s aircraft certification The FAA has analyzed this proposed Chief Counsel. These records include: offices and through the FAA website. rule under the principles and criteria of Proposals, notices of proposed The agency intends to use a variety of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We rulemaking, written material received in additional mechanisms to inform determined that this action would not response to notices, petitions for applicants and industry trade have a substantial direct effect on the rulemaking and exemptions, written associations of the rule change and to States, on the relationship between the material received in response to explain the new procedures. The FAA national Government and the States, or summaries of petitions for rulemaking will serve copies of this final rule on the distribution of power and and exemptions, petitions for rehearing document, with the Regulatory responsibilities among the various or reconsideration, petitions for Evaluation Summary, on trade levels of government. Therefore, we modification or revocation, notices associations that represent most of the determined that this notice does not denying petitions for rulemaking, small entities affected by this rule. The have federalism implications. notices granting or denying exemptions, FAA also will utilize its directorate Environmental Analysis summaries required to be published newsletters to inform industry. The under § 11.27, special conditions agency will present information on the FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA required as prescribed under §§ 21.16 or new rule at industry and FAA designee actions that may be categorically 21.101(d) of this chapter, written meetings. In addition, a training video excluded from preparation of a National material received in response to and instructional materials are being Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) published special conditions, reports of developed that will introduce the new environmental assessment or proceedings conducted under § 11.47, rule and explain the respective roles of environmental impact statement. In notices denying proposals, and final applicants and FAA personnel. These accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, rules or orders. * * * products will also be available to small appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this businesses through the aircraft rulemaking action qualifies for a PART 21ÐCERTIFICATION certification offices. categorical exclusion. PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND PARTS International Trade Impact Assessment Energy Impact The provisions of this rule promote The energy impact of the rule has 3. The authority citation for part 21 international trade for U.S. firms doing been assessed in accordance with the continues to read as follows: business in foreign countries and Energy Policy and Conservation Act Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. foreign firms doing business in the (EPCA) Pub. L. 94–163, as amended (42 106(g), 40105, 40113, 44701–44702, 44707, United States. The final rule results, U.S.C. 6362). It has been determined 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303. primarily, from a recommendation that it is not a major regulatory action 4. Section 21.19 is revised to read as harmonized with the aviation under the provisions of the EPCA. follows: authorities of Canada and Europe. Transport Canada and the Joint Aviation List of Subjects § 21.19 Changes requiring a new type certificate. Authorities have proposed similar 14 CFR Part 11 corresponding changes to regulations Each person who proposes to change governing type certification procedures Administrative practices and a product must apply for a new type for changed products. procedures reporting certificate if the Administrator finds that

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 36266 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations the proposed change in design, power, with a regulation described in paragraph application date may not precede the thrust, or weight is so extensive that a (a) of this section would not contribute date the change is approved by more substantially complete investigation of materially to the level of safety of the than the time period established under compliance with the applicable changed product or would be this paragraph (e). regulations is required. impractical. (f) For aircraft certificated under 5. Section 21.101 is revised to read as (c) An applicant for a change to an §§ 21.17(b), 21.24, 21.25, and 21.27 the follows: aircraft (other than a rotorcraft) of 6,000 airworthiness requirements applicable pounds or less maximum weight, or to to the category of the product in effect § 21.101 Designation of applicable a non-turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds on the date of the application for the regulations. or less maximum weight may show that change include each airworthiness (a) An applicant for a change to a type the changed product complies with the requirement that the Administrator certificate must show that the changed regulations incorporated by reference in finds to be appropriate for the type product complies with the the type certificate. However, if the certification of the aircraft in accordance airworthiness requirements applicable Administrator finds that the change is with those sections. to the category of the product in effect significant in an area, the Administrator on the date of the application for the may designate compliance with an 6. Section 21.115 is amended by change and with parts 34 and 36 of this amendment to the regulation revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: chapter. Exceptions are detailed in incorporated by reference in the type § 21.115 Applicable requirements. paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. certificate that applies to the change and (b) If paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3) of any regulation that the Administrator (a) Each applicant for a supplemental this section apply, an applicant may finds is directly related, unless the type certificate must show that the show that the changed product complies Administrator also finds that altered product meets applicable with an earlier amendment of a compliance with that amendment or requirements specified in § 21.101 and, regulation required by paragraph (a) of regulation would not contribute in the case of an acoustical change this section, and of any other regulation materially to the level of safety of the described in § 21.93(b), show the Administrator finds is directly changed product or would be compliance with the applicable noise related. However, the earlier amended impractical. requirements of part 36 of this chapter regulation may not precede either the (d) If the Administrator finds that the and, in the case of an emissions change corresponding regulation incorporated regulations in effect on the date of the described in § 21.93(c), show by reference in the type certificate, or application for the change do not compliance with the applicable fuel any regulation in §§ 23.2, 25.2, 27.2, or provide adequate standards with respect venting and exhaust emissions 29.2 of this chapter that is related to the to the proposed change because of a requirements of part 34 of this chapter. change. The applicant may show novel or unusual design feature, the * * * * * compliance with an earlier amendment applicant must also comply with special of a regulation for any of the following: conditions, and amendments to those PART 25ÐAIRWORTHINESS (1) A change that the Administrator special conditions, prescribed under the STANDARDS: TRANSPORT finds not to be significant. In provisions of § 21.16, to provide a level CATEGORY AIRPLANES determining whether a specific change of safety equal to that established by the is significant, the Administrator regulations in effect on the date of the 7. The authority citation for part 25 considers the change in context with all application for the change. continues to read as follows: previous relevant design changes and all (e) An application for a change to a Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– related revisions to the applicable type certificate for a transport category 44702, 44704. regulations incorporated in the type aircraft is effective for 5 years, and an 8. Section 25.2 is amended by revising certificate for the product. Changes that application for a change to any other paragraph (c) to read as follows: meet one of the following criteria are type certificate is effective for 3 years. automatically considered significant: If the change has not been approved, or § 25.2 Special retroactive requirements. (i) The general configuration or the if it is clear that it will not be approved * * * * * principles of construction are not under the time limit established under (c) Compliance with subsequent retained. this paragraph, the applicant may do revisions to the sections specified in (ii) The assumptions used for either of the following: paragraph (a) or (b) of this section may certification of the product to be (1) File a new application for a change be elected or may be required in changed do not remain valid. to the type certificate and comply with accordance with § 21.101(a) of this (2) Each area, system, component, all the provisions of paragraph (a) of this chapter. equipment, or appliance that the section applicable to an original Administrator finds is not affected by application for a change. Issued in Washington, DC, on May 31, 2000. the change. (2) File for an extension of the original (3) Each area, system, component, application and comply with the Jane F. Garvey, equipment, or appliance that is affected provisions of paragraph (a) of this Administrator. by the change, for which the section. The applicant must then select [FR Doc. 00–14052 Filed 6–2–00; 10:13 am] Administrator finds that compliance a new application date. The new BILLING CODE 4910±13±P

VerDate 112000 14:08 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR2.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR2 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part IV

Department of Agriculture Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

Small Business Innovation Research Grants Program for Fiscal Year 2001; Request for Proposals and Request for Input; Notice

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNN3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN3 36268 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Washington, D.C. 20024. Telephone: These provisions set forth procedures to (202) 401–5048. be followed when submitting grant Cooperative State Research, Written user input comments should proposals, rules governing the Education, and Extension Service be submitted by mail to: Office of evaluation of proposals and the Extramural Programs; Competitive awarding of grants, and regulations Small Business Innovation Research Research Grants and Awards relating to the post-award Grants Program for Fiscal Year 2001; Management; USDA–CSREES; Stop administration of grant projects. In Request for Proposals and Request for 2299; 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; addition, USDA Uniform Federal Input Washington, DC 20250–2299; or via e- Assistance Regulations (7 CFR part AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, mail to: RFP–[email protected]. In your 3015), Governmentwide Debarment and Education, and Extension Service, comments, please include the name of Suspension (Non-procurement) and USDA. the program and the fiscal year of the Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants) ACTION: Notice of Availability of request for proposals to which you are Program Solicitation and Request for responding. regulations (7 CFR part 3017), Proposals for Fiscal Year 2001 Small FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Restrictions on Lobbying regulations (7 Business Innovation Research Grants Charles F. Cleland; Director, SBIR CFR part 3018), and Debt Management regulations (7 CFR part 3) apply to this Program and Request for Input. Program; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service; STOP program. Copies of 7 CFR parts 3403, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 2243; 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; 3015, 3017, 3018, and 3 may be under the authority of the Small Washington, DC 20250–2243. obtained by writing or calling the office Business Innovation Development Act Telephone: (202) 401–4002. Facsimile: indicated below. of 1982, as amended (15 U.S.C. 638) and (202) 401–6070. The program solicitation, which section 630 of the Act making contains research topic descriptions and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This detailed instructions on how to apply, appropriations for Agriculture, Rural program will be administered by the Development, and Related Agencies may be obtained by writing or calling Cooperative State Research, Education, the following office: Proposal Services programs for the fiscal year ending and Extension Service. Firms with September 30, 1987, and for other Unit; Cooperative State Research, strong scientific research capabilities in Education, and Extension Service; U.S. purposes, as made applicable by section the topic areas listed below are 101(a) of Public Law Number 99–591, Department of Agriculture; STOP 2245; encouraged to participate. Objectives of 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; 100 Stat. 3341, the U.S. Department of the three-phase program include Agriculture (USDA) expects to award Washington, DC 20250–2245. stimulating technological innovation in Telephone: (202) 401–5048. Application project grants for certain areas of the private sector, strengthening the role research to science-based small business materials also may be requested via of small businesses in meeting Federal Internet by sending a message with your firms through phase I of its Small research and development needs, Business Innovation Research (SBIR) name, mailing address (not e-mail) and increasing private sector telephone number to [email protected] Grants Program. commercialization of innovations By this notice, the Cooperative State which states that you wish to receive a derived from USDA-supported research Research, Education, and Extension copy of the application materials for the and development efforts, and fostering Service (CSREES) additionally solicits FY 2001 Small Business Innovation and encouraging participation of stakeholder input from any interested Research Grants Program. The materials women-owned and socially and party regarding the Fiscal Year 2001 will then be mailed to you (not e- economically disadvantaged small SBIR Grants Program Request for mailed) as quickly as possible. Please business concerns in technological Proposals for use in the development of note that applicants who submitted innovation. the next request for proposals for this SBIR proposals for FY 2000 or who have The total amount expected to be program. recently requested placement on the list available for phase I of the SBIR for FY 2001 will automatically receive DATES: All phase I proposals must be Program in fiscal year (FY) 2001 is a copy of the FY 2001 program received at USDA on or before August approximately $5,500,000. The solicitation. 31, 2000. Proposals not received on or solicitation is being announced to allow before this date will not be considered adequate time for potential recipients to Stakeholder Input for funding. prepare and submit applications by the CSREES is soliciting comments ADDRESSES: All proposals must be closing date of August 31, 2000. The regarding this solicitation of submitted to the following address: research to be supported is in the applications from any interested party. Small Business Innovation Research following topic areas: These comments will be considered in Program; c/o Proposal Services Unit; 1. Forests and Related Resources. the development of the next request for Cooperative State Research, Education, 2. Plant Production and Protection. proposals for the program. Such and Extension Service; U.S. Department 3. Animal Production and Protection. comments will be forwarded to the of Agriculture; STOP 2245; 1400 4. Air, Water and Soils. Secretary or his designee for use in Independence Avenue, SW.; 5. Food Science and Nutrition. meeting the requirements of section Washington, DC 20250–2245. 6. Rural and Community 103(c)(2) of the Agricultural Research, Note: The address for hand-delivered Development. Extension, and Education Reform Act of proposals or proposals submitted using 7. Aquaculture. 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7613(c)(2)). Written an express mail or overnight courier 8. Industrial Applications. comments should be submitted by mail service is: Small Business Innovation 9. Marketing and Trade. to: Policy and Program Liaison Staff; Research Program; c/o Proposal Services The award of any grants under the Office of Extramural Programs; USDA- Unit; Cooperative State Research, provisions of this program is subject to CSREES; STOP 2299; 1400 Education, and Extension Service; U.S. the availability of appropriations. Independence Avenue, S.W.; Department of Agriculture; Room 303, This program is subject to the Washington, D.C. 20250–2299; or via e- Aerospace Center; 901 D Street, SW.; provisions found at 7 CFR part 3403. mail to: RFP–[email protected]. (This e-

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36269 mail address is intended only for Grants Program. Comments are Done at Washington, DC, this 30th day of receiving stakeholder input comments requested within six months from the May, 2000. regarding this RFP, and not for issuance of the solicitation of Charles W. Laughlin, requesting information or forms.) applications. Comments received after Administrator, Cooperative State Research, In your comments, please indicate that date will be considered to the Education, and Extension Service. that you are responding to the FY 2001 extent practicable. [FR Doc. 00–14237 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] Small Business Innovation Research BILLING CODE 3410±22±P

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNN3 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part V

Department of Housing and Urban Development 24 CFR Part 245 Tenant Participation in Multifamily Housing Projects; Final Rule

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 36272 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND reasonable tenant organizing activities attend specific meetings to discuss URBAN DEVELOPMENT that the owner of a covered multifamily particular issues. housing project must allow, and set The final rule has made a change to 24 CFR Part 245 forth extremely detailed requirements the provisions regarding non-tenants [Docket No. FR±4403±F±02] for establishing, operating, and who seek to organize the tenants at a structuring a tenant organization. In complex, in order to conform this rule RIN 2502±AH32 addition, the proposed rule established to the requirements of the mark-to- policies regarding outside tenant market program. Specifically, persons Tenant Participation in Multifamily organizers, the establishment of more who have received HUD grants to Housing Projects than one tenant organization, and the inform tenants regarding mark-to- AGENCY: Office of the Assistant right of tenants to replace the leadership market, and who are acting pursuant to Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing of existing tenant organizations. A the terms of such grant, may enter the Commissioner, HUD. discussion of the specific provisions is property and speak to tenants without ACTION: Final rule. found in the preamble of the proposed being accompanied. rule at 64 FR 32782–32783 (June 17, In response to comments regarding SUMMARY: This rule enhances and 1999). tenants with disabilities, the rule has expands the rights of tenants in HUD- II. This Final Rule been slightly revised to take into insured and assisted housing to organize account the fact that, if a building, for and participate in project operation. This final rule adopts certain of the whatever reason, does not have or has Pursuant to statutory changes enacted in provisions of the proposed rule, while not been retrofitted with accessible 1998, the rule expands the assistance adding certain provisions and common areas, the tenant organization programs in which tenants have rights eliminating others in response to public may have to work with management to to organize. The rule also defines comments. Specifically, this final rule find a cooperative solution so that general characteristics of a legitimate significantly revises proposed § 245.110, disabled tenants may attend. tenant organization, such as regularity and eliminates proposed §§ 245.115— Finally, numerous commenters stated of meeting and democratic organization, 245.135 (this final rule renumbers that HUD should include an while leaving the specific organizational proposed §§ 245.140–160 as enforcement scheme. The rule adds a structures and procedures to local §§ 245.115—245.135). A large number of new § 245.135 to clarify that the decisionmaking by the tenants commenters stated that these sections, administrative enforcement mechanisms themselves. The rule outlines examples which proposed specific requirements in 24 CFR part 24 apply. of appropriate tenant organization for the structure, voting procedures, and The public comment period on this activities that housing owners and governing boards of tenant proposed rule closed on August 16, managers must allow, and requires that organizations, tended to be overly 1999. HUD received 73 comments from tenants have input on certain prescriptive and that tenants should be a wide variety of commenters, including management decisions. The rule sets allowed to decide these matters for individual tenants, tenant organizations, parameters as well for the conditions themselves based on their particular public housing authorities, legal aid situations and the best arrangements for under which tenant organizers may organizations, public interest advocacy their housing complexes. While HUD operate. Finally, in response to public groups, building industry would like tenant organizations to move comments, the rule clarifies that representatives, multifamily toward some sort of formal structures, existing administrative enforcement management representatives, and one HUD has decided to adopt this mechanisms apply. member of Congress. It should be noted ‘‘grassroots’’ approach in arriving at that a number of commenters were DATES: Effective Date: July 7, 2000. those structures. Thus, rather than organizations and associations whose FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: defining in detail what constitutes a comments were supported by a large Willie Spearmon, Director, Office of properly established tenant number of other commenters. Because Housing Assistance and Grant organization, the final rule establishes the commenters commented on a wide Administration, U.S. Department of basic general principles for legitimate variety of topics related to the proposed Housing and Urban Development, 451 tenant organizations. For similar rule, the following summary groups the Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC reasons, the final rule eliminates comments by subject. 20410–8000; telephone (202) 708–3000 proposed § 245.160, related to (this is not a toll-free number). Hearing- additional tenant organizations and III. Summary of Public Comments or speech-impaired individuals may recall elections. access this number via TTY by calling The final rule revises the purpose 1. General Comments the toll-free Federal Information Relay statement in § 245.100 to more fully Comment: The applicability of the Service at (800) 877–8339. implement the purpose of the statute. In rule should be curtailed. Tenant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: addition, the revision responds to participation in rental housing is not commenters who noted that the essential to the operation of housing, I. The June 17, 1999 Proposed Rule proposed language defined the purpose and the final rule should not provide The proposed rule of June 17, 1999 of tenant organizations too narrowly. tenants with day to day input into (see 64 FR 32782) amended the tenant One of the basic principles is that a management decisions. participation rules in 24 CFR part 245. tenant organization should be Nonprofit elderly projects should be Implementing the statutory mandate of independent of management. In order to excluded from the rule. section 599 of the Public Housing insure the independence of tenant Response. The rule implements a Reform Act, Pub. L. 105–276 (approved organizations from owners and statutory requirement that project October 21, 1998), codified at 12 U.S.C. managers, the final rule revises owners not impede the reasonable 1715z–1b, the proposed rule expanded proposed § 245.140 (now § 245.115) to efforts of tenants to organize and the categories of multifamily housing clarify that management representatives represent their members (see 12 U.S.C. projects covered by part 245. The may not attend organization meetings 1715z–1b(b)(4)). In addition, elderly proposed rule sought to clarify the unless invited by the organization to projects are included in the tenant

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36273 management provisions of the statute, Comment: Notices to tenants. The access, you can access HUD notices and and hence cannot be excluded from the rule should directly implement the rules. From the HUD home page - (http:/ rule. Therefore, HUD has made no policies regarding tenant organizations /www.hud.gov) select ‘‘Reading Room’’ change to the rule as a result of these contained in the HUD publication from the left hand side of the HUD comments. entitled ‘‘Tenants’ Rights and home page. On the next screen, select Comments: Certain technical changes Responsibilities.’’ ‘‘Bookshelf 12: Legal Information.’’ On should be made. The term ‘‘resident’’ Owners and managers should be the next screen, scroll down to ‘‘HUD should be used in place of ‘‘tenant.’’ required to issue to tenants a notice Handbooks, Regulations and Notices.’’ The final rule should include a regarding tenants’ rights to organize. Click on that link. On the next page, statement that it preempts local law Once a tenant organization has been click on ‘‘Search HUDCLIPS databases.’’ with respect to tenant organization, formed at a particular housing complex, Alternatively, you can go directly to because owners may claim that state all local notices regarding building code HUDCLIPS at http://www.hudclips.org. laws allow them to bar one or more violations and all Federal notices HUDCLIPS provides tools to search or protected activities. concerning programmatic regulations browse through various HUD materials, The regulations should be made should be formally transmitted to the including Federal Register publications, consistent with the public housing tenant organization. handbooks and notices (please keep in tenant participation regulations at 24 Response. Regarding implementation mind that these instructions are current CFR part 964. of the policies concerning tenant as of this date, and WWW pages may organizations in the HUD publication Response. Regarding the use of the change from time to time). (which is entitled ‘‘Resident Rights and term ‘‘tenant,’’ this is the appropriate Responsibilities’’), the publication 2. Comments on Section 245.10, the term based on the language in the reiterates in a user-friendly manner the Applicability of Part 245 statute, which extends the right to policies relating to tenant organizations Comment: Exemption from coverage organize to ‘‘tenants’’ (see section 202(a) that are incorporated in the rule itself. should be omitted. The exception in of the Housing and Community Therefore, it is not necessary to § 245.10(a)(3), which exempts from the Development Amendments of 1978, 12 separately implement the policies stated coverage of ‘‘Subpart B ‘‘ Tenant U.S.C. 1715z–1b(a)). in the brochure as a rule. Organizations’’ all State or local housing Regarding the suggestion that the Regarding the suggestion that project finance agency projects receiving regulation contain an explicit statement owners be required to notify tenants of assistance under section 236 of the that it preempts State law, HUD has their rights to organize, however, HUD National Housing Act (see 12 U.S.C. concluded that regulatory preemption is does plan to require affected property 1715z–1) but without FHA-insured or not necessary for HUD to fully owners and managers to provide HUD-held mortgages, should be implement the tenant participation information on tenants’ rights to tenants dropped. statute. and tenant organizations through Response: HUD is currently Regarding consistency with the public changes to the model lease, Use investigating whether the exclusion of housing regulations, there are important Agreement and Regulatory Agreement. the State-financed Section 236 projects differences between public housing and Regarding the formal transmission to is appropriate, and is strongly housing with mortgages insured or tenant organizations of notices of local considering proposing a rule that would assisted under other HUD programs. In building code violations and all Federal reverse this exclusion. However, that public housing, the operation of the notices regarding new program change will have to be part of a separate housing itself is much more pervasively regulations, while HUD is sympathetic rulemaking, as notice of coverage of regulated than the private assisted to the need for information, HUD does State-financed section 236 projects was housing that this regulation affects. The not believe that the best way to not given in the proposed rule. tenant participation guidelines in this accomplish this goal is through a Comment: ‘‘Enhanced’’ vouchers rule are designed to fit the generally applicable regulation. Local should not be included. Projects characteristics of assisted housing code violations are a matter governed by receiving enhanced vouchers should not programs other than public housing. local law, and individual tenant be included in the rule because doing so For these reasons, HUD has not made organizations can negotiate information would segregate tenants paying market any changes to this rule as a result of sharing with management on this rent from those receiving rental these comments. subject, in accordance with procedures assistance, and also because it may deter Comment: Sensitivity training is and policies for their area. Certainly, owners from accepting enhanced necessary. HUD should provide HUD expects assisted housing owners to vouchers. sensitivity training in tenants’ rights to comply with HUD’s Uniform Physical Some commenters questioned how HUD field office staff and property Conditions Standards as set forth in the rule could be enforced as to owners and management. regulations. enhanced vouchers in the absence of a Response. Any sensitivity issues will As to new program regulations, such regulatory agreement with HUD. be addressed via handbook revisions, regulations are published in the Federal Other commenters took a contrary rather than implementing sensitivity Register, which is publicly accessible view and asserted that the rule should training as part of this rule. (see HUD World Wide Web site clearly state that it applies to housing Comment: Cooperation by HUD field instructions in the following paragraph). with ‘‘enhanced’’ or ‘‘preservation’’ offices is necessary. HUD’s Washington To the extent that HUD sends notices to vouchers. Headquarters must enforce cooperation assisted housing providers regarding Response. Section 599 of the Public from local HUD offices, since not all HUD policies, these notices are also Housing Reform Act, Pub. L. 105–276 local HUD offices support tenant available from HUD’s World Wide Web (approved October 21, 1998) expressly organization. site or by calling the local HUD field includes in the coverage of section 202 Response. All HUD offices will be office or HUD’s Multifamily Housing ‘‘* * * a project which receives * * * required to comply with this regulation. Clearinghouse (800–685–8470). enhanced vouchers under the Low- No further change in this regulation is Accessing HUD’s World Wide Web: if Income Housing Preservation and required as a result of this comment. you have a computer with Internet Resident Homeownership Act of 1990,

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 36274 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations the provisions of the Emergency Low above. Therefore, HUD agrees that the Response. HUD believes that the rule Income Housing Preservation Act of purpose of addressing ‘‘terms and as crafted strikes the right balance 1987, or the Multifamily Assisted conditions of tenancy’’ should be between the rights of tenants and project Housing Reform and Affordability Act revised. HUD has revised § 245.100 to owners and managers. The language in of 1997.’’ Section 245.10(a)(5) read: ‘‘The tenants of a multifamily the preamble does nothing more than implements this express legal housing project covered under § 245.10 recognize, in the context of a discussion requirement. Section 538 of the FY 2000 have the right to establish and operate of the impact of the rule on small Department of Veteran’s Affairs and a tenant organization for the purpose of business, that the rule does not grant Housing and Urban Development and addressing issues related to their living tenant organizations the right to force Independent Agencies Appropriations environment, which includes the terms management to alter its proposals. On Act (Pub. L. 106–74, approved October and conditions of their tenancy as well the other hand, the rule requires 20, 1999), unified the various enhanced as activities related to housing and management ‘‘to give reasonable voucher authorities. This section is community development.’’ consideration’’ to concerns raised by codified at 42 U.S.C. 1437f(t). Regarding the suggestion that the rule tenant organizations and requires As to the issue of enforcement, should be as broad as the tenants’ First multifamily housing owners to allow payments of the non-tenant portion of Amendment right to organize for any tenants to formulate responses to rent on enhanced vouchers are made to purpose, HUD strongly supports the owners’ requests for rent increases, the owner by the PHA via a Housing First Amendment rights of all assisted partial payment of insurance claims, Assistance Payment contract. Such a housing tenants, and expects assisted reduction in tenant utility allowances, contract is a lower-tier covered housing owners and managers to respect and other matters stated in transaction for the purposes of the those rights. This statute and rule, § 245.115(a)(9). HUD fully expects enforcement mechanisms at 24 CFR part however, are specifically addressed to owners to consider the comments and 24, which include Limited Denials of tenant organizing for the purpose of input of tenant organizations. Since Participation, Suspension and enhancing the tenants’’ living HUD believes that the existing Debarment. Therefore, the enforceability environment. regulatory language strikes the of this rule in the case of enhanced Comment: Clarify independence from appropriate balance, HUD has adopted vouchers is clear. owners. Tenants have the right to no change as a result of this comment. Comment: Definition of ‘‘project.’’. operate tenant organizations Comment: Rights of individual The final rule should include a independently of the owner and the tenants. The proposed rule will definition of the term ‘‘project’’ to make owner’s agents. To accomplish this, the negatively affect the rights of individual clear that an entire development or final rule should add a provision that tenants outside of organizations. The complex is encompassed in the rule. permits a tenant organization to exclude rule implies that the owner is not Response. The term ‘‘project’’ is from its governing board, its required to give consideration to the generally understood. For example, see membership, and its meetings any concerns of individual tenants. the definition of project under HUD’s employee or agent of the owner, The rule should clarify that it does part 200 regulations at 24 CFR 200.3. A including one who is a tenant. not supersede subparts D and E. further definition of ‘‘project’’ for part Response. HUD agrees that tenant Response. HUD has carefully 245 is not required. organizations should be independent of reviewed the rule, and determined that owners and management. Therefore, nothing in the rule purports to deprive 3. Comments on Section 245.100, the this final rule revises § 245.110 to state individual tenants of any existing legal Right of Tenants To Organize in part that a legitimate tenant rights, or supersede subparts D and E Comment: Purpose clause is too organization ‘‘meets regularly, operates (indeed, the rule only purports to revise narrow. The proposed purpose for democratically, is representative of all a portion of subpart A, and subpart B). organizing and operating a tenant residents in the development, and is Therefore, HUD concludes that no organization, that is, ‘‘for the purpose of completely independent of owners, further clarification of the regulation is addressing the terms and conditions of management, and their representatives.’’ needed. their tenancy,’’ is too narrow. Tenant The final rule also specifies that, in 5. Section 245.110, ‘‘Properly organizations can be involved in a order to preserve independence, tenant Established’’ Tenant Organization; variety of community activities, such as organization meetings should take place Cross-References to Sections 245.115 related to job training, neighborhood without the presence of management (Constitution or By-Laws); 245.120 improvements, Crime Watch, Meals on representatives, unless the organization (Governing Board); 245.125 (Qualified Wheels, and other activities. has invited them to specific meetings to Voting Member); 245.130 (Number of This section should be broadly discuss specific issues. phrased to protect tenants’ First Votes); 245.135 (Election Notices) Amendment right to organize for any 4. Section 245.105, Recognition of Comments: The proposed rule micro- lawful purpose. Tenant Organizations manages the structure of tenant Response. The purpose of the Comment: Preamble language organizations. A ‘‘properly established’’ underlying legislation includes a undercuts rule. One commenter stated tenant organization should not be recognition of the benefits of tenant that language in the preamble that states defined in terms of its compliance with participation in ‘‘creating a suitable that ‘‘[w]hile HUD encourages owners to proposed § 245.110 and the other living environment in multifamily take these responses into consideration, particular proposed organizational housing projects’’ (see 12 U.S.C. 1715z- the proposed rule would not require requirements that section cross- 1b(a)). Indeed, as commenters point out, that owners modify or abandon their referenced, but rather, HUD should use tenant organizations have been involved proposals based on the the definition in its Management Agent in a variety of activities that enhance recommendations made by the tenant Handbook 4381.5 REV–2, which states their living environment beyond merely organization’’ weakens the assumption that legitimate tenant organizations are the terms and conditions of their that tenant opinions will be given any groups that meet regularly, operate tenancy, including the examples reasonable consideration, and calls into democratically, are representative of all mentioned by the commenters listed question the purpose of the rule. residents in the development, and are

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36275 independent of non-resident owners Response. As stated above, given the CFR 964.115(c), the public housing and management agents. In addition, a multiplicity of different types of tenant resident council requirements. legitimate tenant organization should be organizations and the large number of Response. The requirements of the completely independent of management comments opposed to HUD imposing public housing program are not and the owner. specific organizational requirements by necessarily appropriate for other The ‘‘properly established’’ concept as regulation, HUD has revised the rule to assisted housing, which is privately proposed undermines the right of require that tenant organizations, inter owned and operated. Furthermore, tenants to establish and operate tenant alia, operate democratically and considering the numerous comments organizations. represent all the residents. Thus, tenant that HUD received that the proposed The following proposed sections organizations will have flexibility to set rule was overly prescriptive as to the represent inappropriate and their own election procedures within nature of tenant organizations, HUD has unnecessary intrusions into the rights of those guidelines. decided to allow the tenants themselves tenants to determine the structure of to decide this issue rather than closely their organizations: §§ 245.115(b), 7. Section 245.120, Governing Board regulating this area. 115(c); 245.120(a)(2), 120(b)(2), 120(c); Comment: Independence from 9. Section 245.130, Number of Votes 125; 130; and 135. owners. The final rule should clarify Proposed §§ 245.110–245.135 may be that owners and management employees Comment: There should be more than appropriate in the public housing may not run for elected office or serve one vote per unit. Commenters stated context, but for privately owned on a tenant organization’s board of that there should be one vote per housing, they are unreasonable, directors. resident rather than one vote per unit. unworkable, unduly burdensome, and Response. The provision in § 245.110 One suggestion was that each member of serve no useful purpose. HUD should that tenant organizations are completely a tenant family whose income is adopt the definition from the independent of owners, management counted toward rent should be allowed Management Agent Handbook. and their representatives implies that to vote. Other commenters stated that The proposed requirements would management personnel may not serve any resident who is at least 18 years of interfere with existing functional tenant on a tenant organization’s board of age and whose name appears on the unit organizations. Such organizations directors or as officers, and adequately lease should be allowed to vote, as in should be allowed to continue operating addresses this issue. public housing. as they have. Response. Considering the numerous A tenant organization’s legitimacy is Comment: Procedures for electing governing board. The governing board comments that HUD received that the not derived from written by-laws, proposed rule was overly prescriptive as staggered terms, and term limits. Rather, should be democratically elected by qualified voting members. to the structure and procedures of it is derived from the respect tenants tenant organizations, HUD has decided accord the organization. The The issue of staggered terms (see proposed § 245.120(a)(2)) should be to allow the tenants themselves to organizational proposals are not based decide this issue. on reality and should be dropped. decided by the tenant organization. Response. While HUD believes that The proposed three year term limit for 10. Section 245.135, Election Notices tenant organizations should have formal members of the governing board should Comment: 30 day notice. This section organizational structures, HUD be removed because it will undermine should require at least thirty days’ recognizes that, given the wide variety the effectiveness of tenant organizations notice of nominations, as does 24 CFR of possible structures that tenant by depriving them of their best leaders 964.115(c), relating to public housing organizations could use, depending on after three years. resident councils. their particular needs and membership, The requirement that governing board Response. Considering this comment it is appropriate to allow tenants to members be in compliance with their along with other comments stating that determine their organizations’ structures leases should be dropped. First, there HUD’s proposals, including this section, and procedures based on their needs. are tenant confidentiality concerns. were too prescriptive in view of the Therefore, HUD has accepted the Secondly, the requirement gives the varying needs of different tenant suggestion of a number of commenters owner too much control over the organizations, HUD has eliminated to incorporate the guidance for tenant membership of the governing board. The proposed § 245.135. Tenant organizations from the Management appropriate sanction for lease organizations can establish their own Agent Handbook in place of the detailed noncompliance is eviction. procedures within the parameters of organizational requirements of proposed Response. HUD agrees not to include democratic operation. §§ 245.110–245.135. Tenant the governing board regulations in the 11. 24 CFR 245.140, Protected Activities organizations will be able to establish final rule, but rather, in accordance with their procedures and structures within the approach taken regarding other Comment: Prior permission not those basic requirements of meeting portions of the rule, to allow tenant required. The final rule should include regularly, being democratically organizations to select their own additional language that makes it clear operated, representing all the residents organizational structures. Any that no prior notice to or permission of the development, and being governing boards would be covered by from owners and managers of a project completely independent of owners and the overall requirements that the tenant is needed prior to the tenant management and their representatives. organization must operate organization undertaking the activities democratically and be representative of permitted by this section. 6. Section 245.115, Constitution or By- the residents. Response. Upon consideration of this Laws comment, HUD agrees that a 8. Section 245.125, Qualified Voting Comment: Elections every three years. management requirement of prior Member The rule should require that elections be permission before conducting activities held at least every three years. The rule Comment: Conformance with public permitted by the regulation could should require that an independent housing requirements. This section constitute a significant impediment to third party oversee the elections. should be revised to conform with 24 tenants’ enjoyment of the right to

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 36276 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations organize and to the organization’s § 245.140(a)). The purpose of a tenant Response. ‘‘Reasonableness’’ is a independence, contrary to the purpose organization is to address matters common, generally understood legal of the underlying statute. Therefore, relating to the tenants’ living principle, which is also used in the HUD has revised the final rule to clarify environment. Activities outside of those underlying statute. The list of activities this point. However, HUD believes that parameters are not protected by this rule in proposed § 245.140(a) (§ 245.115(a) in it is good practice for tenant (although there may be other general this final rule) provides examples of the organizations to communicate with legal protections, such as broader First sorts of activities that might be management about their activities, and Amendment rights). For this reason, considered ‘‘reasonable.’’ Since the doing so supports a spirit of partnership HUD does not adopt the suggestion to activities of tenant organizations do, in in maintaining a positive living eliminate leaflets and posting from the fact, have to be reasonable, HUD has environment. tenant organizations’ permitted made no changes to the rule as a result Comment: Certain permitted tenant activities. of this comment. activities should be omitted. HUD Comment: Additional facilities. One Comment: Support for proposed should remove from the list of permitted commenter asked whether the rule § 245.140. Proposed § 245.140 should activities certain matters under would require the installation of not be ‘‘watered down.’’ § 245.140(a)(9) (§ 245.115(a)(9) in this additional facilities, such as a bulletin Response: HUD is not making any final rule), including partial payment of board if the housing complex had none. change to § 245.140 that would ‘‘water claims; conversion from project-based Response. The rule does not require it down.’’ paid utilities to tenant paid utilities; housing complexes to add additional Comment: There should be specific converting residential units to non- facilities. instructions regarding leaflets. Placing residential use, cooperative housing, or Comment: The list of permitted leaflets at tenants’ doors creates a condominiums; major capital activities is not exhaustive. The rule potential safety hazard. The rule should improvements; and prepayment of should make clear that the list of require that leaflets either be placed loans. Including these items in the list permitted activities in proposed under doors, attached to doors, or may give a false impression that an § 245.140(a) is not exhaustive. placed in an orderly fashion in a public owner must do what the tenant Response. Section 245.115(b) location. organization recommends. These (proposed as § 245.140(b)) makes Response. HUD has considered this decisions are best determined by sufficiently clear that the list is not comment, but does not believe that a individuals who have specialized exhaustive. rule concerned with general policies training, not tenants. Comment: Right of tenants to conduct regarding tenant organizations is the Requiring an owner to receive tenant door to door contact. The right of appropriate venue for instructions on comments on proposed capital tenants to contact other tenants door to distributing leaflets. If HUD were to improvements is unreasonable and door should not be limited to an initial provide any such guidance, it would unwarranted. Similarly, it is survey to solicit interest (see proposed most likely be in the form of handbook inappropriate for tenants to be involved § 245.140(a)(5)). revisions or informational brochures. in property financing decisions, such as Response. While the list in proposed 12. Section 245.145, Meeting Space prepayment of loans. § 245.140(a) does not purport to be Response. The commenters’ concern exhaustive, HUD agrees, for the sake of Comment: The rule should clarify that that the list of examples of permitted improved clarity, to amend proposed tenants have a right to meet without activities may give a false impression § 245.140(a)(5) as suggested (see representatives of owners and that owners have to comply with tenant § 245.115(a)(5) of this final rule). In management. A new paragraph should recommendations is not supported by accordance with the comment below be added to this section clarifying this the text of the rule, which only requires regarding use of the word ‘‘solicit,’’ principle and further stating that tenants that owners and their agents give HUD is substituting other language for who are not management ‘‘reasonable consideration’’ to concerns that term in this section as well. representatives should have the option that tenant organizations raise. Comment: Remove the term ‘‘solicit’’ to exclude tenants who are management Therefore, HUD does not believe that from the rule. Use of the term ‘‘solicit’’ representatives from their meetings. the commenters’ fears in this regard inaccurately describes the work done by Response. The final rule provides that warrant a revision of the proposed rule. tenant organizers and will support legitimate tenant organizations are Furthermore, the list of areas on which attempts by management to prevent ‘‘completely independent of owners, tenant organizations may comment can tenant organizers from conducting management, and their representatives’’ affect the living conditions of tenants. legitimate outreach activities. (see § 245.110). In order to preserve this Thus, permitting tenant comment in Response. HUD agrees that the term independence, while organizations can these areas is both reasonable and ‘‘solicit’’ has negative connotations certainly choose to invite management within the parameters of the underlying unrelated to tenant organizing, and will representatives to attend specific statute. use other terms in the final rule. meetings on specific issues, as a general Comment: Permitting leaflets will Comment: The term ‘‘reasonable’’ practice, absent such invitation, permit offensive materials. Giving should be removed from proposed meetings should be without the blanket protection to leaflet and post § 245.140(b). Section 245.140(b) presence of management representatives information on bulletin boards would provides that tenant organizations may or agents. This rule makes a clarifying strip the owners of the ability to control conduct other ‘‘reasonable’’ activities change to § 245.115(a)(8) (redesignated offensive materials, particularly in related to the establishment or operation from proposed § 245.140(a)(8)). culturally diverse environments. of a tenant organization. Owners could Comment: Persons with disabilities. Response. Tenant activities, including use this language to attempt to The rule should require tenant distributing leaflets and posting on intimidate tenants or tenant organizers organizations only to make ‘‘reasonable bulletin boards, are protected by this by claiming they are not acting efforts’’ to make their meetings rule insofar as they are ‘‘related to the ‘‘reasonably.’’ Alternatively, the rule accessible to persons with disabilities. establishment or operation of a tenant could alter the wording to ‘‘activities Under the proposed rule, a tenant organization’’ (see proposed reasonably related * * *’’. organization may be effectively

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36277 prohibited from holding meetings if the 13. Section 245.150, Tenant Organizers owner does not have such a policy. One only reasonable place to hold a meeting Comment: Independence from comment inquires who will make the is in a project’s community room and owners. The rule should make clear that determination of whether the owner has the room is inaccessible to persons with tenant organizers cannot be affiliated such a policy. A number of comments disabilities. with current or prospective owners or stated that the policy should be required Response. Under section 804(f)(3)(C) management. to be in writing to avoid disputes. Response. In order to avoid disputes of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of Response. In order to further the and selective enforcement of anti- 1988, 42 U.S.C. 3604(f)(3)(C), intent of the rule that tenant canvassing rules, HUD has revised the multifamily dwellings built for initial organizations be independent from proposed regulation to require that occupancy after March 13, 1991 are owners and management, HUD has policies be in writing, in addition to generally required to have accessible revised proposed § 245.150 as being consistently enforced as the common areas. In addition, section 504 suggested. That section is renumbered proposed rule stated. HUD hopes that of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 as § 245.125 in this final rule. these criteria are sufficiently objective U.S.C. 794, prohibits discrimination Comment: Tenant organizers should so as to avoid most disputes, but in the against disabled individuals by be held to standards. Tenant organizers event disputes arise the HUD field office recipients of federal financial assistance, should be held to the same standards as which includes housing complexes can assist in resolving the issue. agents and owners. Outside organizers Comment: New policies. The final receiving HUD assistance through the should be required to disclose Section 8 and other programs. Pursuant rule should clarify that owners and background qualifications, experience management may not initiate a new to these legal requirements, HUD and potential conflicts of interest. expects that many of the complexes at policy against contacting residents door The final rule should establish to door in response to, or to prevent which tenant organizations have been or qualifications for non-resident tenant will be formed under this regulation tenant organizing. organizers, who otherwise could Response. Under the system set forth would have accessible common areas, potentially serve as agents for outside in the rule, a policy against door to door including meeting rooms. For those influences with no stake in the ultimate canvassing would not serve to prevent complexes which do not have accessible impact on the tenant community. tenant organizing. Rather, it would common areas, because, for example, Response. HUD believes that the simply require non-resident tenant they predate the legal requirement to proposed disclosures and requirements organizers to be accompanied by a have them and have not been retrofitted, would overly restrict tenant organizing tenant. Furthermore, the rule requires HUD expects tenant organizations and activity. It should be up to the tenants the policy to be both ‘‘consistently management to work together to find a themselves to assess whether to speak to enforced’’ and ‘‘written.’’ A written solution so that all tenants who wish to tenant organizers and make their own policy solely applied against tenant do so may participate in organizational judgments about the organizers’ organizers and not other door to door meetings. presentation and potential agenda. canvassers would not meet the Comment: Owners should not be Comment: Advance notification. standards of the rule for a consistently allowed to charge fees for meeting Owners should be notified in advance enforced policy. Also, it is contrary to space. Through the charging of fees, when a non-resident tenant organizer law and regulation for an owner to deposits or amounts to cover additional plans to visit a property, and be impede the reasonable efforts of tenants insurance, owners could effectively permitted to have a representative to organize. HUD can enforce this deny tenants the right to use community monitor the organizer while he or she regulation by proceedings under 24 CFR rooms. As an alternative, the regulation conducts organizing activities. part 24, including Limited Denials of could provide that the costs of Response. While HUD believes it is Participation, suspension, and providing meeting space are eligible good practice for tenants to provide debarment. Thus, HUD believes there project expenses. information to owners regarding their are sufficient protections in the rule and Response. The proposed rule simply organizing activities, the intent of this statute to guard against contrived or bad continues HUD’s current policy of regulation is to ensure that tenant faith uses of anti-canvassing policies. allowing reasonable, customary and organizations are independent from Comment: There should be no usual fees, as approved by HUD, that owners and management. Thus, for restrictions on tenant organizers. owners would normally charge for the example, § 245.115 (proposed § 245.140) Tenants should not be required to use of such facilities. Under this does not require permission from accompany non-tenant organizers approach, owners may not charge fees owners to conduct organizing activities. because tenants are often not willing to for tenant organizations to use meeting Requiring advance notice of a non- take on this role because of fears of space where they do not charge such resident tenant organizer would make retaliation by management. fees for other uses of the space, and they such independence more difficult and The rule requiring that organizers be may not single out tenant groups for could have the effect of impeding accompanied by a tenant when higher fees. HUD believes that this organizational efforts, contrary to canvassing door to door if management approach reasonably balances the tenant section 202(b)(4) of the Housing and has a consistently enforced policy organizations’ needs against the owner’s Community Development Amendments against canvassing will likely lead to a costs. of 1978, 12 U.S.C. 1715z-1b. Therefore, proliferation of non-solicitation policies. The alternative suggestion of charging HUD has adopted no change to the rule It will be difficult to prove if the the fees to project costs does not as a result of this comment. policies have been consistently necessarily resolve the issue of owner’s Comment: Owner’s policies regarding enforced. There is a long tradition in costs. While some owners may be door to door canvassing. With respect to this country of door to door outreach of willing to waive fees altogether and use non-resident tenant organizers, the this kind in buildings that are not their project accounts to defray the proposed rule differentiates between a subsidized by the Federal government. costs, others may not be in a financial situation where the owner has a Supreme Court decisions have position to do so because of other costs ‘‘consistently enforced’’ policy against supported the right of organizers to go of operating the project. door to door canvassing, and where the door to door.

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 36278 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

The final rule should provide that a tenant to ensure that at least one From management’s perspective, organizers may contact tenants door to tenant has invited the organizer onto the multiple tenant organizations would be door if either accompanied by a resident property. However, HUD also agrees burdensome for management to or acting at the request of one. that the activities of certain grant accommodate. From the tenants’ It would be preferable to omit any recipients whose purpose is to provide perspective, they would be better served limitation on non-resident tenant education and outreach to tenants by a single, strong organization that a organizers from the rule. However, if concerning restructuring of assistance multitude of fragmented organizations. retained, § 245.150(c) should be revised under the mark-to-market program, At a minimum, the rule should provide as follows: should not be so conditioned. HUD has that a tenant organization must § 245.150(c)(1): ‘‘If a multifamily therefore made a change to the proposed represent at least 10% of all a project’s project covered under § 245.10 has a rule at § 245.150(c), codified in this final residents, and not less than five consistently enforced pre-existing, rule as § 245.125(c). residents in any case. written policy against contacting Comment: Section 245.150(c) violates Allowing multiple tenant residents door-to-door that is not the First Amendment. This section will organizations could encourage otherwise prohibited by law, then a have a chilling effect on tenants’ rights confusion and dissension among tenants non-tenant tenant organizer conducting of association, and as such is when a minority of tenants decide to door-to-door contact while on any unconstitutional under Laird v. Tatum, form their own organization. property or building of the project may 408 U.S. 1, 11 (1972). Therefore, the Allowing additional tenant do so if either accompanied by or acting section should be omitted entirely. organizations would create schisms, at the request of a tenant of the Response. The proposed regulation issue-based factions, and animosity property.’’ permitting outside organizers to canvass among tenants and effectively destroy § 245.150(c)(2): Change the word on private property despite non- the effectiveness of the rule, and ‘‘solicitation’’ to ‘‘door-to-door contact.’’ soliciting policies serves to protect provide no means to establish an § 245.150(c)(3): ‘‘Where a pre-existing, tenants’ organizational rights as well as effective consensus among tenants in written policy against contacting residents the property interests of owners. HUD representing issues to management. door-to-door does not exist as of the date of disagrees that this regulatory Response. The final rule omits the publication of these regulations, an owner or proposed language explicitly providing management agent may not initiate a new accommodation violates the holding of Laird v. Tatum or any case law for multiple tenant organizations, in policy against contacting residents door-to- favor of the general definition in door in response to or to prevent tenant concerning First Amendment rights that organization activities.’’ applies in this situation. § 245.110. HUD believes that this § 245.150(c)(4): ‘‘The limitation on door-to- general definition supplies sufficient door contact by non-tenant tenant organizers 14. Section 245.155, Re-solicitation guidance. Comment: Management control. The in paragraph (c)(1) shall not be construed to Comment: Proposed § 245.155 should prohibit or limit any other protected rule should not permit the creation of a be omitted from rule. The section is not activities by non-tenant tenant organizers second organization under management necessary, because any tenant can enumerated in § 245.140 or to prohibit or control. limit the right of tenant of the covered project simply refuse to speak to tenant Response. HUD believes that the to contact other residents door-to-door or organizers and choose not to attend provision for complete independence of otherwise assert their rights under meetings of the tenant organization. On § 245.140.’’ the tenant organization in § 245.110 the other hand, the section can be used adequately addresses this concern. § 245.150(c)(5): ‘‘Where a pre-existing, by owners to keep tenant organizers written policy against contacting residents Comment: Proposed section door-to-door already exists, a non-tenant from the property. Owners can seek out 245.160(b), replacement of leadership. tenant organizer may conduct an initial door- dissenters as a means to undermine The final rule should only require to-door contact without an invitation by a legitimate tenant organizations. owners to recognize the right of tenants resident.’’ Response. HUD has considered this to replace their leadership if the § 245.150(c)(6:) ‘‘Non-tenant tenant comment and believes that the rule replacement is done according to the organizers funded through HUD’s Outreach should respect the wishes of tenants, and Training Grant or Intermediary written procedures contained in the having been made aware of their rights, tenant organizations’ by-laws, that meet Technical Assistant Grant program or not to be repeatedly solicited. Since the through VISTA Volunteer positions provided the standards of proposed § 245.115. by the Corporation for National Service right not to be re-solicited only applies Response. HUD also received (CNS) and funded by HUD through a contract to ‘‘a tenant,’’ that is, on an individual numerous comments generally on with CNS to provide outreach and training basis, HUD does not believe proposed §§ 245.110—245.135, to the assistance to residents of covered projects management can use this section as a effect that these sections sought to may conduct initial or on-going door-to-door mechanism to keep tenant organizers excessively micro-manage tenant contact with residents without an invitation from talking to tenants who have not organizations, and would eliminate or by a resident.’’ asserted this right. Proposed § 245.155 is hamper many effective organizations Response. HUD believes that the issue renumbered as § 245.130 in this final that follow different procedures. of non-resident tenant organizers rule. Therefore, HUD has decided to allow requires balancing of an owner’s 15. Section 245.160, Additional Tenant tenants to choose their organizational property rights with tenants’ right to Organizations procedures and structures within the organize. There are a variety of forums general guidelines of § 245.110. For this by which non-residents can contact Comment: The rule should not allow reason, the final rule omits proposed residents, including mail or meeting more than one tenant organization at a § 245.160(b). them in a public area outside the project project. Allowing more than one tenant property. In addition, HUD agrees that organization could cause legal and 16. Enforcement in cases where management has a bona administrative difficulties. Comment: Final rule should expressly fide policy against contacting residents Allowing multiple tenant provide tenants with the right to enforce door-to-door, it is reasonable to require organizations would make it unclear the regulations. The rule will only be outside organizers to be accompanied by who speaks for the community. meaningful if it can be enforced by

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36279 tenants and tenant organizations in Section 245.180 Sanctions and consider whether to require prospective addition to HUD. In addition to Penalties. changes to the model lease, Regulatory providing by regulation tenant (a) HUD shall pursue removal of the Agreement and Use Agreement enforcement rights, HUD should agent or appropriate civil and/or memorializing the right to tenant explicitly make the tenants third party criminal penalties as sanctions for participation, and making tenants third- beneficiaries of the regulatory agreement violations of residents rights to organize party beneficiaries of the Regulatory between HUD and the owners. HUD or assert their individual rights as and/or Use Agreement. Such changes should make tenants partners in the tenants, including but not limited to: could strengthen the ability of tenants to enforcement of HUD requirements. (1) Removal of an agent under a HUD enforce their rights to organize, if The final rule should explicitly state regulatory agreement, if any; necessary. enforcement procedures and penalties (2) Civil penalties up to $25,000 for On the issues of civil money penalties and criminal sanctions, HUD’s statutes for violations. violations of residents’ right to organize or their individual rights as tenants; provide specific instances in which civil The following should be added as (3) A fine of not more than $10,000, money penalties are applicable. HUD new enforcement sections to the final imprisonment of not more than five does not believe it can expand those rule: years or both for knowingly and instances to include tenant Section 245.170 Enforcement. willingly falsifying, concealing, or organizational rights without a statutory making any false, fictitious or change. Likewise, HUD does not have (a) HUD staff shall utilize the fraudulent statement regarding statutory authority to impose criminal procedures prescribed in the harassment or interference with penalties such as imprisonment. Management Agent Handbook 4381.5 residents asserting their right to However, HUD can use the existing REV–2 to identify, assess, and respond organize or their individual rights as administrative enforcement system. to resident complaints regarding owner tenants; Because of the availability of the agent conduct or omissions, including (4) Referral to the Attorney General sanctions of LDP, suspension and harassment of residents or resident and/or HUD’s Enforcement Center with debarment, HUD believes it currently associations who attempt to exercise a recommendation for civil action, has sufficient enforcement authority to their rights, lease violations, failure to including mandatory or injunctive address violations of this regulation. maintain HQS requirements, or failure relief, to enjoin against owner/agent Comment: The final rule should by the owner/agent to properly carry out actions violating residents’ right to expressly prohibit harassment. Because its management responsibilities. organize or assert their individual rights of the lack of enforcement actions by HUD, the final rule should state that (b) HUD field staff shall assess as tenants. (b) In cases of extended HUD will no longer tolerate harassment resident complaints regarding noncompliance affecting a property, or of tenants and tenant organizations harassment and owner/agent responses widespread noncompliance affecting asserting their protected rights. on these matters as part of field more than one property, HUD will The prohibited harassment tactics Management Reviews. consider taking the following listed in chapter 7 of HUD’s (c) If the owner/agent fails to enforcement actions, without further Management Agent Handbook should be adequately respond to outstanding notice to the owner/agent: included in the final rule, along with resident complaints within a reasonable (1) Debarment from or limited denial the listed sanctions available. time period set by the HUD field office, of participation in HUD programs; Response. The rule states that: tenants HUD staff shall implement sanctions (2) Initiate legal action to place the have a right to organize (§ 245.100); against the agent and/or owner. property in receivership; owners and their agents must recognize (d) HUD staff shall classify the (3) Partially abate the project’s legitimate tenant organizations and give property as ‘‘troubled’’ due to persistent, assistance contracts; reasonable consideration to their (4) Take steps to have the property validated resident complaints of a concerns; and owners and their agents declared in default of the mortgage and serious nature, including but not limited must allow tenants to conduct initiate foreclosure proceedings. to harassment of the residents reasonable activities related to the (c) HUD shall otherwise follow the establishment and operation of a tenant association or individual tenants for procedures prescribed in the asserting their rights. organization. These provisions suffice to Management Agent Handbook (4381.5, require owners and their agents to allow (e) Upon publication of a final rule, REV–2) in assessing these penalties. tenant organizations to function. HUD shall revise regulatory agreements Response. HUD agrees that it is Violations of these regulatory provisions and contracts with owners and their important that tenants’ rights to can be addressed through administrative agents to include the rights of tenants to organize be enforceable. HUD can means, as set forth in new § 245.135. A organize and assert their individual enforce the provisions of this tenant provision specifically on harassment rights explicitly in the agreements and participation rule under the procedures would not add significantly to these contracts themselves, including but not of 24 CFR part 24, which provides for existing protections, which apply to any limited to the renewal of expiring Limited Denials of Participation interference with tenants’ organizational project-based or Preservation Voucher (‘‘LDP’’), debarment, and suspension in rights. Section 8 contracts, amendments to the case of such violations. These are Comment: The rule should include a existing regulatory agreements (which powerful sanctions, and HUD will use list of prohibited activities. The rule might occur in a partial payment of them as necessary to address should contain the following additional claim, bond refinancing, transfer of interference with tenants’ right to section: physical assets, or sale of the property), organize. HUD has made an amendment Section 245.170 Impediments to new regulatory agreements, and a to the rule to clarify that this existing residents or resident associations revision to HUD’s Model Lease as authority applies with respect to this attempting to exercise their rights. published in the Handbook 4350.3, regulation. Occupancy Standards for HUD Assisted Regarding tenant enforcement of the (a) Actions by owners/agents that Housing. right to organize, HUD expects to constitute impediments to resident or

VerDate 112000 15:56 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 07JNR3 36280 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations resident associations attempting to IV. Findings and Certifications agency from promulgating a regulation exercise their rights include, but are not that has federalism implications and E.O. 12866 Statement limited to, the following: either imposes substantial direct (1) Unreasonable denial of accessible The Office of Management and Budget compliance costs on State and local meeting space to residents; (OMB) reviewed this rule under governments and is not required by Executive Order 12866 (entitled statute, or preempts State law, unless (2) Sending management ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’). the relevant requirements of section 6 of representatives (including residents OMB determined that this final rule is the Executive Order are met. This rule who are management employees or who a ‘‘significant regulatory action,’’ as does not have federalism implications receive rent concessions in exchange for defined in section 3(f) of the Order and does not impose substantial direct management services) to resident (although not economically significant, compliance costs on State and local meeting when residents have not as provided in section 3(f)(1) of the governments or preempt State law invited these representatives to attend; Order). Any changes made to the rule within the meaning of the Executive (3) Evicting, threatening to evict, subsequent to its submission to OMB Order. withholding entitlements, or otherwise are identified in the docket file, which penalizing tenants for organizing or is available for public inspection in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act asserting their rights; office of the Rules Docket Clerk, Room Title II of the Unfunded Mandates (4) Attempting to adversely influence 10276, U.S. Department of Housing and Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531– resident leaders by offering individual Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, 1538)(UMRA) establishes requirements inducements such as employment, SW, Washington, DC, 20410–0500. for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, preferential transfers, rent abatements, Impact on Small Entities favored repairs, or other benefits not local, and tribal governments and the available to all residents in the The Secretary, in accordance with the private sector. This final rule does not development; Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. impose any Federal mandates on any 605(b)), has reviewed this rule before State, local, or tribal governments or the (5) Attempting to form a competing publication and by approving it certifies private sector within the meaning of the resident organization under the control that this rule does not have a significant UMRA. of the management company or the economic impact on a substantial owner; number of small entities. The rule, List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 245 (6) Sexual harassment of residents by while it requires owners and their Condominiums, Cooperatives, Grant owners/agents; agents to permit reasonable tenant programs—housing and community (7) Interfering with or obstructing organizing activities, does not impose development, Loan programs—housing residents or non-tenant tenant any affirmative obligation on owners to and community development, Low and organizers from engaging in any give financial or other assistance to moderate income housing, Rent protected activities set forth in § 245.140 tenant organizations in the conduct of subsidies, Reporting and recordkeeping of these regulations; and these activities. requirements, Utilities. The rule would permit tenant (8) Engaging in any activity designed For the reasons stated in the organizations to develop responses to to intimidate, harass, or retaliate against preamble, HUD amends part 245 as economic proposals made by owners tenant or non-tenant tenant organizers follows: that could affect the living environment exercising their right to organize or of the tenants, such as rent increases PART 245ÐTENANT PARTICIPATION assert their rights. and major capital additions, and IN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROJECTS (b) Owner or management employees requires owners of give reasonable 1. The authority citation for 24 CFR may not run for elected office or serve consideration to such responses. part 245 continues to read as follows: on the board of directors of the residents However, it does not require owners to organization. adopt such proposals. Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715z–1b; 42 U.S.C. (c) HUD considers any of the above 3535(d). Environmental Impact action taken by owner/agents to be a Subpart AÐGeneral Provisions violation of residents’ rights to organize In accordance with 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1) and assert individual rights. of HUD’s regulations, this rule does not § 245.10 [Amended] direct, provide for assistance or loan Response. The rule as proposed and mortgage insurance for, or 2. Amend 24 CFR 245.10 as follows: a. Remove paragraph (a)(2); contains a list exemplifying protected otherwise govern or regulate, real b. Remove from paragraph (c) the activities (see § 245.115(a)), and also property acquisition, disposition, definition of ‘‘Section 202 Loans for the protects other reasonable activities leasing, rehabilitation, alteration, Elderly or Handicapped BMIR related to establishing and operating a demolition, or new construction, or Program’’; tenant organization (see § 245.115(b)). establish, revise, or provide for Therefore, actions that interfere with c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(3) and standards for construction or (a)(4) as paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3), these activities are prohibited. construction materials, manufactured Additionally, some of the suggested respectively; housing, or occupancy. Therefore, this d. Revise redesignated paragraphs additions are simply beyond the scope rule is categorically excluded from (a)(2)(ii) and (a)(3); and of this rulemaking in any case; the review under the National e. Add paragraphs (a)(4)–(7) to read as prohibition on sexual harassment of Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. follows: residents, for example, is enforced 4321 et seq.). through the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 245.10 Applicability of part. Federalism Impact § 3601 et seq., and the regulations (a) * * * promulgated pursuant thereto. Executive Order 13132 (entitled (2) * * * Therefore, HUD makes no change to the ‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits, to the extent (ii) Was sold by the Secretary subject final rule as a result of this comment. practicable and permitted by law, an to a mortgage insured or held by the

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36281

Secretary and an agreement to maintain addressing issues related to their living (iv) A reduction in tenant utility the low- and moderate-income character environment, which includes the terms allowances; of the project; and conditions of their tenancy as well (v) Converting residential units to (3) State or local housing finance as activities related to housing and non-residential use, cooperative agency project. The project receives community development. housing, or condominiums; assistance under section 236 of the (vi) Major capital additions; and National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z– § 245.105 Recognition of tenant (vii) Prepayment of loans. organizations. 1) or the Rent Supplement Program (b) In addition to the activities listed administered through a State or local Owners of multifamily housing in paragraph (a) of this section, owners housing finance agency, but does not projects covered under § 245.10, and of multifamily housing projects covered have a mortgage insured under the their agents, must: under § 245.10, and their agents, must National Housing Act or held by the (a) Recognize legitimate tenant allow tenants and tenant organizers to Secretary. Subject to the further organizations; and (b) Give reasonable conduct other reasonable activities limitation in paragraph (b) of this consideration to concerns raised by related to the establishment or operation section, only the provisions of subparts legitimate tenant organizations. of a tenant organization. (c) Owners of multifamily housing A and C of this part and of subpart D § 245.110 Legitimate tenant organizations. of this part for requests for approval of projects and their agents shall not A tenant organization is legitimate if a conversion of a project from project- require tenants and tenant organizers to it has been established by the tenants of paid utilities to tenant-paid utilities or obtain prior permission before engaging a multifamily housing project covered of a reduction in tenant utility in the activities permitted under under § 245.10 for the purpose allowances, apply to a mortgagor of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. described in § 245.100, and meets such a project; regularly, operates democratically, is § 245.120 Meeting space. (4) The project receives project-based representative of all residents in the assistance under section 8 of the United (a) Owners of multifamily housing development, and is completely States Housing Act of 1937 (this projects covered under § 245.10, and independent of owners, management, regulation does not cover tenant their agents, must reasonably make and their representatives. participation in PHAs that administer available the use of any community room or other available space such project-based assistance); § 245.115 Protected activities. (5) The project receives enhanced appropriate for meetings that is part of (a) Owners of multifamily housing the multifamily housing project when vouchers under the Low-Income projects covered under § 245.10, and Housing Preservation and Resident requested by: their agents, must allow tenants and (1) Tenants or a tenant organization Homeownership Act of 1990, the tenant organizers to conduct the provisions of the Emergency Low and used for activities related to the following activities related to the operation of the tenant organization; or Income Housing Preservation Act of establishment or operation of a tenant 1987, or the Multifamily Assisted (2) Tenants seeking to establish a organization: tenant organization or collectively Housing Reform and Affordability Act (1) Distributing leaflets in lobby areas; of 1997, as amended; address issues related to their living (2) Placing leaflets at or under tenants’ environment. (6) The project receives assistance doors; under the Section 202 Direct Loan (b) Tenant and tenant organization (3) Distributing leaflets in common meetings must be accessible to persons program or the Section 202 Supportive areas; Housing for the Elderly program; or with disabilities, unless this is (4) Initiating contact with tenants; impractical for reasons beyond the (7) The project receives assistance (5) Conducting door-to-door surveys under the Section 811 Supportive organization’s control. If the complex of tenants to ascertain interest in has an accessible common area or areas, Housing for Persons with Disabilities establishing a tenant organization and to program. it will not be impractical to make offer information about tenant organizational meetings accessible to * * * * * organizations; persons with disabilities. 3. Subpart B is revised to read as (6) Posting information on bulletin (c) Fees. An owner of a multifamily follows: boards; housing project covered under § 245.10 (7) Assisting tenants to participate in may charge a reasonable, customary and Subpart BÐTenant Organizations tenant organization activities; usual fee, approved by the Secretary as Sec. (8) Convening regularly scheduled may normally be imposed for the use of 245.100 Right of tenants to organize. tenant organization meetings in a space such facilities in accordance with 245.105 Recognition of tenant on site and accessible to tenants, in a procedures prescribed by the Secretary, organizations. manner that is fully independent of for the use of meeting space. An owner 245.110 Legitimate tenant organizations. management representatives. In order to may waive this fee. 245.115 Protected activities. preserve the independence of tenant 245.120 Meeting space. organizations, management § 245.125 Tenant organizers. 245.125 Tenant organizers. representatives may not attend such (a) A tenant organizer is a tenant or 245.130 Tenants’ rights not to be re- meetings unless invited by the tenant non-tenant who assists tenants in canvassed. 245.135 Enforcement. organization to specific meetings to establishing and operating a tenant discuss a specific issue or issues; and organization, and who is not an Subpart BÐTenant Organizations (9) Formulating responses to owner’s employee or representative of current or requests for: prospective owners, managers, or their § 245.100 Right of tenants to organize. (i) Rent increases; agents. The tenants of a multifamily housing (ii) Partial payment of claims; (b) Owners of multifamily housing project covered under § 245.10 have the (iii) The conversion from project- projects covered under § 245.10, and right to establish and operate a tenant based paid utilities to tenant-paid their agents, must allow tenant organization for the purpose of utilities; organizers to assist tenants in

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 36282 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations establishing and operating tenant enforced, written policy against debarment, to be taken when there is organizations. canvassing, the project shall be treated adequate evidence that a cause for (c) Non-tenant tenant organizers. (1) If as if it has a policy favoring canvassing. debarment may exist and immediate a multifamily housing project covered action is needed to protect the public under § 245.10 has a consistently § 245.130 Tenants' rights not to be re- interest. The specific rules and canvassed. enforced, written policy against regulations relating to suspension are canvassing, then a non-tenant tenant A tenant has the right not to be re- found at 24 CFR part 24, subpart D. organizer must be accompanied by a canvassed against his or her wishes (3) Limited Denial of Participation. tenant while on the property of the regarding participation in a tenant An LDP generally excludes a person multifamily housing project, except in organization. from future participation in the Federal the case of recipients of HUD Outreach § 245.135 Enforcement program under which the cause arose. and Assistance Training Grants The duration of an LDP is generally up (‘‘OTAG’’) or other direct HUD grants (a) Owners of housing identified in to 12 months. The specific rules and designed to enable recipients to provide § 245.10, and their agents, as well as any regulations relating to LDPs are found at education and outreach to tenants principals thereof (as defined in 24 CFR 24 CFR subpart G. concerning HUD’s mark-to-market 24.105), who violate any provision of program (see 24 CFR parts 401 and 402), this subpart so as to interfere with the (b) These sanctions may also apply to who are conducting eligible activities as organizational and participatory rights affiliates (as defined in 24 CFR part 24) defined in the applicable Notice of of tenants, may be liable for sanctions of these persons or entities. Funding Availability for the grant or under 24 CFR part 24. Such sanctions (c) The procedures in 24 CFR part 24 other effective grant document. may include: shall apply to actions under this (2) If a multifamily housing project (1) Debarment. A person who is subpart. covered under § 245.10 has a written debarred is prohibited from future policy favoring canvassing, any non- participation in Federal programs for a Dated: June 1, 2000. tenant tenant organizer must be afforded period of time. The specific rules and William C. Apgar, the same privileges and rights of access regulations relating to debarment are Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal as other uninvited outside parties in the found at 24 CFR part 24, subpart C. Housing Commissioner. normal course of operations. If the (2) Suspension. Suspension is a [FR Doc. 00–14217 Filed 6–2–00; 2:57 pm] project does not have a consistently temporary action with the same effect as BILLING CODE 4210±33±P

VerDate 112000 14:22 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR3.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR3 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part VI

Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) and Standards of Conduct; Notice

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNN4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 07JNN4 36284 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Internet through FERC’s Home Page the Commission issued a third revised (http://www.ferc.fed.us). S&CP Document (Version 1.3) in Open Federal Energy Regulatory Access Same-Time Information System Notice of Proposed Changes Commission and Standards of Conduct, 84 FERC I. Introduction [Docket No. RM95±9±011] ¶ 61,329 (1998). This is the S&CP In this notice, the Federal Energy Document currently in effect. Open Access Same-Time Information Regulatory Commission (Commission) III. Discussion System (OASIS) and Standards of proposes to revise Version 1.3 of the Conduct OASIS Standards and Communication The January 31 submittal Protocols Document (S&CP Document, recommends the following changes to May 19, 2000. Version 1.3) to reflect recommended Version 1.3 of the S&CP Document: (1) AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory revisions put forth by the OASIS How Post procedures associated with Commission, DOE. Working Group (How Group) and the capacity benefit margin; (2) post ACTION: Notice of proposed changes. Market Interface Committee (MIC) references on curtailment information, (collectively How/MIC) 1 in a joint filing interruptions, and system studies; (3) SUMMARY: The Federal Energy modifications to the TRANSREQUEST submitted on January 31, 2000 (January Regulatory Commission (the template; (4) removal of the Commission) proposes to adopt 31 submittal). The January 31 submittal was filed TRANSALT, CURTAIL, and AUDIT revisions to Version 1.3 of the OASIS prior to our issuance of our ‘‘Business templates; (5) addition of templates for Standards and Communication Practice Standards for OASIS SECURITY, REDUCTION, and Protocols Document. The changes are Transactions’’ (BPS) in Order No. 638 SYSTEMDATA; (6) rename the being proposed to improve OASIS and thus does not reflect our findings in SCHEDULE template as performance and to conform with that order. Accordingly, in addition to SCHEDULEDETAIL; (7) revised Commission policy. The Commission procedures for posting information in inviting comments on our proposed invites written comments on this the TRANSOFFERING template; (8) revisions to S&CP Document, Version proposal and on four specific questions addition of a unique reference to 1.3, we are inviting commenters to enumerated in the notice. continuation records; (9) revisions to address four specific questions OASIS performance response times DATES: Written comments (an original (enumerated below) that are designed to (section 5.3) to add specific required and 14 paper copies) must be received insure that any revised S&CP Document response times; and (10) corrections to by July 7, 2000. In addition, the we issue will be consistent with our support the above changes and update Commission encourages the filing of a determinations in Order No. 638. copy of the comments on computer the table of contents.4 diskette or by E-Mail by the same date. II. Background These changes are designed to ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary, implement the Commission’s findings The Commission first issued the S&CP 5 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Document (Version 1.0) on April 24, in Order No. 605, the Commission’s 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 1996, as a separate document whose OASIS Audit Template Experiment, 20426 and by E-Mail to issuance accompanied issuance of Order recent orders on posting capacity benefit ‘‘[email protected]’’. No. 889.2 We explained in Order No. margin (CBM), and other miscellaneous 889 that we would periodically update changes. We propose to adopt these FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: changes. However, these changes, as Marvin Rosenberg (technical and revise the S&CP Document as needed.3 On September 10, 1996, the proposed in the January 31 submittal, information), Office of Markets, were not designed to implement the Tariffs, and Rates, Federal Energy Commission issued a revised S&CP Document (Version 1.1) in Open Access Commission’s findings in Order No. Regulatory Commission, 888 First 638, which was issued on February 25, Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426; Same-Time Information System and Standards of Conduct, 76 FERC ¶ 61,243 2000. (202) 208–1283 We therefore have concerns that (1996). On June 18, 1998, the Paul Robb (technical information), additional changes may be needed to Commission again issued a revised Office of Markets, Tariffs, and Rates, the S&CP Document to ensure S&CP Document (Version 1.2) in Open Federal Energy Regulatory consistency between the S&CP Access Same-Time Information System Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Document and our findings in Order No. and Standards of Conduct, 83 FERC Washington, DC 20426; (202) 219– 638. Accordingly, although this notice ¶ 61,360 (1998). On September 29, 1998, 2702 proposes adoption of the How/MIC– Gary D. Cohen (legal information), sponsored revisions to the S&CP Office of the General Counsel, Federal 1 As explained in Order No. 638, Open Access Same-time Information System and Standards of Document (as a baseline), we Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Conduct, Final Rule, 65 FR 17370 (March 31, 2000), contemplate that our final notice on this First Street, NE, Washington, DC FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ at 31,398 n.2, 31,400 & n.8 subject may include further revisions to 20426; (202) 208–0321 (February 25, 2000), the MIC is an industry working reflect our findings in Order No. 638. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: group, sponsored by the North American Electric The full Reliability Council, that has taken over functions We therefore invite interested persons text of this notice, including the OASIS previously performed by the Commercial Practices filing comments on this NOPR to Standards and Communication Working Group. address both the merits of the proposed Protocols, Version 1.4, is available for 2 See Open Access Same-Time Information revisions to the S&CP Document as well inspection in the Commission’s Public System and Standards of Conduct, Order No. 889, 61 FR 21737 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. as the following: Reference Room at 888 First Street, NE, ¶ 31,035 at 31,586 (April 24, 1996), order on reh’g, Washington, DC 20426, during regular Order No. 889–A, 62 FR 12484 (March 14, 1997), 4 A more complete explanation of these business hours, is posted on both the FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,049 (March 4, 1997), order recommended changes is included in the January Commission’s Issuance Posing System on reh’g, Order No. 889–B, 81 FERC ¶ 61,253 31 submittal. (1997), order on reh’g, Order No. 889–C, 82 FERC 5 Open Access Same-Time Information System (CIPS) and the Records and Information ¶ 61,046 (1998). and Standards of Conduct, Final Rule, 64 FR 34117 Management System (RIMS), and may 3 Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,035 at (June 25, 1999), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,075 (May be viewed and printed remotely via the 31,591. 27, 1999).

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 07JNN4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36285

1. If we adopt the proposed revisions to the system attributes, but does not state that all recommended, provides performance S&CP Document, are changes needed to system attributes can be requested at the standards (time limits) for responding to reflect our findings in Order No. 638? same time.7 We therefore request comment queries regarding TRANSSTATUS and 2. Specifically, do any provisions of the on whether the description of the template in TRANSOFFERING. It does not establish proposed S&CP revisions conflict with section 4.3.4.4 should be revised to clarify comparable requirements regarding response provisions of Order No. 638? If so, how that all system attributes can be requested at times for any other queries. We therefore should those conflicts be resolved? 6 the same time. invite comment on whether the proposed 3. With regard to section 4.3.4.4 on System 4. With regard to section 5.3.3 on performance standards meet customer needs Data (Recommended S&CP Document Measurement Criteria for OASIS Node today and for the near term future. Version 1.4 at page 55), this section states Functions (Recommended S&CP Document Note: Proposed section 5.3.3 would require that a transmission provider is obligated to Version 1.4 at page 108), we see three the following response times to OASIS post values for one or more of the defined possible problems. First, section 5.3.3, as queries:

Template or GUI equivalent Average response not fewer than 90% of responses not fewer than transstatus ...... 100 rows/minute ...... 10 rows/minute. transoffering ...... 500 rows/minute ...... 100 rows/minute.

Second, we also note that the grant waiver of the OASIS Final Rule Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility recommended performance standards in requirements (including compliance analysis is required pursuant to section section 5.3.3 are so specific that they may with the S&CP Document) to small 603 of RFA. become obsolete and fail to keep pace with public utilities. We further explained changing technology, market conditions, and V. Environmental Statement that the Commission’s waiver policy user needs. We therefore invite comment on Commission regulations require that whether it would be preferable to adopt a follows the SBA definition of small more general performance standard, such as electric utility 10 and that 34 small an environmental assessment or an one that would require a node’s response to entities had received waivers of the environmental impact statement be be sufficient to meet the legitimate needs of requirement to establish and maintain prepared for a Commission action that its customers. an OASIS and five small entities had may have a significant effect on the 13 Third, we also would be open to received waivers of the OASIS human environment. In the consideration of other possible revisions to Standards of Conduct requirements.11 Commission’s view, the environmental section 5.3.3 that might contain a novel impact of this proposal is negligible. approach preferable to either that proposed These decisions show that the Commission carefully evaluates the This proposal makes technical revisions in this NOPR or that contained in Version to existing technical requirements 1.3. effect of the OASIS requirements on small electric utilities and is granting governing the format used for OASIS IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act waivers where appropriate, thus postings to ensure uniformity in the mitigating the effect of that rule on display of information posted on OASIS The Regulatory Flexibility Act nodes. Accordingly, we find that this (RFA),8–9 requires the Commission to small public and non-public utilities. The Commission’s standards for notice does not propose any action that describe the impact a proposed rule might have a significant effect on the would have on small entities or to deciding on requests for waiver are unaffected by this Notice. human environment and find that no certify that the rule, if promulgated, will environmental impact statement not have a significant economic impact The proposed revisions to the S&CP concerning this proposal is required. on a substantial number of small Document are technical revisions entities. intended to implement the VI. Statement of Information Collection If promulgated, the same entities Commission’s findings in Order No. and Public Reporting Burden subject to the current S&CP Document 605,12 the Commission’s OASIS Audit In this notice, based on would be required to comply with the Template Experiment, recent orders on recommendations from two industry revised S&CP Document (Version 1.4) posting CBM, and other miscellaneous working groups with input from diverse proposed in this Notice. Moreover, the technical changes. We hereby certify, industry segments, we propose minor proposals in this Notice would not under section 605(b) of RFA, that this technical revisions to Version 1.3 of the affect which entities would be eligible notice, if promulgated, will not have a S&CP Document. for a waiver. As we explained in Order significant economic impact on a On December 1, 1998, the No. 889–A, under appropriate substantial number of small entities Commission issued a proposed circumstances the Commission will within the meaning of RFA. information collection and request for

6 For example, this NOPR proposes modifying the (Recommended S&CP Document Version 1.4 at page In the Open Access Final Rule, we concluded TRANSQUEST template to allow Transmission 44) states that a variable listed with an asterisk can that, under these definitions, the Open Access Final Customers to request modifications to confirmed have at least four multiple instances defined by the Rule and the OASIS Final Rule would not have a transmission reservations. Among the new types of user in making a query. Taken together, these significant economic impact on a substantial transmission requests proposed is RENEWAL. This provisions show that multiple system attributes number of small entities. We reaffirmed that is intended to permit a customer to request to renew may be requested in one request, even though this conclusion in Order Nos. 888–A and 889–A. is not explicitly stated in section 4.3.4.4. an expiring transmission reservation. Would such a 11 See Order No. 889–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ request provide the existing customer rights it did 8–9 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 31,049 at 30,578. not have under S&CP Document Version 1.3 or the 10 See 5 U.S.C. 601(3) and 601(6) and 15 U.S.C. 12 Open Access Same-Time Information System OASIS Business Practice Standards? Does 632(a). The RFA defines a small entity as one that RENEWAL conflict with any OASIS Business is independently owned and not dominant in its and Standards of Conduct, Final Rule, 64 FR 34117, Practice Standards or rights of first refusal under field of operation. See 15 U.S.C. 632(a). The Small FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,075 (1999). the pro forma tariff? Business Administration defines a small electric 13 Regulations Implementing National 7 We note that: (1) More than four system utility as one that disposes of 4 million MWh or less Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR attributes are listed in section 4.3.4.4; (2) the system of electric energy in a given year. See 13 CFR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987); 1986–90 Regs. Preambles attribute query variable in section 4.3.4.4 is 121.601 (Major Group 49—Electric, Gas and FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (Dec. 10, 1987) followed by an asterisk; and, (3) section 4.3.2 Sanitary Services). (codified at 18 CFR Part 380).

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 07JNN4 36286 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices comments in Docket No. IC99–717–000 OMB Control No: 1902–0173. designed to implement the that covered all information collected Respondents: Business or other for- Commission’s findings in Order No. under the requirements of FERC–717 profit, including small business. 605, the Commission’s OASIS Audit ‘‘Open Access Same-Time Information Frequency of Responses: On occasion. Template Experiment, recent orders on System and Standards of Conduct’’ Necessity of the Information: The posting CBM, and other miscellaneous (OMB No. 1902–0173) over the next Notice of Proposed Rulemaking solicits changes. three years that provides as follows: public comments on proposed revisions In addition, the burden estimate to Version 1.3 of the OASIS Standards Information Collection Statement and Communication Protocols submitted on December 1, 1998 for all Title: FERC–717, Open Access Same- Document (S&CP Document, Version OASIS requirements was as follows: Time Information Systems and 1.3) to reflect recommended revisions Burden Statement: Public reporting Standards of Conduct. put forth by two industry-led working burden for this collection is estimated Action: Proposed Collection. groups. These technical revisions are as:

Number of responses per re- Average burden hours per re- Number of respondents annually spondent sponse Total annual burden hours

(1) (2) (3) (1)×(2)×(3)

140 1 1,418 198,520 hours

The estimated total cost to burden associated with this collection of this notice should direct their comments respondents is $21,157,500.14 information and has assured itself, by to the Desk Officer for FERC, OMB, We are not preparing a separate means of its internal review, that there Room 10202 NEOB, Washington, DC estimate covering this notice only, is specific, objective support for this 20503, phone 202–395–3087, facsimile because we find that the notice would information burden estimate. Moreover, 202–395–7285. Comments must be filed not significantly alter the estimate the Commission has reviewed the with OMB within 30 days of publication contained in the December 1, 1998 collection of information proposed by of this document in the Federal notice. The December 1, 1998 burden this notice and has determined that the Register. Three copies of any comments estimate gave the Commission’s collection of information is necessary filed with the Office of Management and estimate of OASIS-related information and conforms to the Commission’s plan, Budget also should be sent to the requirements over the next three years, as described in this order, for the following address: Mr. David P. and this estimate contemplated the collection, efficient management, and Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy use of the required information.15 Commission’s continued use of the Regulatory Commission, Room 1A, 888 S&CP Document during this time frame. Based on our experience in OASIS First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. In any event, if a separate estimate were implementation over the past four years, For further information on the reporting prepared, it would not be substantial, the Commission has refined the estimate requirements, contact Michael Miller at because the proposal in this notice, if of reporting entities covered by OASIS promulgated, would not substantially regulations. Our latest estimate is that (202) 208–1415. increase the information collection 140 respondents are required to collect VII. Public Comment Procedure requirements already specified in information under the OASIS Version 1.3 of the S&CP Document. regulations. However, as discussed This notice gives notice of our The collection of information above, this notice does not impose any intention to make certain technical contained in this notice has been new information collection burdens. revisions to S&CP Document, Version submitted to the Office of Management The Office of Management and 1.3. Prior to taking final action on this and Budget (OMB) for review under Budget’s (OMB) regulations,16 require notice, we are inviting comments from Section 3507(d) of the Paperwork OMB to approve certain information interested persons on the proposals Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. collection requirements imposed by discussed in this notice and compiled in 3507(d). For copies of the OMB agency rule. The information collection the OASIS Standards and submission, contact Michael Miller at requirements in this notice will be Communication Protocols, Version 1.4. 202–208–1415. reflected in OASIS postings that are In addition, the Commission specifically directly available to transmission users Internal Review invites comments on four specific and subject to subsequent audit by the questions enumerated in the discussion The Commission has conducted an Commission. The more efficient posting above relating to whether the proposal internal review of the public reporting of this information will help the is consistent with our findings in Order 14 The estimated total cost of $21,157,500 was Commission carry out its No. 638. The Commission invites computed as follows: responsibilities under Part II of the FPA. The Commission has assumed that 4.5 personnel interested persons to submit written The Commission is submitting are necessary for staffing and using a total comments on the matters and issues notification of this notice to OMB. personnel cost of $109,889, the result is $494,501. proposed in this notice to be adopted, To get the total cost, add annual ongoing costs of Persons wishing to comment on the including any related matters or $110,000 plus staffing costs [$110,000 + $494,501] collections of information proposed by for a total of $604,501 divided by 4 = $151,125. The alternative proposals that commenters estimated total cost of the OASIS requirement is 15 See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c). may wish to discuss. 140 respondents × $151,125 or $21,157,500. 16 5 CFR 1320.11.

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 07JNN4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36287

The original and 14 copies of such telephone at 202–501–8145 or by E-Mail icon. The full text of this document is comments must be received by the (to [email protected]). available on CIPS in ASCII and Commission by July 7, 2000. Comments Commenters should take note that, WordPerfect 8.0 format for viewing, should be submitted to the Office of the until the Commission amends its rules printing, and/or downloading. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory and regulations, the paper copy of the —RIMS contains images of documents Commission, 888 First Street NE, filing remains the official copy of the submitted to and issued by the Washington DC 20426 and should refer document submitted. Therefore, any Commission after November 16, 1981. to Docket No. RM95–9–011. discrepancies between the paper filing Documents from November 1995 to In addition to filing paper copies, the and the electronic filing or the diskette the present can be viewed and printed Commission encourages the filing of will be resolved by reference to the from FERC’s Home Page using the comments either on computer diskette paper filing. RIMS link or the Energy Information or via Internet E-Mail. Comments may VIII. Document Availability Online icon. Descriptions of be filed in the following formats: documents back to November 16, All written comments will be placed WordPerfect 8.0 or lower version, MS 1981, are also available from RIMS- in the Commission’s public files and Word Office 97 or lower version, or on-the-Web; requests for copies of will be available for inspection in the ASCII format. these and other older documents For diskette filing, include the Commission’s Public Reference Room at should be submitted to the Public following information on the diskette 888 First Street NE, Washington DC Reference Room. label: Docket No. RM95–9–011; the 20426, during regular business hours. name of the filing entity; the software Additionally, comments may be viewed User assistance is available for RIMS, and version used to create the file; and and printed remotely via the Internet CIPS, and the Website during normal the name and telephone number of a through FERC’s Home Page (http:// business hours from our Help line at contact person. www.ferc.fed.us) and in FERC’s Public (202) 208–2222, or by E-Mail (to For Internet E-Mail submittal, Reference Room during normal business [email protected]) or the Public comments should be submitted to hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) Reference Room at (202) 208–1371 (E- ‘‘[email protected]’’ in the at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Mail to following format. On the subject line, Washington, DC 20426. [email protected]). specify Docket No. RM95–9–011. In the From FERC’s Home Page on the During normal business hours, body of the E-Mail message, include the Internet, this information is available in documents can also be viewed and/or name of the filing entity; the software both the Commission Issuance Posting printed in FERC’s Public Reference and version used to create the file, and System (CIPS) and the Records and Room, where RIMS, CIPS, and the FERC the name and telephone number of the Information Management System Website are available. User assistance is contact person. Attach the comment to (RIMS). also available. the E-Mail in one of the formats —CIPS provides access to the texts of By direction of the Commission. specified above. The Commission will formal documents issued by the send an automatic acknowledgment to Commission since November 14, Linwood A. Watson, Jr., the sender’s E-Mail address upon 1994. Acting Secretary. receipt. Questions on electronic filing —CIPS can be accessed using the CIPS [FR Doc. 00–13103 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] should be directed to Brooks Carter by link or the Energy Information Online BILLING CODE 6717±01±P

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN4.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 07JNN4 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

Part VII

Federal Housing Finance Board 12 CFR Parts 900, 905, 965, 966, 969, 985 and 989 Office of Finance; Authority of Federal Home Loan Banks To Issue Consolidated Obligations; Final Rule and Changes to the Financial Management Policy of the Federal Home Loan Bank System; Notice

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36290 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD under the authority of section 11(c) of See 65 FR 324 (Jan. 4, 2000). The the Act. At some point to be determined proposed rule described a new structure 12 CFR Parts 900, 905, 965, 966, 969, by the Finance Board and the OF, the for the OF to accommodate additional 985 and 989 issuance of debt under the authority of functions proposed to address new [No. 2000±24] section 11(c) of the Act will cease and challenges faced by the Bank System. all COs will be issued under the The 60-day public comment period RIN 3069±AA88 authority of section 11(a) of the Act. The closed on March 6, 2000. The Finance final rule makes clear that OF ultimately Board received a total of 22 comments, Office of Finance; Authority of Federal will be responsible for performing all 15 from Banks, 5 from trade Home Loan Banks To Issue CO issuance functions, including associations, 1 from a Bank member, Consolidated Obligations preparation of combined financial and 1 from a group of Bank members. AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance reports, for the Banks. The final rule A majority of the commenters generally Board. also effects a number of other corporate supported the concept of devolving the ACTION: Final rule. governance changes to maximize the debt issuance from the Finance Board to operating efficiency of the OF. the Banks, but opposed the proposed SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance The Finance Board is also adopting in restructuring of the OF. Board (Finance Board) is amending its final form certain conforming regulations governing the operations of amendments to the FMP. A Notice II. Comments on the Proposed Rule and the Office of Finance (OF), a joint office describing the FMP amendments in Analysis of Changes Made in the Final of the Federal Home Loan Banks (Bank detail is published elsewhere in this Rule or Banks), and the issuance of debt for issue of the Federal Register. A. Joint Asset Activity Management and the Federal Home Loan Bank System. DATES: This final rule is effective July 1, Restructuring of the Office of Finance The final rule authorizes the Banks to 2000. The proposed rule would have issue joint debt, i.e., bonds, notes or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: amended part 941 of the regulations to debentures, on which the Banks are Joseph A. McKenzie, Deputy Chief authorize the OF, as the only statutorily jointly and severally liable, to be called Economist, Office of Policy, Research recognized joint office of the Banks, to consolidated obligations (COs), under and Analysis, 202/408–2845, operate as a centralized facility through section 11(a) of the Federal Home Loan [email protected], Deborah F. Act (Act). This action is intended to which Bank assets could be efficiently Silberman, General Counsel, Office of administered on a joint basis. The more closely reflect the reality of the General Counsel, 202/408–2570, Banks’ current funding operations by proposed rule provided that, to the [email protected], or Charlotte A. allowing the Banks to be responsible for extent requested by two or more Banks Reid, Special Counsel, Office of General accessing the capital markets through pursuant to any agreement or contract, Counsel, 202/408–2510, [email protected]. the OF to fund their own operations, the OF shall facilitate or provide Staff also can be reached by regular mail rather than having the Finance Board services to the Banks in connection with at the Federal Housing Finance Board, issue COs on behalf of the Banks as is any Bank joint asset activities 1777 F Street, NW, Washington, DC currently the case. The final rule does authorized by law. With regard to the 20006. not have a substantive effect on the debt joint asset activities of the Banks, the OF issuance process or on the joint-and- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: would have been required to provide administrative and technical support for several liability of the Banks on I. The Proposed Rule outstanding COs or COs to be issued in the origination, purchase, management, the future. This action is consistent with On January 4, 2000, the Finance servicing or sale of any asset owned by devolutionary actions taken by Congress Board published for comment a one or more Banks pursuant to any to give the Banks greater autonomy over proposed rule to amend parts 910 and contract, including acquired member the management of their business and to 941 of the Finance Board’s regulations assets; provide market information to remove the Finance Board from governing operation of the OF and the Banks concerning acquired member involvement in Bank management issuance of COs, to enable the OF to assets and other assets or investments of functions. issue debt on behalf of the Banks the Banks; conduct and provide The final rule also incorporates pursuant to section 11(a) of the Act, research on such assets and changes to the leverage limit that were require the OF to prepare the quarterly investments; develop effective systems originally proposed as a part of and annual combined financial reports to monitor credit exposure and manage conforming amendments to the policy of the Bank System, and provide counter-party risk; adopt procedures to statement entitled ‘‘Financial services at the request of two or more assist the Banks in managing their Management Policy of the Federal Home Banks related to joint asset activities liquidity; and adopt procedures to Loan Bank System’’ (FMP). Specifically, undertaken by the requesting Banks, facilitate the inter-Bank sale of the final rule deletes the Bank System- including the administration of Member participation interests in advances and wide leverage limit, recasts the Bank-by- Mortgage Asset programs and liquidity investments. This section would not Bank leverage limit from a liability- management. The proposed rule also have required the Banks to make use of based limit to an asset-based limit and would have amended § 900.30 of the the OF in this capacity, but it would incorporates into regulation expanded Finance Board’s regulations to provide have required the OF to provide the leverage originally permitted for year for the termination as of December 31, services outlined if two or more Banks 2000 liquidity purposes, all as 2000, of the OF’s authority to act as wished the OF to do so. The OF would consistent with the Act provisions of the agent for the Finance Board in the have been authorized to establish a recently enacted Gramm-Leach-Bliley issuance of COs under section 11(c) of reasonable fee structure or charge for its Act.1 the Act. By this provision, the Finance services by contract or otherwise. It also The final rule also authorizes the Board intended to transition itself out would have been authorized to mediate Finance Board to continue to issue COs of, and the Banks into, the debt issuance among competing Bank demands, in function under the provisions of section accordance with its specified duties and 1 Pub. L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338 (Nov. 12, 1999). 11(a) of the Act as soon as practicable. responsibilities.

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36291

These proposed provisions were System-wide business issues,’’ such as a a future separate notice of final intended primarily to address the central facility to assist the Banks in rulemaking. Finance Board’s belief that the market managing various aspects of their B. Authorization of Banks To Issue Joint has created an incentive and a business operations, including mortgage-related Debt Under Section 11(a) of the Act need for a facility controlled by the assets, has grown in the ten years since Banks and their members to provide Congress confirmed the OF as a joint As discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY economies and efficiencies of scale, as office of the Banks in the Financial INFORMATION of the proposed it has done for the issuance of COs by Institutions Reform, Recovery and rulemaking, section 11(a) of the Act the Finance Board, by giving the Banks Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA).3 provides that the Banks may issue the flexibility to centralize certain of bonds, debentures or other obligations A majority of the commenters their common business functions. As ‘‘upon such terms and conditions’’ as opposed this portion of the proposal, as discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY the Finance Board may approve and well as the provisions of proposed INFORMATION of the proposed ‘‘subject to the rules and regulations § 941.4 4 concerning the restructuring of rulemaking, see 65 FR 324 (Jan. 4, 2000), prescribed by’’ the Finance Board. 12 the Finance Board anticipates that this the OF board of directors to significantly U.SC. 1431(a). Proposed § 910.2(b) need will become even more critical as alter both the size and composition of (redesignated as § 966.2(b) in the final the Banks develop asset activities such the OF board of directors by including rule) expressly authorizes the OF to as acquired member assets as part of representatives from each Bank, elected undertake the issuance of joint Bank their core business.2 Not only would members of the Bank System, and debt pursuant to section 11(a) of the Act such a facility provide operational appointed representatives of the general as COs on which all of the Banks would benefits, it also would enhance the public with relevant experience, and be jointly and severally liable subject to safety and soundness of the operations other proposed changes designed to § 966.9 of the Finance Board regulations by providing both expertise and a provide the structure, additional (which governs the joint-and-several mechanism for achieving risk functions and operational capacity the liability of the Banks on COs issued management, and geographic diversity OF would have to possess in order to under section 11(c) of the Act). As on a joint asset portfolio basis. In light accommodate the joint assets activities adopted, § 966.2(b) also provides that of the recent enactment of Title VI of the function. Because the Finance Board the authorization contained therein Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Federal does not wish to delay adoption of the shall be deemed to constitute Home Loan Bank System Modernization debt issuance provisions in final form, satisfaction of the requirement for Act of 1999, the Finance Board the Finance Board has decided to Finance Board approval of the ‘‘terms proposed a reorganization of the OF that remove the joint asset activity and conditions’’ pursuant to section would allow OF, the only joint office of management and restructuring 11(a) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(a)). the Banks, to function in this way at the provisions from the text of this final As discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY request of the Banks and facilitate rule. The proposals regarding joint asset INFORMATION of the proposed growth in the Bank System’s business as activity management functions for the rulemaking, the Finance Board wishes the Banks seek to provide their members OF and the necessity to adapt the to achieve the goals of continuing to with new credit products and respond structure of the OF for the addition of give the Banks the autonomy to manage to changes in the marketplace and such functions, however, remain under and run their own businesses by congressional mandates. active consideration and analysis by the authorizing the Banks to issue the COs, The Finance Board believes that Finance Board. It is anticipated that the while eliminating the continued administering joint assets through a Finance Board will respond to the potential for conflict with the Finance centralized facility could offer safety- comments and adopt those provisions in Board in its roles as regulator of the OF and-soundness benefits of better risk- and the Banks and issuer of the COs. management capabilities and geographic 3 See Pub.L. 101–73, tit. VII, sec. 702, 103 Stat. See 65 FR 324 at 325 (Jan. 4, 2000). diversity in the asset portfolio, which is 183 (Aug. 9, 1989). The GAO report noted that A majority of the commenters particularly important given the FIRREA made ‘‘many changes’’ to the Bank System national nature of the mortgage markets. that ‘‘introduced significant cultural changes for the generally supported the concept of The mortgage market is no longer the Banks and their members.’’ GAO Report at 19–20. devolution of the CO issuance function Principally, after FIRREA, the Banks were no longer fragmented, localized market that it was to the Banks. However, almost all of the involved in the oversight and supervision of their commenters expressed varying degrees when Congress created the Bank System members. The members henceforth only would in 1932. Driven by technological view the Banks as a credit facility, and this change of apprehension about recent market improvements, the mortgage market’s would promote the cooperative nature of the Bank volatility and about how System. GAO concluded, however, that to attract delivery systems have become more implementation of the final rule would new, voluntary members and retain members, the be perceived in the capital markets, and national in scope, and the mortgage Banks ‘‘must provide sufficient value—through the market now plays a central role in the products and services offered and the dividends many recommended delaying adoption national economy. The need for ‘‘an paid—to warrant the required stock investment for of the final rule because of those membership.’’ Id. at 21. The GAO Report noted the appropriate vehicle for coordination of concerns. Several commenters need for coordination of System-wide business questioned whether the Finance Board issues. Id. at 117. 2 Indeed, the General Accounting Office (GAO) 4 The Finance Board recently reorganized and had a legal basis to require, as a foresaw this need, stating that ‘‘there may be a need redesignated all of its regulations. See 65 FR 8253 condition of authorizing the Banks to for a central coordinating mechanism . . . [that] (Feb. 18, 2000). Part 900 of the Finance Board’s issue debt under section 11(a) of the should reside in the [Bank] System itself. See report regulations, 12 CFR part 900 (1999), was Act, that the Banks be jointly and commissioned by Congress in section 1393 of the redesignated as part 905, see 65 FR 8253, 82 (to be Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, codified at 12 CFR part 905); part 910, severally liable on the debt. One Bank issued on December 8, 1993 (GAO/GGD–94–38) ‘‘Consolidated Bonds and Debentures,’’ was commenter questioned whether COs (GAO Report), at 113. The GAO Report observed redesignated as part 966 ‘‘Consolidated issued by the OF as agent for the Banks that there were certain positive goals that could be Obligations,’’ see 65 FR 8253, 82 (to be codified at would be afforded the same treatment attained by relieving the Finance Board of certain 12 CFR part 966); and part 941, ‘‘Operations of the Bank System governance functions, including Office of Finance, ‘‘ was redesignated as part 985, under the Federal securities laws as COs enhanced cost control and the centralization of see 65 FR 8253, 82 (to be codified at 12 CFR part issued by the Finance Board under ‘‘certain business functions.’’ Id. at 114. 985). section 11(c).

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR4 36292 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

There are no conditions or restrictions Five commenters expressed opposition to undertake individually; and set out attached to the Finance Board’s to various aspects of this provision. the functions the OF was authorized to authority to prescribe the rules and Two Bank commenters and one trade undertake in support of the issuance of regulations or to approve the terms and association commenter objected to debt and the support to be provided to conditions of issuance of Bank debt limiting the purchase of Federal funds the Banks engaged in joint asset under section 11(a). So long as the and the use of repurchase agreements to activities. See 65 FR 324 at 329. As Finance Board exercises its power to meet the short-term liquidity needs of previously discussed, because only the promulgate its rules in a form the Banks, stating that the standard was CO issuance provisions of the proposal authorized by Congress,5 and the rules ambiguous or that the limits would are being adopted in final form at this are reasonable and consistent with the make liquidity management more time, only those comments are being statute, the rules will be valid and difficult. The Finance Board has addressed here. Three Banks, two trade enforceable, and will have the force and reconsidered the need for the limit in associations, and one individual effect of law.6 light of the comments and in light of its commented on some aspect of this As proposed, the final rule applies the change to the leverage limit from a provision of the proposed rule. same rules governing the apportionment liability-based limit to an asset-based Proposed § 941.2(c) (redesignated as of joint-and-several liability to COs limit, and has determined not to limit § 985.6(b) of the final rule) assigned to issued by the Finance Board pursuant to the purchase of Federal funds or the use the OF the function of preparing the section 11(c) of the Act as to COs issued of repurchase agreements in the final combined Bank System annual and by the Banks pursuant to section 11(a). rule. quarterly financial reports as a part of By requiring joint-and-several liability Proposed § 910.2(a)(2) (redesignated the CO issuance or debt management as a condition of authorizing the Banks as § 965.2(b) in the final rule) was function. The proposal codified current to issue debt under section 11(a), the designed to continue each Bank’s Finance Board policy (See Res. No. 98– Finance Board is implementing by authority to accept deposits from 27 (June 24, 1998)) (Policy Statement) regulation an issuance scheme that is members, other Banks and and set forth the standards under which identical to the issuance scheme instrumentalities of the United States, the OF would be required to prepare established by Congress elsewhere in but provided that deposit transactions Bank System financial reports, section 11 of the Act, and the Banks will may not be conducted in such a way as including requiring that the scope, form be subject to the same payment to result in the offer or sale of a security and content of the disclosure contained provisions (i.e., the joint-and-several in a public offering as those terms are in such financial reports generally be liability provisions) currently defined under the Federal securities consistent with the requirements of the established in the Finance Board’s laws. See 65 FR at 328. Three Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulations. Nothing in the Finance commenters criticized this provision, (SEC) Regulations S–K (specific Board’s regulatory action requiring the noting that it was unclear as proposed narrative disclosure requirements) and Banks to be jointly and severally liable whether deposits from categories of S–X (accounting and financial statement on debt issued under section 11(a) is financial institutions from which the disclosure requirements) (17 CFR parts inconsistent with any existing statutory Banks now accept deposits still would 229 and 210) and be presented in or regulatory requirement. be permitted, and that there was no accordance with the Statement Of The Finance Board has concluded justification for limiting or eliminating a Financial Accounting Standards No. that it has the authority both to significant, low-cost source of funds for 131, ‘‘Disclosures about Segments of an promulgate this rule and to require, as the Banks. The Finance Board did not Enterprise and Related Information’’ a condition of authorizing the Banks to intend to preclude the Banks from (FAS 131). issue debt under section 11(a) of the accepting deposits or cash accounts The proposed rule included an Act, that the Banks be jointly and from any category of financial Appendix listing exceptions to the severally liable on that debt. Further, institution from which the Banks are standards set forth in proposed the Finance Board has concluded that currently authorized by statute or § 941.2(c)(1)(iv)(A) and (B), derived the technical change in the issuer of the regulation to do so. The final rule has from the Finance Board’s Policy COs from the Finance Board to the been revised in light of the comments to Statement, which included certain Banks will have no effect on the remedy this. Two commenters objected disclosures concerning related-party treatment of COs under the Federal to the ‘‘no public offering’’ provision transactions, biographical information, securities laws.7 relating to deposits and recommended compensation, submission of matters to that it be eliminated as difficult to apply a vote of shareholders, exhibits, per- C. Authorized Liabilities in light of the rate posting practices of share information and beneficial Proposed § 910.2(a) (redesignated as the Banks and unnecessary given the ownership. The proposed rule also § 965.2 in the final rule) set forth an nature of the Banks’ depositors. The required the OF to file and distribute exclusive list of liabilities authorized for Finance Board agrees with the combined Bank System financial reports Bank business operations, which was comments and has eliminated that according to a schedule that mirrors the designed to replace the Funding restriction from the final rule. filing requirements applicable to Guidelines section of the FMP. See 65 corporate registrants under the FR 324 at 328; 65 FR 339 (Jan. 4, 2000). D. Powers and Responsibilities of the OF Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (1934 Proposed § 941.2 stated that the OF is Act) (i.e., annual reports within 90 days 5 Generally, Congress has authorized Federal a joint office of the Banks under section after the end of the fiscal year and agencies to issue binding rules through the use of 2B of the Act; set out a two-pronged the notice and comment procedure set forth in quarterly reports within 45 days after section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 purpose for the OF; provided that, as a the end of each of the first 3 fiscal U.S.C. 551 et seq. See generally, 1 Kenneth Culp part of its purpose, OF shall issue COs quarters). The proposal expressly Davis & Richard J. Pierce, Jr., Administrative Law on behalf of the Banks or the Finance confirmed the Finance Board’s sole Treatise § 6.3 at 236 (3rd ed. 1994 and Supp. 1999). Board and shall support the Banks upon authority to determine compliance with 6 Id. (citing Fawcus Machine Co. v. United States, 282 U.S. 375, 378 (1931); Maryland Casualty Co. v. the request of two or more Banks the standards of proposed part 941 United States, 251 U.S. 342, 349 (1920)). undertaking joint asset activities that the (redesignated as part 985) and provided 7 See Op. Gen. Counsel (May 22, 2000). Banks are otherwise authorized by law an explicit compliance mechanism by

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36293 requiring the OF to promptly comply no intention by engaging in this of ‘‘competition with the retail deposit with any Finance Board directive rulemaking of creating any private right offering of member institutions.’’ pertaining to the preparation, filing, of action that would not have existed in The Finance Board agrees that this amendment or distribution of financial the absence of this rule. It should be regulation is the appropriate place to reports. noted that the Finance Board does not address the issue. The Finance Board Two commenters objected to the believe that the Banks, the OF or the OF agrees with the commenter that, timeframes within which the financial board of directors will incur any ultimately, it should be up to the boards statements are required to be prepared different or greater liability under any of directors of the Banks to determine and recommended that those deadlines aspect of the final rule than existed such matters involving their members. be relaxed. One commenter also previously. See Op. Gen. Counsel (May Therefore, the final rule has been suggested that the provision governing 22, 2000). revised to prohibit the issuance of COs the preparation of the system financial Proposed § 941.2(c)(ii)(C) intended to be privately placed with or statements make clear that the Finance (redesignated as § 985.8(c)(3) of the final sold without the participation of an Board would make its determination as rule) would have required OF to define, underwriter to retail investors, or issued to whether the reports conform to the implement and maintain investor with a concession structure designed to appropriate disclosure and accounting suitability standards, and assure that facilitate the placement of the COs in requirements prior to the release of the these standards are met. Several retail accounts, unless the OF has given financial statement by the OF. Two commenters noted that investor notice to the board of directors of each commenters suggested the addition of a suitability is more properly dealt with of the Banks describing a policy provision stating that the failure to by underwriters than by issuers. The permitting such issuances, soliciting comply with the rule would not create Finance Board agrees with these comments from each Bank’s board of any private right of action that would comments and has revised the final rule directors, and considering the not have existed in the absence of the to address suitability by requiring OF to comments received before adopting a regulation’s reporting requirement. require that underwriters of COs have policy permitting such issuance Section 985.6(b) is adopted as and maintain adequate suitability sales activities. The language of the rule has proposed, with only minor changes, in practices and policies governing the been designed so as to have no effect on the final rule. With respect to the distribution of Bank debt that are current debt issuance practices, which comments concerning relaxing the acceptable to, and subject to review by, as noted above are not currently timeframes for preparation of financial the OF. directed at retail level investors. Only reports, the Finance Board continues to Proposed § 941.2(c)(2)(iv) departures from current practices would believe that, just as disclosure (redesignated as § 985.6 of the final rule) subject the issuance process to the concerning the Bank System should would have required the OF to have notice procedure described in the rule. conform to industry standards, so too systems in place for timely monitoring All other references to considering or should the Bank System provide that the unsecured credit exposure of the promoting the cooperative nature of the information to interested parties within Banks, and appropriate systems to Bank System have been deleted from the the timeframes applicable in the manage the Banks’ counterparty risk. final rule. industry. In this regard, the Finance While the monitoring of counterparty Board prepared and completed both the risk is an existing function of the OF, E. Leverage Limit 1999 combined annual financial report management of counterparty risk, as at The proposed rule, and corresponding and the first quarter 2000 combined least two commenters pointed out, is a proposed changes to the FMP, did not financial report within the applicable function more appropriately left to the include the 20-to-1 leverage limit from timeframes. There does not appear to be Banks. The final rule has been revised § 910.1(b) of the Finance Board’s any reason why the OF could not and to delete the requirement that the OF regulations, or the 20-to-1 leverage limit should not continue to meet this manage the Banks’ counterparty risk, on each Bank contained in the FMP. standard. Therefore, no changes have but retains the requirement that the OF Instead, the proposed amendments to been made in the final rule to the timely monitor each Bank’s and the the FMP recast the leverage limit proposed timeframes. Bank System’s unsecured credit applicable to each Bank from a liability- With respect to the comment exposure to individual counterparties. based limit to an asset-based limit, and concerning Finance Board review of Proposed § 941.2(c)(1)(i) and (iii) required that each Bank maintain disclosure prior to release of financial (redesignated as § 985.8(c)(4) of the final capital in an amount equal to at least reports, the Finance Board does not rule) required the OF to consider or 4.76 percent of the Bank’s total assets. wish to impose any delay in the promote the cooperative nature of the See 65 FR at 328, 339. This limit issuance or distribution process, nor to Bank System, and be mindful of and required that the assets of a Bank not have the process of review of these preserve the relationship between the exceed 21 times its capital. reports differ from the process of review Banks and their members, which are The Finance Board did not believe practiced by the SEC. When the SEC also issuers of debt in the capital that either the elimination of the Bank reviews 1934 Act reports, it does not markets. Several commenters objected System-wide leverage limit from the generally do so prior to issuance. to the inclusion of these concepts as Finance Board’s regulations, or the Therefore, the Finance Board has ambiguous, onerous, confusing and proposed revision to the leverage limit adopted the review provision as lacking clarity as standards. One contained in the FMP, would have any proposed. commenter suggested that this rule was practical effect on the Bank System or A provision stating that the failure to not the optimal forum for addressing the its bondholders. The Finance Board, as comply with the rule would not create matter of retail debt issuance by the the regulator of the Banks, would any private right of action that would Banks vis a vis Bank members. Another continue to monitor each Bank for not have existed in the absence of the commenter, while acknowledging that compliance with the individual leverage regulation’s reporting requirement has Bank System debt is not currently limit included in the FMP. The existing been added to the rule in § 985.6(b)(7), distributed directly to retail level FMP provision prohibits a Bank from in response to a concern expressed by investors, speculated that such participating in COs if such transactions the commenters. The Finance Board has distributions could raise a policy issue would cause the Bank’s liabilities to

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36294 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations exceed 20 times the Bank’s capital.8 The funded by repurchase agreements and to take whatever action may be proposed revision to the FMP other secured liabilities would be necessary to maintain the rating of COs established an equivalent leverage subject to capital charges. at the highest level is a substantially standard, stated as a percentage of Repurchase agreements are a de stronger protection than the current assets, which would require each Bank minimis portion of Bank funding. At requirement of a one-time written to maintain capital of at least 4.76 December 31, 1999, repurchase statement from a rating agency or percent of its total assets. The agreements were less than one-tenth of investment banking firm that a change imposition of the proposed standard on one percent of the total funding of the in the leverage limit would not each Bank would ensure that the Bank Banks, eight of the Banks had no adversely affect the rating or System itself stays within the leverage repurchase agreements, and one Bank creditworthiness of COs. limit, rendering any retention of a Bank accounted for a majority of the Bank System-wide leverage limit System’s repurchase agreements. F. Other Changes unnecessary. Further, the Finance Board The Finance Board agrees with the 1. Amendments to Part 900 recommendation that the leverage noted that with the recent passage of the As proposed, the duplicative requirement be included in the Finance Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Banks definitions in part 966 of the terms Board’s regulations rather than in the would be subject to asset-based ‘‘Board’’ and ‘‘Bank,’’ which are now FMP. The final rule incorporates the statutory leverage limits and risk-based defined in part 900, have been deleted. leverage limit provision into § 966.3(a). capital requirements. When The definition of ‘‘consolidated implemented, the new risk-based capital The proposed rule deleted provisions of the Finance Board’s regulations that obligation’’ is adopted as proposed, with regime would provide an additional minor edits, in § 900.1 of the final rule safeguard to the Bank System and its purported to limit the Finance Board’s ability to change the leverage limit only to clarify that it includes any bond, bondholders by requiring Banks to hold debenture or note authorized under part capital in proportion to the risks they if the Finance Board received either written evidence from at least one major 966 to be issued jointly by the Banks assume. under section 11(a) of the Act, or any The final rule incorporates the Nationally Recognized Securities Rating bond or note issued by the Finance leverage change that originally was Organization (NRSRO) that the Board on behalf of all Banks pursuant to proposed to be part of the FMP. In proposed change will not result in the section 11(c) of the Act, on which the addition, the final rule extends and lowering of that rating agency’s then- Banks are jointly and severally liable. makes permanent the additional current rating or assessment on senior leverage authority originally permitted bonds outstanding or next to be issued; 2. Amendment to Part 905 to the Banks for Year 2000 liquidity. In or a written opinion from an investment The proposal would have amended particular, the final rule allows a Bank banking firm that the proposed change § 905.30 to add a new paragraph (a)(3) to have asset-based leverage of up to 25 would not have a materially adverse to provide for the termination as of to 1 if the Bank’s non-mortgage assets effect on the creditworthiness of senior December 31, 2000, of the OF’s after deducting deposits and capital, do bonds outstanding or next to be issued. authority to act as agent for the Finance not exceed 11 percent of its total assets. See 65 FR 324 at 328–329. As proposed, Board in the issuance of COs under For the purpose of the final rule, non- these provisions are deleted by the final section 11(c) of the Act. By this 10 mortgage assets equal the total assets rule. Instead, § 966.3(b) of the final provision, the Finance Board intended after deducting core mission activity rule requires the Banks to seek, obtain to transition itself out of, and the Banks assets and assets described in sections and maintain a rating on the COs from into, the debt issuance function under II.B.8 through II.B.11 of the FMP.9 The an NRSRO. It requires each Bank to the provisions of section 11(a) of the Act Year 2000 leverage provision allowed a operate in such a manner and take as soon as practicable. Bank to have liability-based leverage of whatever actions are necessary to ensure The Finance Board has determined up to 25 to 1 if its ratio of non-mortgage that the COs receive and maintain the that it can accomplish the same goal by investments did not exceed 12 percent highest rating from an NRSRO. Section deleting § 905.30 in its entirety, and of the liabilities for which the Bank was 966.3(c) of the final rule requires each providing in § 966.2 that the Finance the primary obligor. This 25 to 1 Bank to obtain a rating, such as a long- Board may in its discretion from time to leverage requirement is consistent with term credit issuer rating from Standard time delegate its issuance of COs under the leverage requirements of the and Poor’s or a financial strength rating section 11(c) of the Act by resolution of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. from Moody’s that is no lower than the the Board of Directors of the Finance A number of commenters objected to second highest credit rating. Each of the Board.11 The Finance Board anticipates the proposed change on the basis that Banks now has an Aaa long-term issuer working with the OF to determine a secured liabilities, principally credit rating from Standard and Poor’s. mutually acceptable date on which the repurchase agreements, are not now Therefore, the ratings requirements in OF will begin issuing COs under the subject to a capital requirement. Under the final rule merely reflect current authority of section 11(a) of the Act and the proposed FMP, however, assets practice and will impose no new costs ceasing to issue COs under the authority or burdens on the Banks. of section 11(c) of the Act. 8 By resolution the Board of Directors of the The ratings requirements in the final Finance Board directed that, through June 30, 2000, rule will enhance the protections 3. Amendments to Part 966— a Bank may have leverage up to 25 to 1 as long as afforded the holders of COs. Requiring Consolidated Obligations that Bank’s ratio of non-mortgage investments to COs does not exceed 12 percent. The Finance Board each of the Banks on an ongoing basis Part 910 of the Finance Board’s adopted this additional leverage flexibility on an regulations was redesignated as part interim basis to allow the Banks to provide Year 10 Without conceding that the terms of the current 966. The part has been reorganized and 2000 funding to their members. See Res. No. 99– rule apply, but in an abundance of caution, so as 33 (May 28, 1999). to be in compliance with the terms of the current renumbered, terms have been modified 9 On May 3, 2000, the Finance Board published rule, a written opinion from an NRSRO that the for notice and comment a proposed rule that changes to the leverage limit would not have a 11 The Finance Board annually adopts a debt- included a listing of activities that would qualify as materially adverse effect on the creditworthiness of issuance authorization to the OF that includes core mission activities. See 65 FR 25676 at 25688 COs outstanding or next to be issued was obtained parameters to which the debt must conform. See (May 3, 2000). prior to adoption of the final rule. Res. No. 2000–11 (Feb. 23, 2000).

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36295 as proposed in the final rule for stating that agreements and instruments would be jointly and severally liable, on regulatory consistency (such as by entered into in connection with the behalf of the Banks and the Finance substituting ‘‘Finance Board’’ for issuance of COs prior to implementation Board under sections 11(a) and 11(c) of ‘‘Board,’’ ‘‘Bank’’ for ‘‘Federal Home of the final rule will continue to be the Act, respectively. 12 U.S.C. 1431(a) Loan Bank,’’ and ‘‘consolidated effective with respect to the issuance of and (c). That proposal has been adopted obligation’’ for ‘‘consolidated bond’’), COs issued under the authority of the in § 985.3(a) of the final rule. Section and a new § 966.10 has been added. final rule by operation of law, and that 985.3 of the final rule goes on to provide a. Definitions—§ 966.1. As proposed, references to COs in those agreements that the OF shall prepare and issue the the definitions of the terms ‘‘Board’’ and and instruments shall be deemed to combined annual and quarterly ‘‘Bank,’’ which are now defined in part refer to all COs by whomever issued. financial reports for the Bank System, 900, and of the term ‘‘unsecured senior The Finance Board agrees that such a shall function as the Fiscal Agent for the liabilities’’ have been deleted. The savings clause would be prudent and Banks, and shall perform such duties definition of ‘‘Nationally Recognized would further its goal of effecting a and responsibilities for the Financing Statistical Rating Organizations’’ has smooth and seamless transition of the Corporation and the Resolution Funding been adopted as proposed in § 966.1. CO issuance process between it and the Corporation as may be required under b. Sections 966.2 through 966.10. The Banks. Accordingly, the Finance Board the Finance Board’s regulations or the negative pledge requirement is adopted has added such a savings clause as Act. as proposed, in § 966.2(c), retaining the § 966.10 in the final rule. iv. Finance Board oversight. Proposed negative pledge requirement for debt § 941.3 has been redesignated as § 985.4 previously issued by the OF on behalf 4. Amendments to Part 985—the Office of Finance and adopted without other changes from of the Finance Board under section the proposal. 11(c), and expressly requiring each Bank The final rule has been significantly to maintain the specified assets free of reorganized in form, but not in v. Funding of the OF. Proposed pledge in an amount equal to the Bank’s substance, from the proposed rule. The § 941.7 incorporated, with modest pro rata share in COs issued by the OF most important conceptual difference revisions, the existing provisions of the on behalf of the Banks under section between the proposed and final rules is Finance Board’s regulations regarding 11(a) in which the Bank participated. that certain powers and duties proposed the responsibility of the Banks to fund Proposed § § 910.3 through 910.7 are to be powers and duties of the OF board the operations of the OF. That section adopted as proposed, with minor of directors have been recast as has been redesignated as § 985.5 in the changes, in the final rule, but authorities and responsibilities of the final rule and revised to eliminate redesignated as § § 966.4 through 966.8. OF itself in the final rule. Part 941 has unnecessary provisions and to more One commenter argued that the been redesignated as part 985. fully devolve the responsibility for this provision in proposed § 910.3, reserving a. Definitions, oversight, authority of process. As adopted, § 985.5 retains the to the Finance Board the authority to the Office of Finance, functions and requirement that the Banks are prescribe the form of each CO, runs funding. i. Definitions. Section 985.1 of responsible for jointly funding the OF, counter to the devolution of the final rule defines ‘‘OF’’ as the Office and makes explicit that this shall management issues. The Finance Board of Finance, a joint office of the Banks include the cost of indemnifying the agrees and has therefore deleted that pursuant to section 2B of the Act. See members of the OF board of directors, provision from § 966.4 of the final rule. 12 U.S.C. 1422b(b)(2). the Managing Director, and other Proposed § 910.7, redesignated as ii. Authority of the OF. Proposed officers and employees of the OF. This § 966.8 in the final rule, provided the § 941.5 (redesignated as § 985.2(a)), requirement was added at the urging of conditions under which the OF board of which was entitled ‘‘Powers of the OF several commenters, with whom the directors shall authorize the issuance of board of directors,’’ has been adopted as Finance Board agrees. As proposed, COs. As adopted, § 966.8 provides that ‘‘Authority of the OF,’’ but otherwise is § 985.5(b) of the final rule provides that, the OF board of directors shall authorize enacted substantively as proposed. It at the direction of and pursuant to the offering for current and forward provides that the OF shall have the policies and procedures adopted by the settlement (not to exceed 12 months) or incidental powers under section 12(a) of OF board of directors, the Banks are the reopening of COs as necessary and the Act as are necessary, convenient and required periodically to reimburse the authorize the maturities, rates of proper to accomplish the efficient OF to maintain sufficient operating interest, terms and conditions thereof, operation and management of the OF, funds under the budget approved by the subject to the provisions of 31 U.S.C. including having authority to contract OF board of directors. Also as proposed, 9108. It also provides that COs may be with a Bank or Banks for the use of Bank the final rule provides that each Bank’s offered for sale only to the extent that facilities or personnel in order to respective pro rata share of the the Banks are committed to take the perform its functions or duties. The rule reimbursement must be based on the proceeds, and continues the existing empowers the OF to act as agent (rather ratio of the total paid-in value of its prohibition on directly placing COs than the OF board of directors) for the capital stock relative to the total paid- with another Bank. As discussed Banks in issuing COs pursuant to in value of all capital stock in the Bank previously, the requirements in the section 11(a) of the Act, for the Finance System. The final rule adopts the proposal that the OF board of directors Board, by delegation, in issuing COs provision of the proposed rule shall implement investor suitability pursuant to section 11(c) of the Act, and providing authority for the OF board of standards and adopt a policy addressing in making principal and interest directors, with the prior approval of the the relationship between the Banks and payments on COs issued in either Finance Board, to implement an their members as debt issuers, have capacity. Finally, § 985.2 gives the OF alternative formula for determining each been deleted from the final rule. authority to assess the Banks for the Bank’s respective share of the OF Proposed § 910.8 (joint-and-several funding of its operations in accordance expenses or, by contract with a Bank or liability) has been redesignated as with the provisions of § 985.5. Banks, to choose to be reimbursed § 966.9 without change. iii. Functions of the OF. Proposed through a fee structure in lieu of or in One commenter recommended the § 941.2(b)(1) expressly provided that the addition to assessment, for services inclusion in the final rule of a provision OF could issue COs on which the Banks provided to the Bank or Banks for the

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36296 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations issuance or servicing of COs or for other annual and quarterly financial reports the term during which the vacancy activities. for the Bank System (discussed occurs. Section 985.7(c) provides that One commenter suggested not using previously in more detail); (3) that the the private citizen director shall serve as the Banks’ paid-in capital as the OF shall manage relationships with the the Chair, with the Vice Chair being allocation method for assessments on NRSROs; (4) that the OF shall conduct selected by a majority vote of the the Banks for the OF operating expense, research reasonably related to the directors. The Chair is responsible for stating that soon there would no longer issuance or servicing of COs; and (5) ensuring that the directives, resolutions exist any direct connection between the that the OF shall timely monitor each and minutes of the OF board of directors paid-in capital of a member of a Bank Bank’s and the Bank System’s are drafted and maintained. and the member’s advances outstanding. unsecured credit exposure to individual Proposed § 941.4(e) (redesignated as The commenter suggested that the counterparties. § 985.7(d) in the final rule) would have measure should more directly Proposed § 941.2(c)(3) provides that, replaced the multiple provisions of the approximate the issuance costs for the in accordance with policies and current rule with a single standard of Bank System and recommended further procedures established by the OF board compensation permitting members of that the measure be the Banks’ of directors, the OF shall perform such the OF board of directors to receive apportionment of the proceeds of duties and responsibilities for the compensation and reimbursement for aggregate CO issuance for the prior year Financing Corporation (FICO) or the expenses incurred as a result of their or quarter. While the Finance Board Resolution Funding Corporation service on the OF board of directors. believes that there may be some merit in (REFCorp) on behalf of the Banks, as The final rule maintains the existing these suggestions, no changes have been may be required. This section preserves compensation provisions, with made at this time to the final rule. The a current function of the OF as set forth modifications to reflect recent Finance Board has proposed a risk- in § 941.5(b). amendments to the Finance Board’s based capital rule, but it will be some ii. Structure of the OF board of rules in light of the enactment of time before the new capital system is directors. The proposed rule would Gramm-Leach-Bliley. In light of the OF’s fully in place. At such time as the new have changed the current structure of role, § 985.7 of the final rule also capital system has been implemented, the OF board of directors to includes a new paragraph (e) requiring, the Finance Board will consider the accommodate proposed new functions rather than merely allowing, the OF to need to change this provision of the for the OF. As discussed previously, no indemnify its directors, the Managing rule. In the interim, the Banks can take new functions for the OF are being Director, and other officers and advantage of the provision allowing for adopted at this time, except the employees of the OF under such terms alternative formulae for assessments if preparation of the Bank System’s and conditions as shall be determined the current formula becomes combined annual and quarterly by the OF board of directors, provided unworkable. financial reports. Therefore, no changes that such terms and conditions shall be The final rule does not require, as did to the structure of the OF board of generally consistent with the terms and the proposed rule, that the OF’s directors are being adopted in the final conditions of indemnification of checking account be called the Imprest rule. Although the structure is not being directors, officers and employees of the Fund. The final rule does contain new changed, provisions relating to Banks generally. provisions specifying that the OF’s compensation and governance of the OF iii. General Duties of the OF board of operating funds shall not be board of directors in the final rule have directors. Section 985.8 of the final rule commingled with any proceeds received been revised to devolve responsibilities sets forth general duties of the OF board from the sale of COs, and that, pursuant to the OF board of directors consistent of directors, adopting provisions from to the provisions of section 2B(b)(1) of with similar regulatory provisions proposed § 941.6 and applying to the OF the Act, 12 U.S.C. 1422b(b)(1), none of relating to the boards of directors of the board of directors appropriate the OF’s operating funds or any of the Banks. provisions of the Finance Board’s proceeds from the sale of any COs shall Section 985.7 of the final rule recently adopted rule on ‘‘Powers and be construed to be Government funds or maintains the current three-member Responsibilities of Federal Home Loan appropriated monies or subject to structure of the OF board of directors, Bank Boards of Directors and Senior apportionment for the purposes of composed of two Bank presidents and Management’’ at part 917. See 65 FR chapter 15 of title 31 of the United one private citizen with demonstrated 25267 (May 1, 2000). It retains existing States Code or any other authority. expertise in financial markets, all requirements that the OF board of b. Debt management activities. i. Debt appointed by the Finance Board. This directors shall adopt bylaws, but management duties of the OF. Proposed structure has served the OF and the provides that it shall do so in § 941.2(c) (redesignated as § 985.6(a) in Bank System well while the OF’s only accordance with the provisions of the final rule) set out the functions the functions have been to issue COs and to § 917.10 of the Finance Board’s OF is authorized to undertake in make CO principal and interest regulations, 12 CFR 917.10. It also support of the issuance of debt; it also payments when due. The Finance Board retains existing requirements that the set forth functions the OF is authorized believes that this structure will continue OF board of directors shall conduct its to undertake in support of joint asset to serve these purposes in an efficient business by majority vote of its members activities which are not being addressed and effective manner, under the convened at a meeting in accordance at this time. As adopted in § 985.6 of the oversight and supervision of the with its bylaws, but goes on to require, final rule, this section sets out an Finance Board. consistent with recently adopted abbreviated version of the debt The final rule provides that the provisions of § 918.7, that the OF board management duties of the OF proposed directors shall serve three-year terms. of directors shall hold no fewer than in § 941.2(c), including: (1) That the OF The initial terms are staggered so that 1⁄3 nine meetings annually. shall issue and service COs pursuant to of the terms will expire each year. The Section 985.8(c) adopts provisions of and in accordance with the policies and directors are subject to removal or proposed § 941.6(b)(2) requiring the OF procedures established by the OF board suspension for cause by the Finance board of directors to establish policies of directors; (2) that the OF shall Board. The Finance Board fills regarding COs which shall govern the prepare and distribute the combined vacancies, but only for the remainder of frequency and timing of issuance, issue

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36297 size, minimum denomination, bond may be deemed to be created under part reports. Section 985.8(d)(7) of the final concessions, underwriter qualifications, 985. rule gives the OF board of directors the currency of issuance, interest-rate Also adopted is the provision of exclusive authority to select the change or conversion features, call proposed § 941.4(f) that requires the OF independent outside accountant for the features, principal indexing features, board of directors to establish an audit combined financial report. selection and retention of outside committee. The final rule provides that Second, in its recently adopted counsel, and selection of clearing the OF board of directors shall governance rule, § 917.7, the Finance organizations. It also requires that the constitute and perform the duties of an Board gives the audit committee of each policies be intended to cause CO audit committee, which to the extent Bank a role in the selection or retention issuance efficiently and at the lowest possible shall operate consistent with of the independent outside accountant all-in funding costs over time, the requirements of § 917.6 and the for that Bank. Section 989.2 of the final consistent with: (i) Prudent risk- requirements pertaining to audit rule sets the criteria for selecting the management practices, prudential debt committee reports set forth in Item 306 independent outside accountant that parameters, short and long-term market of Regulation S-K promulgated by the each Bank and the OF must follow. conditions, and the Banks’ role as SEC. government-sponsored enterprises; (ii) Proposed § 941.8, which would have III. Regulatory Flexibility Act retained a savings clause providing that maintaining reliable access to the short- The final rule applies only to the all actions taken by the OF as it existed term and long-term capital markets; and Banks, which do not come within the prior to these amendments will (iii) positioning the issuance of debt to meaning of small entities as defined in continue to be valid as regards the take advantage of current and future the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). capital market opportunities. Finance Board and the Bank System, is deleted, along with the rest of the See 5 U.S.C. 601(6). Therefore, in Section 985.8(d) adopts without provisions of current § 941.12 (which accordance with section 605(b) of the significant substantive change the were proposed to be deleted) as obsolete RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Finance Board provisions of proposed § 941.6(b), and and no longer necessary. As discussed hereby certifies that this final rule will requires the OF board of directors to be above, the appropriate savings clause not have significant economic impact on responsible for the conduct and applying to pre-existing contracts has a substantial number of small entities. performance of all duties, functions, been included as § 966.10. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act operations and activities of the OF and The new § 989.2 sets forth audit for its efficient and effective operation. requirements. At the present time, the This final rule does not contain any The final rule authorizes the OF board process for selecting the independent collections of information pursuant to of directors to approve a strategic outside accountant for the Bank System the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. business plan for the OF and monitor and independent audit requirements is See 33 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Therefore, the the progress of its operations under such governed by Decision Memorandum 95– Finance Board has not submitted any plan; and to review, adopt, and monitor DM–09 (Feb. 9, 1995), as modified by information to the Office of the annual operating budget of the OF. Resolution 96–94 (Dec. 12, 1996). These Management and Budget for review. The final rule requires the OF board of require the Banks to have a single V. Effective Date directors to select, employ and define independent outside accountant and the duties of the Managing Director, that this independent outside Because the final rule provides for who shall be the chief executive officer accountant provide a separate opinion revisions to the leverage limit of the OF, a member of the Directorate on the financial statements on each previously authorized under Finance of the Financing Corporation, pursuant Bank and on the combined financial Board Resolution No. 99–33, dated May to section 21(b)(1)(A) of the Act, 12 statements for all of the Banks that 28, 1999, which by its terms expires U.S.C. 1441(b)(1)(A), and a member of appears in the annual financial report June 30, 2000, the Finance Board for the Directorate of the Resolution for the Bank System. Although the good cause finds that the final rule Funding Corporation, pursuant to selection of the independent outside should become effective on July 1, 2000. section 21B(c)(1)(A) of the Act, 12 accountant was up to the Banks, the See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). U.S.C. 1441b(c)(1)(A). The final rule Finance Board, as issuer of the COs List of Subjects provides that the OF will be the Fiscal under section 11(c) of the Act, annually Agent of the Banks. Additionally, the ratified the Banks’ selection. 12 CFR Part 900 final rule requires the OF board of New § 989.2 codifies most of the directors to review and approve all provisions of Decision Memorandum Administrative practice and contracts of the OF. Pursuant to the final 95–DM–09, with the exception of the procedure. rule, the OF board of directors will have requirement that there be a single 12 CFR Part 905 the exclusive authority to employ and independent outside accountant for contract for the services of an each Bank and the Bank System. It also Organization and functions independent, external auditor for the removes the Finance Board from any (Government agencies). Banks’ annual and quarterly combined role in selecting or ratifying the 12 CFR Part 965 financial statements; select, evaluate, selection of the independent outside determine the compensation of, and, accountant. Federal home loan banks, Finance. where appropriate, replace the internal The method of selecting the 12 CFR Part 966 auditor, who may be removed only by independent outside accountant must vote of the OF board of directors. Under change for two reasons. First, the Banks Federal home loan banks, Securities. the final rule, the OF board of directors will be taking over the function of 12 CFR 969 will assume any other responsibilities issuing COs under the authority of that may from time to time be delegated section 11(a) of the Act, with the OF Federal home loan banks, Finance. to it by the Finance Board. The final acting as their agent in issuing and 12 CFR Part 985 rule expressly states that no private servicing the debt and in preparing the rights of action are created and none Bank System’s combined financial Federal home loan banks, Securities.

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36298 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

12 CFR Part 989 (ii) A trust company that is a member 966.7 Administrative provision. of the Federal Reserve System or 966.8 Conditions for issuance of Accounting, Federal home loan banks, consolidated obligations. Financial disclosure. insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and is 966.9 Joint and several liability. For the reasons stated in the 966.10 Savings clause. designated by a Bank’s board of preamble, the Finance Board hereby directors; or Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a, 1422b, and amends 12 CFR parts 900, 905, 965, 966, (iii) A U.S. branch or agency of a 1431. 969, 985, and 989 as follows: foreign bank, as defined in the § 966.1 Definitions. PART 900ÐDEFINITIONS International Banking Act of 1978, as amended (12 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.), that For purposes of this part: 1. The authority citation for part 900 is subject to the supervision of the Financial Management Policy (FMP) continues to read as follows: Board of Governors of the Federal has the meaning set forth in § 956.1 of this chapter. Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422b(a). Reserve System, and is designated by a Bank’s board of directors. NRSRO means a credit rating 2. Amend § 900.1 to revise the Repurchase agreement means an organization regarded as a Nationally definition of ‘‘Consolidated obligations’’ agreement in which a Bank sells Recognized Statistical Rating to read as follows: securities and simultaneously agrees to Organization by the Securities and repurchase those securities or similar Exchange Commission. § 900.1 Definitions applying to all regulations. securities at an agreed upon price, with § 966.2 Issuance of consolidated or without a stated time for repurchase. obligations. * * * * * Consolidated obligation or CO means § 965.2 Authorized liabilities. (a) Consolidated obligations issued by any bond, debenture, or note authorized As a source of funds for business the Finance Board. The Finance Board under part 966 of this chapter to be operations, each Bank is authorized to may issue consolidated obligations issued jointly by the Banks pursuant to incur liabilities by: under section 11(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. section 11(a) of the Act, as amended (12 (a) Accepting proceeds from the 1431(c)), including the determination of U.S.C. 1431(a)), or any bond or note issuance of consolidated obligations the dates of issue, maturities, rates of issued by the Finance Board on behalf issued in accordance with part 966 of interest, terms and conditions thereof, of all Banks pursuant to section 11(c) of this chapter; and the manner in which such the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(c)), on which (b) Accepting time or demand consolidated obligations shall be issued. the Banks are jointly and severally deposits from members, other Banks or The Finance Board in its discretion from liable. instrumentalities of the United States, time to time may delegate this by resolution of the Board of Directors of * * * * * and cash accounts from members or associates pursuant to § § 969.2, the Finance Board, or may terminate PART 905ÐDESCRIPTION OF 950.24(b)(2)(i)(B), 950.24(d) or such delegation. ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS 961.4(a)(1), or other institutions for (b) Consolidated obligations issued by which the Bank is providing the Banks. (1) Pursuant to the Banks’ 3. The authority citation for part 905 correspondent services pursuant to housing finance mission set forth in continues to read as follows: section 11(e) of the Act (12 U.S.C. section 2A(a)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act (12 Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 12 U.S.C. 1422b(a) 1431(e)); U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3)(B)(ii)), pursuant to and 1423. (c) Purchasing Federal funds; and the Finance Board’s duty to ensure that (d) Entering into repurchase the Banks carry out that mission and Subpart C [Removed and Reserved] agreements. remain adequately capitalized and able to raise funds in the capital markets 4. Remove and reserve subpart C. § 965.3 Liquidity reserves for deposits. under section 2A(a)(3)(B)(ii) and (iii) of 5. Add part 965 to read as follows: Each Bank shall at all times have at the Act (12 U.S.C. 1422a(a)(3)(B)(ii) and least an amount equal to the current (iii)), and subject to the provisions of PART 965ÐSOURCE OF FUNDS deposits received from its members this part and such rules, regulations, invested in: Sec. terms and conditions as the Finance (a) Obligations of the United States; Board may prescribe, the Banks are 965.1 Definitions. (b) Deposits in banks or trust 965.2 Authorized liabilities. authorized to issue joint debt under companies; or section 11(a) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 965.3 Liquidity reserves for deposits. (c) Advances with a maturity of not to 1431(a)), which shall be called Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a, 1422b, and exceed five years that are made to consolidated obligations and on which 1431. members in conformity with part 950 of the Banks shall be jointly and severally this chapter. § 965.1 Definitions. liable under § 966.9 of this part. 6. Revise part 966 to read as follows: As used in this part: (2) Consolidated obligations shall be Deposits in banks or trust companies PART 966ÐCONSOLIDATED issued only through the Office of means: OBLIGATIONS Finance, as agent of the Banks pursuant (1) A deposit in another Bank; to this part and part 985. (2) A demand account in a Federal Sec. (3) The authorization contained Reserve Bank; 966.1 Definitions. herein shall be deemed to constitute (3) A deposit in, or a sale of Federal 966.2 Issuance of consolidated obligations. satisfaction of the requirement for funds to: 966.3 Leverage limit and credit rating Finance Board approval of the ‘‘terms (i) An insured depository institution, requirements. and conditions’’ of the consolidated 966.4 Form of consolidated obligations. as defined in section 2(12)(A) of the Act 966.5 Transactions in consolidated obligations pursuant to section 11(a) of (12 U.S.C. 1422(12)(A)), that is obligations. the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(a)). designated by a Bank’s board of 966.6 Lost, stolen, destroyed, mutilated or (c) Negative pledge requirement. Each directors; defaced consolidated obligations. Bank shall at all times maintain assets

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36299 described in paragraphs (c)(1) through consolidated obligations receive and Banks, to administer §§ 966.5 and 966.6, (c)(6) of this section free from any lien continue to receive the highest credit and to delegate such authority at their or pledge, in an amount at least equal rating from any NRSRO by which the discretion to other officers, employees, to a pro rata share of the total amount consolidated obligations have then been and agents of the Department of the of currently outstanding consolidated rated. Treasury. Any such regulations may be obligations jointly issued by the Banks (c) Individual Bank credit rating. Each waived on behalf of the Finance Board pursuant to section 11(a) of the Act (12 Bank shall operate in such a manner and the Banks by the Secretary of the U.S.C. 1431(a)) and by the Finance and take any actions necessary to ensure Treasury, the Acting Secretary of the Board pursuant to section 11(c) of the that the Bank has and maintains an Treasury, or by an officer of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(c)) and equal to individual issuer credit rating of at least Department of the Treasury authorized such Bank’s participation in all such the second highest credit rating from to waive similar regulations with COs outstanding, provided that any any NRSRO providing a rating, where respect to United States securities, but assets that are subject to a lien or pledge such rating is a meaningful measure of only in any particular case in which a for the benefit of the holders of any the individual Bank’s financial strength similar regulation with respect to issue of consolidated obligations shall and stability, and is updated at least United States securities would be be treated as if they were assets free annually by an NRSRO, or more waived. The terms ‘‘securities’’ and from any lien or pledge for purposes of frequently as required by the Finance ‘‘bonds’’ as used in this section shall, compliance with this paragraph (c). Board, to reflect any material changes in unless the context otherwise requires, Eligible assets are: the condition of the Bank. include and apply to coupons and (1) Cash; (d) Transition provision. Each Bank interim certificates. (2) Obligations of or fully guaranteed shall obtain the credit rating from an by the United States; NRSRO required under paragraph (c) of § 966.8 Conditions for issuance of (3) Secured advances; this section by July 1, 2001. consolidated obligations. (a) The OF board of directors shall (4) Mortgages as to which one or more § 966.4 Form of consolidated obligations. Banks have any guaranty or insurance, authorize the offering for current and or commitment therefor, by the United (a) All consolidated obligations shall forward settlement (up to 12 months) or States or any agency thereof; be issued in pari passu. the reopening of COs, as necessary, and (b) Consolidated obligations with (5) Investments described in section authorize the maturities, rates of maturities of one year or less may be 16(a) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1436(a)); and interest, terms and conditions thereof, (6) Other securities that have been designated consolidated notes. subject to the provisions of 31 U.S.C. assigned a rating or assessment by an § 966.5 Transactions in consolidated 9108. NRSRO that is equivalent to or higher obligations. (b) COs may be offered for sale only than the rating or assessment assigned The general regulations of the to the extent that Banks are committed by that NRSRO to consolidated Department of the Treasury now or to take the proceeds. obligations outstanding. hereafter in force governing transactions (c) COs shall not be directly placed with any Bank. § 966.3 Leverage limit and credit rating in United States securities, except 31 requirements. CFR part 357 regarding book-entry § 966.9 Joint and several liability. procedure, are hereby incorporated into (a) Bank leverage. (1) Except as (a) In general. (1) Each and every this part 966, so far as applicable and as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this Bank, individually and collectively, has necessarily modified to relate to section, the total assets of any Bank an obligation to make full and timely consolidated obligations, as the shall not exceed 21 times the total of payment of all principal and interest on regulations of the Finance Board for paid-in capital stock, retained earnings, consolidated obligations when due. similar transactions on consolidated and reserves (excluding loss reserves (2) Each and every Bank, individually obligations. The book-entry procedure and liquidity reserves for deposits and collectively, shall ensure that the for consolidated obligations is contained pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1431(g)) of that timely payment of principal and interest in part 987 of this subchapter. Bank. on all consolidated obligations is given (2) The aggregate amount of assets of § 966.6 Lost, stolen, destroyed, mutilated priority over, and is paid in full in any Bank may be up to 25 times the or defaced consolidated obligations. advance of, any payment to or total paid-in capital stock, retained United States statutes and regulations redemption of shares from any earnings, and reserves of that Bank, of the Department of the Treasury now shareholder. provided that non-mortgage assets, after or hereafter in force governing relief on (3) The provisions of this part shall deducting the amount of deposits and account of the loss, theft, destruction, not limit, restrict or otherwise diminish, capital, do not exceed 11 percent of mutilation or defacement of United in any manner, the joint and several such total assets. For the purposes of States securities, so far as applicable liability of all of the Banks on all of the this section, the amount of non- and as necessarily modified to relate to consolidated obligations issued by the mortgage assets equals total assets after consolidated obligations, are hereby Finance Board pursuant to section 11(c) deduction of core mission activity assets adopted as the regulations of the of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(c)) and by the and assets described in sections II.B.8 Finance Board for the issuance of Banks pursuant to section 11(a) of the through II.B.11 of the FMP. substitute consolidated obligations or Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(a)). (b) Credit ratings. (1) The Banks, the payment of lost, stolen, destroyed, (b) Certification and reporting. (1) collectively, shall obtain from an mutilated or defaced consolidated Before the end of each calendar quarter, NRSRO and, at all times, maintain a obligations. and before declaring or paying any current credit rating on the Banks’ dividend for that quarter, the President consolidated obligations. § 966.7 Administrative provision. of each Bank shall certify in writing to (2) Each Bank shall operate in such a The Secretary of the Treasury or the the Finance Board that, based on known manner and take any actions necessary, Acting Secretary of the Treasury is current facts and financial information, including without limitation reducing hereby authorized and empowered, as the Bank will remain in compliance Bank leverage, to ensure that the Banks’ the agent of the Finance Board and the with the liquidity requirements set forth

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36300 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations in section 11(g) of the Act (12 U.S.C. obligations, due during the applicable Bank pursuant to the Finance Board’s 1431(g)), and the Finance Board’s FMP quarter. authority under the Act or otherwise to or any regulations (as the same may be (3) A non-complying Bank may supervise the Banks and ensure that amended, modified or replaced), and continue to incur and pay normal they are operated in a safe and sound will remain capable of making full and operating expenses incurred in the manner. timely payment of all of its current regular course of business (including (g) No rights created. (1) Nothing in obligations, including direct obligations, salaries, benefits, or costs of office this part shall create or be deemed to coming due during the next quarter. space, equipment and related expenses), create any rights in any third party. (2) A Bank shall immediately provide but shall not incur or pay any (2) Payments made by a Bank toward written notice to the Finance Board if at extraordinary expenses, or declare, or the direct obligations of another Bank any time the Bank: pay dividends, or redeem any capital are made for the sole purpose of (i) Is unable to provide the stock, until such time as the Finance discharging the joint and several certification required by paragraph Board has approved the Bank’s liability of the Banks on consolidated (b)(1) of this section; consolidated obligation payment plan or obligations. (ii) Projects at any time that it will fail inter-Bank assistance agreement, or (3) Compliance, or the failure to to comply with statutory or regulatory ordered another remedy, and all of the comply, with any provision in this liquidity requirements, or will be unable non-complying Bank’s direct obligations section shall not be deemed a default to timely and fully meet all of its current have been paid. under the terms and conditions of the obligations, including direct obligations, (d) Finance Board payment orders; consolidated obligations. Obligation to reimburse. (1) The Finance due during the quarter; § 966.10 Savings clause. (iii) Actually fails to comply with Board, in its discretion and notwithstanding any other provision in Any agreements or other instruments statutory or regulatory liquidity entered into in connection with the requirements or to timely and fully meet this section, may at any time order any Bank to make any principal or interest issuance of COs prior to the all of its current obligations, including payment due on any consolidated amendments made to this part shall direct obligations, due during the obligation. continue in effect with respect to all quarter; or (2) To the extent that a Bank makes COs issued under the authority of (iv) Negotiates to enter or enters into any payment on any consolidated section 11 of the Act and pursuant to an agreement with one or more other obligation on behalf of another Bank, this part. References to consolidated Banks to obtain financial assistance to the paying Bank shall be entitled to obligations in such agreements and meet its current obligations, including reimbursement from the non-complying instruments shall be deemed to refer to direct obligations, due during the Bank, which shall have a corresponding all joint and several obligations of the quarter; the notice of which shall be obligation to reimburse the Bank Banks. accompanied by a copy of the providing assistance, to the extent of agreement, which shall be subject to the such payment and other associated costs PART 969ÐDEPOSITS approval of the Finance Board. (including interest to be determined by 7. The authority citation for part 969 (c) Consolidated obligation payment the Finance Board). plans. (1) A Bank promptly shall file a (e) Adjustment of equities. (1) Any continues to read as follows: consolidated obligation payment plan non-complying Bank shall apply its Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422b(a)(1) and 1431. for Finance Board approval: assets to fulfill its direct obligations. (i) If the Bank becomes a non- (2) If a Bank is required to meet, or § 969.3 [Removed] complying Bank as a result of failing to otherwise meets, the direct obligations 8. Remove § 969.3. provide the certification required in of another Bank due to a temporary 9. Revise part 985 to read as follows: paragraph (b)(1) of this section; interruption in the latter Bank’s debt (ii) If the Bank becomes a non- servicing operations (e.g., in the event of PART 985ÐTHE OFFICE OF FINANCE complying Bank as a result of being a natural disaster or power failure), the Sec. required to provide the notice required assisting Bank shall have the same right pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of this 985.1 Definitions. to reimbursement set forth in paragraph 985.2 Authority of the OF. section, except in the event that a failure (d)(2) of this section. 985.3 Functions of the OF. to make a principal or interest payment (3) If the Finance Board determines 985.4 Finance Board oversight. on a consolidated obligation when due that the assets of a non-complying Bank 985.5 Funding of the OF. was caused solely by a temporary are insufficient to satisfy all of its direct 985.6 Debt management duties of the OF. interruption in the Bank’s debt servicing obligations as set forth in paragraph 985.7 Structure of the OF board of directors. operations resulting from an external (e)(1) of this section, then the Finance 985.8 General duties of the OF board of event such as a natural disaster or a Board may allocate the outstanding directors. power failure; or liability among the remaining Banks on Appendix A to Part 985—Exceptions to the General Disclosure Standards (iii) If the Finance Board determines a pro rata basis in proportion to each that the Bank will cease to be in Bank’s participation in all consolidated § 985.1 Definitions. compliance with the statutory or obligations outstanding as of the end of For purposes of this part: regulatory liquidity requirements, or the most recent month for which the Bank System means the Banks and the will lack the capacity to timely and fully Finance Board has data, or otherwise as Office of Finance. meet all of its current obligations, the Finance Board may prescribe. Chair means the Chairperson of the including direct obligations, due during (f) Reservation of authority. Nothing board of directors of the Office of the quarter. in this section shall affect the Finance Finance. (2) A consolidated obligation payment Board’s authority to adjust equities Managing Director means the plan shall specify the measures the non- between the Banks in a manner different managing director of the Office of complying Bank will undertake to make than the manner described in paragraph Finance. full and timely payments of all of its (e) of this section, or to take OF means the Office of Finance, a current obligations, including direct enforcement or other action against any joint office of the Banks pursuant to

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36301 section 2B of the Act (12 U.S.C. § 985.4 Finance Board oversight. reimbursement described in paragraph 1422b(b)(2)). (a) Oversight and enforcement (b) of this section when directed to do actions. The Finance Board shall have so by the Managing Director pursuant to § 985.2 Authority of the OF. the same regulatory oversight authority procedures of the OF board of directors. (a) General. The OF shall enjoy such and enforcement powers over the OF, (e) Indemnification expenses. All incidental powers under section 12(a) of the OF board of directors, the directors, expenses incident to indemnification of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1432(a)), as are officers, employees, agents, attorneys, the members of the OF board of necessary, convenient and proper to accountants or other OF staff, as it has directors, the Managing Director, and accomplish the efficient execution of its over a Bank and its respective directors, other officers and employees of the OF duties and functions pursuant to this officers, employees, attorneys, shall be treated as an expense of the OF part, including the authority to contract accountants, agents or other staff. to be reimbursed by the Banks under the with a Bank or Banks for the use of Bank (b) Examinations. Pursuant to section provisions of this part. facilities or personnel in order to 20 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1440), the (f) Operating funds shall be perform its functions or duties. Finance Board shall examine the OF, all segregated. (1) Any funds received by (b) Agent. The OF in the performance funds and accounts that may be the OF from the Banks pursuant to this of its duties, shall have the power to act established pursuant to this part 985, section for OF operating expenses on behalf of: and the operations and activities of the promptly shall be deposited into one or (1) The Banks in issuing consolidated OF, as provided for in the Act or any more accounts and shall not be obligations pursuant to section 11(a) of regulations promulgated pursuant commingled with any proceeds from the the Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(a)); thereto. sale of consolidated obligations in any manner. (2) By delegation of the Finance Board § 985.5 Funding of the OF. (2) Neither the proceeds from the sale under § 966.2 of this chapter in issuing (a) Generally. The Banks are of consolidated obligations under part consolidated obligations pursuant to responsible for jointly funding all of the 966, nor any operating expense section 11(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. expenses of the Office of Finance, reimbursements received by the OF 1431(c)); and including the costs of indemnifying the from assessments on the Banks under (3) The Banks in paying principal and members of the OF board of directors, this section shall be construed to be interest due on the consolidated the Managing Director and other officers Government Funds or appropriated obligations, or other obligations of the and employees of the OF, as provided monies or subject to apportionment for Banks. for in this part. the purposes of chapter 15 of title 31 of (c) Assessments. The OF shall have (b) Funding policies. (1) At the the United States Code, or any other authority to assess the Banks for the direction of, and pursuant to policies authority, in accordance with section funding of its operations in accordance and procedures adopted by, the OF 2B(b)(1) of the Act (12 U.S.C. with § 985.5. board of directors, the Banks shall 1422b(b)(1)). periodically reimburse the OF in order § 985.3 Functions of the OF. to maintain sufficient operating funds § 985.6 Debt management duties of the (a) Joint debt issuance. Subject to under the budget approved by the OF OF. parts 965 and 966 of this chapter, and board of directors. The OF operating (a) Issuance and servicing of COs. The this part, the OF as agent shall offer, funds shall be: OF shall issue and service (including issue and service (including making (i) Available for expenses of the Office making timely payments on principal timely payments on principal and of Finance and the OF board of and interest due, subject to §§ 966.8 and interest due) consolidated obligations directors, according to their approved 966.9 of this chapter) consolidated on which the Banks are jointly and budgets; and obligations pursuant to and in severally liable on behalf of the Finance (ii) Subject to withdrawal by check, accordance with the policies and Board pursuant to section 11(c) of the wire transfer or draft signed by the procedures established by the OF board Act (12 U.S.C. 1431(c), or the Banks Managing Director or other person of directors under this part. pursuant to section 11(a) of the Act (12 designated by the OF board of directors. (b) Combined financial reports U.S.C. 1431(a)). (2) Each Bank’s respective pro rata requirements. The OF shall prepare and share of the reimbursement described in distribute the combined annual and (b) Preparation of combined financial paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall be quarterly financial reports for the Bank reports. The OF shall prepare and issue based on the ratio of the total paid-in System in accordance with the the combined annual and quarterly value of its capital stock relative to the following requirements: financial reports for the Bank System in total paid-in value of all capital stock in (1) The scope, form and content of the accordance with the requirements of the Bank System. disclosure generally shall be consistent § 985.6(b) and Appendix A of this part. (c) Alternative formula for with the requirements of the Securities (c) Fiscal agent. The OF shall function assessment. With the prior approval of and Exchange Commission’s as the Fiscal Agent of the Banks. the Finance Board, the OF board of Regulations S–K and S–X (17 CFR parts (d) Financing Corporation and directors may implement an alternative 229 and 210). Resolution Funding Corporation. The formula for determining each Bank’s (2) Information about each Bank shall OF shall perform such duties and respective share of the OF expenses or, be presented as a segment of the Bank responsibilities for the Financing by contract with a Bank or Banks, may System as if Statement of Financial Corporation (FICO) as may be required choose to be reimbursed through a fee Accounting Standards No. 131, titled under part 995 of this chapter, or for the structure in lieu of or in addition to ‘‘Disclosures about Segments of an Resolution Funding Corporation assessment, for services provided to the Enterprise and Related Information’’ (REFCorp) as may be required under Bank or Banks. (FASB 131) applied to the combined part 996 of this chapter or authorized by (d) Prompt reimbursement. Each Bank annual and quarterly financial reports of the Finance Board pursuant to section from time to time shall promptly the Bank System. 21B(c)(6)(B) of the Act (12 U.S.C. forward funds to the OF in an amount (3) The standards set forth in 1441b(c)(6)(B)). representing its share of the paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 36302 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations are subject to the exceptions set forth in to removal or suspension for cause by § 985.8 General duties of the OF board of the Appendix to this part. the Finance Board. directors. (4) The combined Bank System (2) The Finance Board shall fill any (a) General. (1) Conduct of business. annual report shall be filed with the vacancy occurring on the OF board of Each director shall have the duties Finance Board and distributed to each directors. An appointment to fill a prescribed in § 917.2(b) of this chapter, Bank and Bank member within 90 days vacancy shall be only for the remainder as appropriate. after the end of the fiscal year. The of the term during which the vacancy (2) Bylaws. The OF board of directors combined Bank System quarterly occurred. shall adopt bylaws in accordance with reports shall be filed with the Finance (3) Any member of the OF board of the provisions of § 917.10 of this Board and distributed to each Bank and directors is authorized to continue to chapter. Bank member within 45 days after the serve on the OF board of directors after (b) Meetings and quorum. The OF end of the first three fiscal quarters of the expiration of the member’s term board of directors shall conduct its each year. until a successor has been appointed by business by majority vote of its members (5) The Finance Board in its sole the Finance Board. at meetings convened in accordance discretion shall determine whether or (c) Chair. (1) The private citizen with its bylaws, and shall hold no fewer not a combined Bank System annual or member of the OF board of directors than nine meetings annually. Due notice quarterly financial report complies with shall serve as the Chair, and the Vice shall be given to the Finance Board by the standards of this part. Chair shall be selected by a majority (6) The OF board of directors shall vote of the members of the OF board of the Chair prior to each meeting. A comply promptly with any directive of directors. quorum, for purposes of meetings of the the Finance Board regarding the (2) The Chair shall preside over the OF board of directors, shall be not less preparation, filing, amendment or meetings of the OF board of directors. In than two members. distribution of the combined Bank the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair (c) Duties regarding COs. The OF System annual or quarterly financial shall preside. board of directors shall establish reports. (3) The Chair shall be responsible for policies regarding COs that shall: (7) Nothing in this section shall create ensuring that the directives and (1) Govern the frequency and timing or be deemed to create any rights in any resolutions of the OF board of directors of issuance, issue size, minimum third party. are drafted and maintained and for denomination, CO concessions, (c) Capital markets data. The OF keeping the minutes of all meetings. underwriter qualifications, currency of board of directors shall provide capital (d) Compensation. (1) The Bank issuance, interest-rate change or markets information concerning debt to President members shall not receive any conversion features, call features, the Banks. additional compensation or principal indexing features, selection (d) NRSROs. The OF board of reimbursement as a result of their and retention of outside counsel, directors shall manage relationships service on the OF board of directors. selection of clearing organizations, and with Nationally Recognized Statistical (2) Each Bank shall be entitled to be the selection and compensation of Rating Organizations in connection with reimbursed by from the Office of underwriters for consolidated their rating of consolidated obligations. Finance for its expenditure of travel and obligations, which shall be in (e) Research. The OF shall conduct per diem expenses associated with its accordance with the requirements and research reasonably related to the Bank President’s attendance at an OF limitations set forth in paragraph (c)(4) issuance or servicing of consolidated board of directors meeting as a director of this section; obligations. member thereof. (2) Prohibit the issuance of COs (f) Monitor Banks’ credit exposure. (3) The Office of Finance shall pay intended to be privately placed with or The OF shall timely monitor each compensation and expenses to the sold without the participation of an Bank’s and the Bank System’s private citizen member of the OF board underwriter to retail investors, or issued unsecured credit exposure to individual of directors in accordance with the with a concession structure designed to counterparties. requirements for payment of facilitate the placement of the COs in compensation and expenses to Bank retail accounts, unless the OF has given § 985.7 Structure of the OF board of chairs as set forth in part 918 of this directors. notice to the board of directors of each chapter. Bank describing a policy permitting (a) Membership. The OF board of (e) Indemnification. (1) The OF board such issuances, soliciting comments directors shall consist of three part-time of directors shall indemnify its from each Bank’s board of directors, and members appointed by the Finance members, the Managing Director, and considering the comments received Board as follows: other officers and employees of the OF before adopting a policy permitting such (1) Two Bank Presidents; and under such terms and conditions as issuance activities; (2) A citizen of the United States with shall be determined by the OF board of a demonstrated expertise in financial directors, provided that such terms and (3) Require all broker-dealers or markets. Such appointee may not be an conditions are consistent with the terms underwriters under contract to the OF to officer, director or employee of a Bank and conditions of indemnification of have and maintain adequate suitability or Bank System member, hold shares, or directors, officers and employees of the sales practices and policies, which shall any other financial interest in, any Bank System generally. be acceptable to, and subject to review member of a Bank, or be affiliated with (2) The OF board of directors shall by, the Office of Finance; any consolidated obligation selling or adopt indemnification procedures, (4) Require that COs shall be issued dealer group member under contract which shall be supplemented by a efficiently and at the lowest all-in with the OF. contract of insurance. funding costs over time, consistent with: (b) Terms. (1) Except as provided in (f) Delegation. The OF board of (i) Prudent risk-management paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the directors may delegate any of its practices, prudential debt parameters, members of the OF board of directors authority or duties to any employee of short and long-term market conditions, shall serve for three-year terms (which the OF in order to enable the OF to carry and the Banks’ role as government- shall be staggered), and shall be subject out its functions. sponsored enterprises;

VerDate 112000 15:17 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 36303

(ii) Maintaining reliable access to the disclosure of certain relationships and Principles for the purpose of expressing short-term and long-term capital related party transactions. In light of the an opinion thereon. markets; and cooperative nature of the Bank System, Audit report means a document in related-party transactions are to be expected, (iii) Positioning the issuance of debt which an independent accountant to take advantage of current and future and a disclosure of all related-party transactions that meet the threshold would indicates the scope of the audit made capital market opportunities. not be meaningful. Instead, the combined and sets forth an opinion regarding the (d) Other duties. The OF board of annual report will disclose the percent of financial statement taken as a whole, or directors shall: advances to members an officer of which an assertion to the effect that an overall (1) Set policies for management and serves as a Bank director, and list the top ten opinion cannot be expressed. When an operation of the OF; holders of advances in the Bank System and overall opinion cannot be expressed, the (2) Approve a strategic business plan the top five holders of advances by Bank, reasons therefor shall be stated. for the OF in accordance with the with a further disclosure indicating which of provisions of § 917.5 of this chapter, as these members had an officer that served as §§ 989.2 and 989.3 [Redesignated] appropriate; a Bank director. (3) Review, adopt and monitor annual B. Biographical information. The 12. Redesignate §§ 989.2 and 989.3 as biographical information required by Items §§ 989.3 and 989.4, respectively. operating and capital budgets of the OF 401 and 405 of Regulation S–K, 17 CFR in accordance with the provisions of 229.401 and 405, will be provided only for 13. Add § 989.2 to read as follows: § 917.8 of this chapter, as appropriate; the members of the Board of Directors of the § 989.2 Audit requirements. (4) Constitute and perform the duties Finance Board, Bank presidents, chairs and of an audit committee, which to the vice chairs, and the directors and Managing (a) Each Bank, the OF and the extent possible shall operate consistent Director of the OF. Financing Corporation shall obtain with: C. Compensation. The information on annually an independent, external audit (i) The requirements of § 917.6 of this compensation required by Item 402 of of and an audit report on its individual chapter, and Regulation S–K, 17 CFR 229.402, will be financial statement. (ii) The requirements pertaining to provided only for Bank presidents and the Managing Director of the OF. Since stock in (b) The OF board of directors shall audit committee reports set forth in Item each Bank trades at par, the Office of Finance obtain an audit and an audit report on 306 of Regulation S–K promulgated by will not include the performance graph the combined annual financial the Securities and Exchange specified in Item 402(1) of Regulation S–K, statements for the Bank System. Commission. 17 CFR 229.402(1). (c) All audits must be conducted in (5) Select, employ, determine the D. Submission of matters to a vote of accordance with generally accepted compensation for, and assign the duties stockholders. No information will be auditing standards and in accordance and functions of a Managing Director of presented on matters submitted to with the most current government the OF who shall: shareholders for a vote, as otherwise required (i) Be the chief executive officer for by Item 4 of the SEC’s form 10–K, 17 CFR auditing standards issued by the Office the OF and shall direct the 249.310. The only item shareholders vote of the Comptroller General of the United upon is the annual election of directors. implementation of the OF board of States. E. Exhibits. The exhibits required by Item (d) An independent, external auditor directors’ policies; 601 of Regulation S-K, 17 CFR 229.601, are (ii) Serve as a member of the not applicable and will not be provided. must meet at least twice each year with Directorate of the Financing F. Per share information. The statement of the audit committee of each Bank, the Corporation, pursuant to section financial information required by Items 301 OF board of directors, and the Financing 21(b)(1)(A) of the Act (12 U.S.C. and 302 of Rule S–K, 17 CFR 229.301 and Corporation Directorate. 1441(b)(1)(A)); and 302, is inapplicable because the shares of the (e) Finance Board examiners shall (iii) Serve as a member of the Banks are subscription capital that trades at have unrestricted access to all auditors’ Directorate of the Resolution Funding par, and the shares expand or contract with work papers and to the auditors to changes in member assets or advance levels. Corporation, pursuant to section G. Beneficial ownership. Item 403 of Rule address substantive accounting issues 21B(c)(1)(A) of the Act (12 U.S.C. S–K, 17 CFR 229.403, requires the disclosure that may arise during the course of any 1441b(c)(1)(A)). of security ownership of certain beneficial audit. (6) Review and approve all contracts owners and management. The combined 14. Revise newly designated § 989.3 to of the OF; financial report will provide a listing of the read as follows: (7) Have the exclusive authority to ten largest holders of capital stock in the employ and contract for the services of Bank System and a listing of the five largest § 989.3 Requirement to provide financial an independent, external auditor for the holders of capital stock by Bank. This listing and other information to the Finance Board Banks’ annual and quarterly combined will also indicate which members had an and the Office of Finance. officer that served as a director of a Bank. financial statements; In order to facilitate the preparation (8) Select, evaluate, determine the PART 989ÐFINANCIAL STATEMENTS by the Office of Finance of combined compensation of, and, where OF THE BANKS Bank System annual and quarterly appropriate, replace the internal reports, each Bank shall provide to the auditor, who may be removed only by 10. The authority citation for part 989 Office of Finance in such form and vote of the OF board of directors; and continues to read as follows: within such timeframes as the Finance (9) Assume any other responsibilities Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1422a, 1422b, 1431 Board or the Office of Finance shall that may from time to time be delegated and 1440. specify, all financial and other to it by the Finance Board. 11. Add § 989.1 to read as follows: information and assistance the Office of (e) No rights created. Nothing in this Finance shall request for that purpose. part shall create or be deemed to create § 989.1 Definitions. Nothing in this section shall contravene any rights in any third party. For purposes of this part: or be deemed to circumscribe in any Appendix A to Part 985—Exceptions to the Audit means an examination of the manner the authority of the Finance General Disclosure Standards financial statements by an independent Board to obtain any information from A. Related-party transactions. Item 404 of accountant in accordance with any Bank related to the preparation or Regulation S–K, 17 CFR 229.404, requires the Generally Accepted Accounting review of any financial report.

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR4 36304 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

§ 989.4 [Amended] 15. Amend newly designated § 989.4 by removing the words ‘‘Finance Board’’ wherever they appear and adding in their place the words ‘‘Office of Finance.’’ Dated: June 2, 2000. By the Board of Directors of the Federal Housing Finance Board. Bruce A. Morrison, Chairman. [FR Doc. 00–14366 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6725±01±P

VerDate 112000 19:41 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\07JNR4.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNR4 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36305

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD The FMP governs how the Banks may REFCorp obligation the Proposed FMP implement their financial management Amendments would have required the [NO. 2000±25] strategies by specifying the types of Banks to treat these obligations as RIN 3069±AA88 investments the Banks may purchase typical variable expenses (similar to pursuant to their statutory investment operating expenses) for purposes of the Changes to the Financial Management authority. The FMP also establishes Banks’ asset-liability management. Policy of the Federal Home Loan Bank mandatory guidelines relating to the The sixty-day public comment period System funding and hedging practices of the closed on March 6, 2000. The Finance Banks, the management of their credit, Board received seven comment letters: AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance interest-rate, and liquidity risks, and the six from Banks and one from a Bank Board. liquidity requirements for the Banks in trade association. Generally, the ACTION: Notice. addition to those required by statute. commenters opposed the proposed See FMP secs. III–IV.2 change to the leverage limit as more SUMMARY: The Federal Housing Finance Board (Finance Board) is amending its II. Proposed FMP Amendments restrictive than the current allowance and premature in advance of the new policy statement entitled ‘‘Financial On January 4, 2000, the Finance Management Policy of the Federal Home statutory leverage limit and risk-based Board published for comment a notice capital requirements imposed by the Loan Bank System’’ (‘‘FMP’’) to: (1) of proposed amendments to the FMP, in 5 delete the ‘‘Funding Guidelines’’ in Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The conjunction and conformance with commenters offered no objection to the section IV; (2) insert a new section IV proposed regulatory changes to the titled ‘‘Hedging Requirements’’; and (3) revisions to the hedging requirements or Finance Board’s regulations regarding the duration of equity calculation. revise the ‘‘Interest Rate Risk the OF (Proposed OF Rule). See 64 FR Limitations’’ in section VII. These FMP 339 (Jan. 4, 2000) (Proposed FMP III. Comments on the Proposed amendments are being made in Amendments). The Proposed FMP Amendments and Analysis of Changes conjunction with changes to the Finance Amendments would have deleted FMP Made in the FMP Amendments Board’s regulations governing the sec. IV. C. ‘‘Funding Guidelines,’’ as A. Leverage Limit issuance of consolidated obligations unnecessary in light of the Proposed OF (COs) under section 11 of the Federal Rule, with the exception that the current The Proposed FMP Amendments, and Home Loan Bank Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. Bank-by-Bank, liability-based leverage corresponding Proposed OF Rule, did 1431) and the authority and operations limit would have been replaced with a not include the 20-to-1 Bank System- of the Office of Finance (OF), described minimum total capital requirement wide leverage limit from the Finance in detail in a Final Rule published recast as a percentage of assets. The Board’s regulations, or the 20-to-1 elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Proposed FMP Amendments would liability-based leverage limit on each Register (OF Final Rule). have required that a Bank’s capital must Bank contained in the FMP. Instead, the DATES: The FMP amendments are be at least 4.76 percent of assets, or, Proposed FMP Amendments recast the effective June 7, 2000. inversely, that a Bank’s total assets leverage limit applicable to each Bank from a liability-based limit to an asset- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: could not exceed 21 times its capital. based limit, and required that each Bank Joseph A. McKenzie, Deputy Chief The Proposed FMP Amendments also maintain capital in an amount equal to Economist, Office of Policy, Research would have amended section IV.C.3 of at least 4.76 percent of the Bank’s total and Analysis, 202/408–2845, the FMP to eliminate the distinction assets. See 65 FR at 328, 339. This limit [email protected]; or Charlotte A. between standard and non-standard required that the assets of a Bank not Reid, Special Counsel, Office of General debt issues and require the Banks to exceed 21 times its capital. Counsel, 202/408–2510, [email protected]. hedge debt issues linked to equity or commodity prices or those denominated The Finance Board did not believe Staff also can be reached by regular mail that either the elimination of the Bank at the Federal Housing Finance Board, in foreign currencies. Finally, the Proposed FMP System-wide leverage limit from the 1777 F Street, NW, Washington, DC Finance Board’s regulations, or the 20006. Amendments would have amended section VII 3 of the FMP, which proposed revision to the leverage limit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: currently permits the Banks to include contained in the FMP, would have any practical effect on the Bank System or I. Background the cash flows associated with their REFCorp and Affordable Housing its bondholders. The Finance Board, as The FMP evolved from a series of Program (AHP) payment obligations in the regulator of the Banks, would policies and guidelines initially adopted their duration of equity calculations, to continue to monitor each Bank for by the former Federal Home Loan Bank restrict the Banks from treating the compliance with the individual leverage Board (FHLBB), predecessor agency to REFCorp obligation as if it were a fixed limit included in the FMP. The existing the Finance Board, in the 1970s and dollar obligation. In light of the Gramm- FMP provision prohibits a Bank from revised a number of times thereafter. Leach-Bliley Act,4 changes to the Banks’ participating in COs if such transactions The Finance Board adopted the FMP in would cause the Bank’s liabilities to 1991, consolidating into one document 2 See Fin. Bd. Res. No. 96–45, pp. 5–8. exceed 20 times the Bank’s capital. The the previously separate policies on 3 See Fin. Bd. Res. No. 96–45. p. 7. Proposed FMP Amendments established funds management, hedging and 4 Title VI of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the an equivalent leverage standard, stated interest-rate swaps, and adding new Federal Home Loan Bank System Modernization as a percentage of assets, which would guidelines on the management of Act of 1999, Pub. L. 106–102, 113 Stat. 1338 (Nov. require each Bank to maintain capital of 1 12, 1999) (Gramm-Leach-Bliley) changed the Banks’ unsecured credit and interest-rate risks. annual REF Corp. payment from a fixed, aggregate payment of $300 million to a payment of 20 percent percent of its annual income (net of its REFCorp 1 See Fin. Bd. Res. No. 96–45 (July 3, 1996), as of each Bank’s net earnings (net of AHP and obligation) to the AHP, with a Bank System-wide amended by Fin. Bd. Res. No. 96–90 (Dec. 6, 1996), operating expenses). The Finance Board uses minimum of $100 million. Fin. Bd. Res. No. 97–05 (Jan. 14, 1997), and Fin. Bd. duration of equity as its primary measure of interest 5 The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act provides for a five- Res. No. 97–86 (Dec. 17, 1997). See also 62 FR rate risk. Additionally, since 1995, each Bank has year phase-in for new statutory leverage limits and 13146 (Mar. 19, 1997)). been required to contribute a minimum of 10 risk-based capital requirements for the Banks.

VerDate 112000 19:36 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN5.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNN5 36306 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices at least 4.76 percent of its total assets. commenter argued in favor of retaining additional safeguard to the Bank System The imposition of the proposed the 25:1 leverage limit established in the and its bondholders by requiring Banks standard on each Bank would ensure 1999 Resolution, stating that the to hold capital in proportion to the risks that the Bank System itself stays within flexibility provided therein should not they assume. The FMP Amendments, the leverage limit, rendering any be forfeited. A majority of the and the OF Final Rule published retention of a Bank System-wide commenters opposed eliminating the elsewhere in this issue of the Federal leverage limit unnecessary. Further, the Bank System-wide leverage limit in the Register, are consistent with the Finance Board noted that with the current regulations, and urged deferral requirements of the Gramm-Leach- recent passage of the Gramm-Leach- of a new leverage limit until after the Bliley Act. Bliley Act, the Banks would be subject new capital regulations required under Accordingly, the Finance Board is to asset-based statutory leverage limits the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act have been deleting existing section VI, ‘‘Funding and risk-based capital requirements. adopted and the Banks’ capital plans Guidelines’’ from the FMP, as proposed. When implemented, the new risk-based have been reviewed and approved. capital regime would provide an The Finance Board agrees with the B. Hedging Requirement additional safeguard to the Bank System recommendation that the leverage The Finance Board is replacing and its bondholders by requiring Banks requirement should be included in the section IV of the FMP with a new to hold capital in proportion to the risks Finance Board’s regulations rather than section IV titled ‘‘Hedging they assume. in the FMP. The OF Final Rule, Requirements.’’ The ‘‘Hedging The commenters uniformly opposed published elsewhere in this issue of the Requirements’’ provision is adopted as the proposed 4.76 percent asset-based, Federal Register incorporates into proposed, without change, to read as Bank-by-Bank, capital requirement. A § 966.3(a) of the Finance Board’s follows: number of commenters objected to the regulations the leverage provision that proposed change on the basis that was originally proposed in the notice of IV. Hedging Requirements secured liabilities, principally Proposed FMP Amendments. In Prohibition on foreign currency or repurchase agreements, are not now addition, in response to the comments commodity positions. A Bank shall not take subject to a capital requirement. Under received, the OF Final rule extends and a position in any commodity or foreign the Proposed FMP Amendments, makes permanent the leverage authority currency. If a Bank participates in however, assets funded by repurchase provided to the Banks in the 1999 consolidated obligations denominated in a agreements and other secured liabilities Resolution. In particular, the OF Final currency other than U.S. dollars or linked to would be subject to capital charges. equity or commodity prices, it must hedge Rule allows a Bank to have asset-based the currency, equity, and commodity risks. Repurchase agreements represent a de leverage of up to 25 to 1 if that Bank’s minimis portion of Bank funding. At non-mortgage assets do not exceed 11 C. Duration of Equity Calculation December 31, 1999, repurchase percent of that Bank’s total assets that The Finance Board is revising section agreements were less than one-tenth of are not funded by deposits or capital. one percent of the total funding of the VII of the FMP, which sets forth For the purpose of the OF Final Rule, guidelines for the Banks on the Banks, eight of the Banks had no non-mortgage assets equal the total repurchase agreements, and one Bank management of interest-rate risk, assets after deducting core mission including certain interest rate risk accounted for a majority of the Bank activity assets and assets described in System’s repurchase agreements. The limitations. New section VII.B.4 is sections II.B. 8 through II.B. 11 of the adopted as proposed, without change, to Finance Board finds these arguments 7 FMP. read as follows: unpersuasive. The Finance Board believes that, Several commenters recommended when implemented, the new risk-based Each Bank is required to report its cash providing the Banks with a level of capital regime would provide an flows and calculate its duration and market asset/liability management flexibility value of equity without projected cash flows similar to that provided under a that represent the Bank’s share of the that Bank’s ratio of non-mortgage investments to System’s REFCorp and AHP obligations. resolution adopted by Finance Board to COs does not exceed 12 percent. The Finance Board assist the Banks in meeting member adopted this additional leverage flexibility on an Dated: June 2, 2000. demand for Year 2000 liquidity. See interim basis to allow the Banks to provide Year By the Board of Directors of the Federal 2000 funding to their members. See Fin. Bd. Res. Finance Board Res. No. 99–33 (May 28, No. 99–33 (May 28, 1999). Housing Finance Board. 6 1999) (1999 Resolution). One 7 On May 3, 2000, the Finance Board published Bruce A. Morrison, for notice and comment a proposed rule that Chairman. 6 By resolution of its board of directors, the included a listing of activities that would qualify as Finance Board directed that, through June 30, 2000, core mission activities. See 65 FR 25676 at 25688 [FR Doc. 00–14367 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am] a Bank may have leverage up to 25 to 1 as long as (May 3, 2000). BILLING CODE 6725±01±P

VerDate 112000 19:32 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN5.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 07JNN5 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 110 Wednesday, June 7, 2000

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING JUNE

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202±523±5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the revision date of each title. Laws 523±5227 CFR 129...... 35703 187...... 36002 Presidential Documents Proclamations: Proposed Rules: Executive orders and proclamations 523±5227 7316...... 36051 39 ...... 34993, 35590, 35869, The United States Government Manual 523±5227 Executive Orders: 36095 February 26, 1852 71 ...... 35301, 35302, 35303 (Revoked in part by Other Services PLO 7447)...... 35390 15 CFR Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523±4534 13087 (See 760...... 34942 Privacy Act Compilation 523±3187 Proclamation Proposed Rules: Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523±6641 7316) ...... 36051 930...... 34995 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523±5229 922...... 35871 5 CFR 890...... 35259 17 CFR ELECTRONIC RESEARCH Proposed Rules: World Wide Web 7 CFR 1...... 35304 28...... 35807 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other 301...... 35261 18 CFR publications: 915...... 35561 154...... 35706 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 930...... 35265 161...... 35706 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 1160...... 35808 250...... 35706 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access: Proposed Rules: 284...... 35706 54...... 35857 http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 20 CFR 928...... 35590 E-mail 1216...... 35298 404...... 34950 416...... 34950 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an E-mail 10 CFR service for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. To 21 CFR 50...... 34913 subscribe, send E-mail to 5...... 34959 1703...... 35810 [email protected] 312...... 34963 11 CFR 573...... 35823 with the text message: 108...... 36053 24 CFR subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name 245...... 36272 Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe to 12 CFR 902...... 36042 PENS. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. 40...... 35162 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 216...... 35162 27 CFR Federal Register system to: 332...... 35162 Proposed Rules: 573...... 35162 9...... 35871 [email protected] 745...... 34921 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 900...... 36290 29 CFR regulations. 905...... 36290 2520...... 35568 965...... 36290 2584...... 35703 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, JUNE 966...... 36290 969...... 36290 30 CFR 34913±35258...... 1 985...... 36290 250...... 35824 35259±35560...... 2 989...... 36290 914...... 35568 Proposed Rules: 35561±35806...... 5 13 CFR 35807±36052...... 6 701...... 36097 121...... 35810 36053±36306...... 7 724...... 36097 773...... 36097 14 CFR 774...... 36097 11...... 36244 778...... 36097 21...... 36244 842...... 36097 25...... 35813, 36244 843...... 36097 39...... 34926, 846...... 36097 34928, 34932, 34935, 34938, 906...... 36098 34941, 35267, 35270, 35563, 931...... 36101, 36104 35566, 35814, 35817, 35819, 36053, 36055, 36059 32 CFR 71 ...... 35272, 35822, 36060 3...... 35576 73...... 35273 91...... 35703 33 CFR 97...... 35274, 35275 117...... 35825, 35826

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:35 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07JNCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Reader Aids

165 ...... 34971, 35278, 35279, 41 CFR 47 CFR 42...... 36014 35827, 35832, 35838 51±8...... 35286 73...... 34988, 47...... 36030 51±9...... 35286 34989, 34990, 34991, 35588 49...... 36030 34 CFR 51±10...... 35286 Proposed Rules: 52 ...... 36015, 36016, 36025, 361...... 35792 102-36...... 34983 20...... 35601 36027, 36028 25...... 35312 225...... 36034 230...... 36034 36 CFR 42 CFR 73...... 34996, 34997, 34998 1260...... 34973 403...... 34983 49 CFR 1280...... 34977, 35840 1001...... 35583 48 CFR 385...... 35287 1003...... 35583 Ch. 1...... 36012, 36031 1005...... 35583 390...... 35287 38 CFR 1...... 36014, 36015 571...... 35427 1006...... 35583 2...... 36016 3...... 35280 Proposed Rules: 3...... 36030 17...... 35280 571...... 36106 44 CFR 4...... 36016, 36021 21...... 35280 575...... 34998 65 ...... 35584, 36068, 36069, 5...... 36030 7...... 36016 40 CFR 36070 50 CFR 67...... 35587, 36072 8...... 36023 52...... 35577, 35840 Proposed Rules: 9...... 36014 223...... 36074 62...... 36067 67...... 35592, 35596 11...... 36016 635...... 35855 81...... 35577 13...... 36016 679...... 34991, 132...... 35283 34992 45 CFR 15...... 36014 Proposed Rules: 22...... 36014 Proposed Rules: 52...... 35875 5b...... 34986 23...... 36016 16...... 35314 69...... 35430 25...... 36025, 36027 17...... 35025, 80...... 35430 46 CFR 30...... 36028 35033, 35315 86...... 35430 Proposed Rules: 35...... 36014 622 ...... 35040, 35316, 35877 180...... 35307 110...... 35600 37...... 36014 635...... 35881 434...... 34996 111...... 35600 38...... 36023

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:35 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07JNCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCU Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Reader Aids iii

REMINDERS serious injuries for small Other consumer protection DEFENSE DEPARTMENT The items in this list were women and young activities; comments due Defense Logistics Agency editorially compiled as an aid children, etc.; correction; by 6-15-00; published 3- Acquisition regulations: published 6-2-00 17-00 to Federal Register users. Alternative dispute Inclusion or exclusion from AGRICULTURE resolution; comments due this list has no legal COMMENTS DUE NEXT DEPARTMENT by 6-15-00; published 5- significance. WEEK Rural Utilities Service 16-00 Electric loans: DEFENSE DEPARTMENT RULES GOING INTO AGRICULTURE Insured and guaranteed Acquisition regulations: DEPARTMENT loans; general and pre- EFFECT JUNE 7, 2000 Foreign military sales loan policies and Agricultural Marketing contract line items; procedures; comments Service closeout; comments due AGRICULTURE due by 6-16-00; published Commodity laboratory testing by 6-12-00; published 4- DEPARTMENT 5-17-00 Agricultural Marketing programs: 13-00 COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Service Science and technology ENVIRONMENTAL Fluid milk promotion order; laboratory testing service International Trade PROTECTION AGENCY Administration published 6-6-00 fees; comments due by 6- Air quality implementation 15-00; published 5-26-00 FEDERAL ELECTION Educational and scientific plans; approval and COMMISSION Cranberries grown inÐ institutions; instruments and promulgation; various apparatus: Reports by political Massachusetts et al.; States: committees: comments due by 6-14- Florence Agreement Alabama; comments due by 00; published 5-30-00 Program; procedures Campaign finance reports 6-12-00; published 5-11- changes; comments due and statements; copies Honey research, promotion, 00 by 6-12-00; published 5- filed with State officers; and consumer information Arizona; comments due by 12-00 published 6-7-00 order; comments due by 6- 6-12-00; published 4-13- 14-00; published 5-15-00 COMMERCE DEPARTMENT HEALTH AND HUMAN 00 SERVICES DEPARTMENT National Organic Program; National Oceanic and California; comments due by comments due by 6-12-00; Food and Drug Atmospheric Administration 6-15-00; published 5-16- published 3-13-00 Administration Endangered and threatened 00 Onions grown inÐ Medical devices: species: Illinois and Missouri; Idaho and Oregon; American Society for Sea turtle conservation; comments due by 6-16- comments due by 6-14- Testing and Materials; Atlantic waters off eastern 00; published 4-17-00 00; published 5-15-00 amendments to reflect North Carolina and Hazardous waste: current citations; published AGRICULTURE Virginia; closure to large- Project XL program; site- 1-24-00 DEPARTMENT mesh gillnet fishing; specific projectsÐ Animal and Plant Health comments due by 6-12- PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 00; published 5-18-00 International Paper OFFICE Inspection Service Androscoggin Mill pulp Fishery conservation and Abscence and leave: Exportation and importation of and paper management: Family and Medical Leave animals and animal manufacturing facility, Alaska; fisheries of Act; implementation; products: ME; comments due by Exclusive Economic published 5-8-00 Livestock exported from 6-15-00; published 5-16- ZoneÐ 00 TRANSPORTATION U.S.; origin health Pacific cod; comments DEPARTMENT certificates; inspection FARM CREDIT requirements; comments due by 6-12-00; Federal Aviation ADMINISTRATION due by 6-16-00; published published 4-11-00 Administration Farm credit system: 4-17-00 Ocean and coastal resource Aircraft products and parts; Federal Agricultural Interstate transportation of management: certification procedures: Mortgage Corporation; animals and animal products Coastal Zone Management Changed products; type risk-based capital (quarantine): Act Federal consistency certification procedures; requirements; comments Tuberculosis in cattle, bison, regulations; comments published 6-7-00 due by 6-12-00; published goats, and captive due by 6-15-00; published 2-24-00 Airworthiness directives: cervidsÐ 6-1-00 McDonnell Douglas; FEDERAL State and area COMMERCE DEPARTMENT published 5-3-00 COMMUNICATIONS classifications; Patent and Trademark Office COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION comments due by 6-16- Patent cases: Digital television stations; table DEPARTMENT 00; published 5-31-00 American Inventors of assignments: National Highway Traffic AGRICULTURE Safety Administration Protection Act; Virginia; comments due by DEPARTMENT implementationÐ Motor vehicle safety 6-12-00; published 4-27- Commodity Credit Inter Partes reexamination 00 standards: Corporation Occupant crash protectionÐ proceedings, optional; Frequency allocations and Loan and purchase programs: comments due by 6-12- radio treaty matters: Future air bags designed Farm Storage Facility Loan 00; published 4-6-00 to create less risk of Software defined radios; Program; comments due serious injuries for small COMMODITY FUTURES inquiry; comments due by by 6-12-00; published 5- women and young TRADING COMMISSION 6-14-00; published 3-31- 11-00 children and provide Commodity Exchange Act: 00 improved frontal crash AGRICULTURE Large commodity pool Radio stations; table of protection; published 5- DEPARTMENT operators; public reporting assignments: 12-00 Food Safety and Inspection requirements; comments Michigan; comments due by Future air bags designed Service due by 6-16-00; published 6-16-00; published 5-12- to create less risk of Meat and poultry inspection: 4-17-00 00

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:35 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07JNCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Reader Aids

Television broadcasting: Sack preparation changes comments due by 6-16-00; located at 9308 South Children's television for periodicals nonletter- published 5-12-00 Chicago Avenue, Chicago, programming; filing size pieces and Class E airspace; comments Illinois, as the ``John J. requirements extended; periodicals prepared on due by 6-15-00; published Buchanan Post Office comments due by 6-12- pallets; comments due by 5-5-00 Building''. (May 26, 2000; 114 00; published 5-4-00 6-15-00; published 5-16- Federal airways; comments Stat. 320) 00 due by 6-16-00; published FEDERAL HOUSING H.R. 1832/P.L. 106±210 FINANCE BOARD SECURITIES AND 4-24-00 Federal home loan bank EXCHANGE COMMISSION TREASURY DEPARTMENT Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform system: Investment advisers: Customs Service Act (May 26, 2000; 114 Stat. Acquired member assets, Electronic filing system and Educational and scientific 321) core mission activities, Form ADV update; institutions; instruments and H.R. 3629/P.L. 106±211 investments and comments due by 6-13- apparatus: advances; comments due 00; published 4-17-00 Florence Agreement Program; procedures To amend the Higher by 6-15-00; published 5- TRANSPORTATION Education Act of 1965 to 26-00 changes; comments due DEPARTMENT by 6-12-00; published 5- improve the program for FEDERAL MARITIME Coast Guard 12-00 American Indian Tribal COMMISSION Colleges and Universities Ports and waterways safety: Carrier automated tariffs and under part A of title III. (May tariff systems: New York Harbor, Western LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 330) Long Island Sound, East Public access charges; and Hudson Rivers, NY; comments due by 6-15- This is a continuing list of H.R. 3707/P.L. 106±212 safety zones; comments 00; published 5-16-00 public bills from the current due by 6-12-00; published session of Congress which American Institute in Taiwan GENERAL SERVICES 5-11-00 have become Federal laws. It Facilities Enhancement Act ADMINISTRATION (May 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 332) Virginia Beach, VA; safety may be used in conjunction Federal Management zone; comments due by with ``P L U S'' (Public Laws S. 1836/P.L. 106±213 Regulation: 6-15-00; published 5-19- Update Service) on 202±523± Surplus personal property 00 6641. This list is also To extend the deadline for donation; comments due available online at http:// commencement of construction by 6-12-00; published 4- TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT www.nara.gov/fedreg. of a hydroelectric project in 13-00 the State of Alabama. (May Federal Aviation The text of laws is not HEALTH AND HUMAN 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 334) Administration published in the Federal SERVICES DEPARTMENT Airworthiness directives: Register but may be ordered Last List May 25, 2000 Health Care Financing in ``slip law'' (individual Administration Agusta; comments due by pamphlet) form from the Medicare: 6-13-00; published 4-14- Superintendent of Documents, Coverage decisions; criteria; 00 U.S. Government Printing comments due by 6-15- Airbus; comments due by 6- Office, Washington, DC 20402 Public Laws Electronic 00; published 5-16-00 15-00; published 5-16-00 (phone, 202±512±1808). The Notification Service INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Bell; comments due by 6- text will also be made (PENS) Fish and Wildlife Service 16-00; published 5-17-00 available on the Internet from GPO Access at http:// Endangered and threatened Boeing; comments due by www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ species: 6-12-00; published 4-28- PENS is a free electronic mail index.html. Some laws may 00 notification service of newly Critical habitat not yet be available. designationsÐ Eurocopter France; enacted public laws. To Alameda whipsnake; comments due by 6-13- S.J. Res. 44/P.L. 106±205 subscribe, go to www.gsa.gov/ comments due by 6-12- 00; published 4-14-00 Supporting the Day of Honor archives/publaws-l.html or 00; published 5-15-00 Fokker; comments due by 2000 to honor and recognize send E-mail to [email protected] with Holmgren milk-vetch and 6-12-00; published 5-12- the service of minority the following text message: Shivwits milk-vetch; 00 veterans in the United States Armed Forces during World comments due by 6-12- Gulfstream; comments due SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L 00; published 4-12-00 by 6-13-00; published 4- War II. (May 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 312) Your Name. INTERNATIONAL 14-00 H.R. 154/P.L. 106±206 DEVELOPMENT McDonnell Douglas; Note: This service is strictly COOPERATION AGENCY comments due by 6-12- To allow the Secretary of the for E-mail notification of new Interior and the Secretary of Overseas Private Investment 00; published 4-28-00 laws. The text of laws is not Agriculture to establish a fee Corporation Airworthiness standards: available through this service. system for commercial filming Freedom of Information Act; Special conditionsÐ PENS cannot respond to activities on Federal land, and specific inquiries sent to this implementation; comments Boeing Model 747-200 for other purposes. (May 26, address. due by 6-12-00; published series airplanes; 2000; 114 Stat. 314) 5-11-00 comments due by 6-16- H.R. 371/P.L. 106±207 PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 00; published 5-2-00 Hmong Veterans' OFFICE Morrow Aircraft Corp. Naturalization Act of 2000 Pay administration: Model MB-300 airplane; (May 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 316) Dual compensation comments due by 6-14- H.R. 834/P.L. 106±208 reductions for military 00; published 5-15-00 National Historic Preservation retirees; repeal; comments Class D and Class E Act Amendments of 2000 due by 6-12-00; published airspace; comments due by (May 26, 2000; 114 Stat. 318) 4-12-00 6-16-00; published 5-2-00 H.R. 1377/P.L. 106±209 POSTAL SERVICE Class D and Class E To designate the facility of the Domestic Mail Manual: airspace; correction; United States Postal Service

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:35 Jun 06, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07JNCU.LOC pfrm11 PsN: 07JNCU