5–7–01 Monday Vol. 66 No. 88 May 7, 2001 Pages 22899–23134
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:56 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07MYWS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001
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/ FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP fedreg. 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 HOW TO USE IT established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulations. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. 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: 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the system and the public’s role in the development of authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register regulations. as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each 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 documents. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system. documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe 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:/ WASHINGTON, DC /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to WHEN: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer WHERE: Office of the Federal Register and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log Conference Room in as guest with no password. 800 North Capitol Street, NW. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access Washington, DC User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (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: 66 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:56 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07MYWS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 88
Monday, May 7, 2001
Agricultural Marketing Service Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES RULES Agency information collection activities: Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for Proposed collection; comment request, 22997 22998 designated facilities and pollutants: South Carolina, 22927–22929 Agriculture Department Air quality implementation plans; approval and See Agricultural Marketing Service promulgation; various States: See Food Safety and Inspection Service Maryland, 22924–22927 See Foreign Agricultural Service New York, 22922–22924 See Forest Service Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw See Rural Utilities Service agricultural commodities Forchlorfenuron, 22930–22936 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Air programs; approval and promulgation; State plans for Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: designated facilities and pollutants: Alaska; Childhood Injury Prevention Program, 23030 South Carolina, 22970–22971 Behavioral disorders and youth violence; research Air quality implementation plans; approval and capacity, 23030 promulgation; various States: Children and adolescents basic life support training and Maryland, 22970 education program, 23030–23031 Water supply: Meetings: Underground injection control program— Injury Research Grant Review Committee, 23031 Class V wells, 22971–22983 National Vaccine Advisory Committee, 23031–23032 NOTICES Civil Rights Commission Committees; establishment, renewal, termination, etc.: Environmental Policy and Technology National Advisory NOTICES Council, 23022–23027 Meetings; State advisory committees: Michigan, 23000 Executive Office of the President Pennsylvania, 23000 See Trade Representative, Office of United States South Carolina, 23000–23001 Commerce Department Federal Aviation Administration See Foreign-Trade Zones Board RULES See International Trade Administration Airworthiness directives: See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Airbus, 22908–22910 Bell, 22913–22914 Defense Department Boeing, 22910–22913 PROPOSED RULES Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A. (CASA), 22915–22916 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Transport airplane fuel tank system design review, Contractor responsibility, labor relations costs, and costs flammability reduction, and maintenance and relating to legal and other proceedings; revocation, inspection requirements, 23085–23131 23133–23134 Federal Communications Commission Education Department NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 23027 Proposed collection; comment request, 23005–23006 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Federal Emergency Management Agency Elementary and secondary education— RULES Physical Education for Progress Program, 23006–23008 Flood insurance; communities eligible for sale: Parental Assistance Program, 23008–23010 Various States, 22936–22938 NOTICES Energy Department Agency information collection activities: See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Proposed collection; comment request, 23028–23029 NOTICES Disaster and emergency areas: Environmental statements; notice of intent: Mississippi, 23029 Depleted uranium hexafluoride conversion facilities; construction, operation, and decontamination/ Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decommissioning; Portsmouth, OH and Paducah, KY, NOTICES 23010–23013 Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al., 23020–23022 Yucca Mountain, NV; science and engineering report, Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: 23013–23016 AES Medina Valley Cogen, L.L.C., 23016
VerDate 11
Carolina Power & Light Co. et al., 23016–23017 Foreign Agricultural Service Chandeleur Pipe Line Co., 23017 NOTICES Dominion Transmission, Inc., 23017 Meetings: PacifiCorp, 23017 Sanitary measures to protect public and animal health in Sempra Energy Resources, 23018 trade in live animals and animal products; United Texas Eastern Transmission, LP, 23018 States and European Community agreement, 22998– Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 23018–23019 22999 USG Pipeline Co., 23019 Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc., 23019–23020 Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Federal Highway Administration Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: NOTICES Pennsylvania, 23001–23002 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Transportation Equity Act for 21st Century— Forest Service National Corridor Planning and Development Program NOTICES and Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program; Environmental statements; availability, etc.: implementation guidance, 23073–23077 Finger Lakes National Forest, NY, 22999 Value Pricing Pilot Program, 23077–23081 General Services Administration Federal Maritime Commission PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Meetings; Sunshine Act, 23029 Contractor responsibility, labor relations costs, and costs relating to legal and other proceedings; revocation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 23133–23134 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Health and Human Services Department Proposed collection; comment request, 23082–23083 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health Fish and Wildlife Service See Public Health Service RULES See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Endangered and threatened species: Administration Critical habitat designations— Piping plover; Great Lakes breeding population, 22938– Housing and Urban Development Department 22969 PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Endangered and threatened species: Agency information collection activities: Critical habitat designations— Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23041– Wintering piping plover, 22983–22984 23042 Findings on petitions, etc.— Western sage grouse; Washington population, 22984– Interior Department 22994 See Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES See Land Management Bureau Comprehensive conservation plans; availability, etc.: Lower Suwanee and Cedar Keys National Wildlife International Trade Administration Refuges, FL, 23042 NOTICES Roanoke River National Wildlife Refuge, NC, 23042– Agency information collection activities: 23043 Proposed collection; comment request, 23002–23003 Endangered and threatened species permit applications, Antidumping: 23043–23044 Cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from— Italy, 23003 Food and Drug Administration Welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from— RULES Thailand, 23004 Food additives: Secondary direct food additives— Justice Department Acidified sodium chlorite solutions, 22921–22922 See Justice Programs Office NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Justice Programs Office FDA Modernization Act of 1997— NOTICES Recognized standards list modifications (Recognition Agency information collection activities: List Number: 005), 23032–23034 Proposed collection; comment request, 23045–23046 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23046– Food Safety and Inspection Service 23047 RULES Meat and poultry inspection: Labor Department Ratites and squabs; mandatory inspection See Labor Statistics Bureau Republication, 22899–22907 See Occupational Safety and Health Administration
VerDate 11
NOTICES Office of United States Trade Representative Agency information collection activities: See Trade Representative, Office of United States Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23047– 23048 Public Health Service See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Labor Statistics Bureau See Food and Drug Administration NOTICES See National Institutes of Health Agency information collection activities: See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Proposed collection; comment request, 23048–23049 Administration NOTICES Land Management Bureau Meetings: NOTICES National Toxicology Program— Agency information collection activities: Scientific Counselors Board, 23037–23039 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23044– 23045 Rural Utilities Service Meetings: NOTICES Wild horse management; helicopters and motor vehicles Environmental statements; availability, etc.: use; public hearings— Southern Illinois Power Cooperative, 22999–23000 Colorado, 23045 Securities and Exchange Commission National Aeronautics and Space Administration RULES PROPOSED RULES Securities: Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Contractor responsibility, labor relations costs, and costs Act; electronic storage media use; guidance to broker- relating to legal and other proceedings; revocation, dealers, 22916–22921 NOTICES 23133–23134 Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 23054 National Institutes of Health Meetings; Sunshine Act, 23055 NOTICES Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Agency information collection activities: Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 23055–23058 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23034– Government Securities Clearing Corp., 23058–23059 23035 Pacific Exchange, Inc., 23059–23061 Meetings: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: National Center for Complementary and Alternative Public utility holding company filings, 23054–23055 Medicine, 23035 National Center for Research Resources, 23035 State Department National Institute of Child Health and Human NOTICES Development, 23035–23036 Agency information collection activities: National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 23036– Submission for OMB review; comment request, 23062 23037 Art objects; importation for exhibition: National Library of Medicine, 23037 Rediscovering Caesarea Philippi, the Ancient City of Pan or The Banias, 23062 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PROPOSED RULES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Fishery conservation and management: Administration Atlantic highly migratory species— NOTICES Pelagic longline management, 22994–22996 Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Proposed collection; comment request, 23039–23041 Endangered and threatened species: Fisheries management and evaluation plans— Surface Transportation Board Upper Willametter River steelhead, 23004–23005 NOTICES Railroad operation, acquisition, construction, etc.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Union Pacific Railroad Co. et al., 23083 RULES Public records: Trade Representative, Office of United States Charges for reproducing records, 22907–22908 NOTICES NOTICES Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Discrimination in foreign government procurement Nuclear Management Corp., 23052–23053 pursuant to Executive Order 13116 (Title VII), Meetings; Sunshine Act, 23053–23054 23062–23064 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Trade expansion priorities pursuant to Executive Order Nuclear Management Co., LLC, 23051–23052 13116 (Super 301), 23064–23073
Occupational Safety and Health Administration Transportation Department NOTICES See Federal Aviation Administration Agency information collection activities: See Federal Highway Administration Proposed collection; comment request, 23049–23051 See Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
VerDate 11
See Surface Transportation Board Part III Department of Defense, General Services Administration, Veterans Affairs Department National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NOTICES 23133–23134 Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 23083–23084
Reader Aids Separate Parts In This Issue Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Part II phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation and notice of recently enacted public laws. Administration, 23085–23131
VerDate 11
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.
9 CFR 362...... 22899 381...... 22899 10 CFR 9...... 22907 14 CFR 21...... 23086 25...... 23086 39 (4 documents) ...... 22908, 22910, 22913, 22915 91...... 23086 121...... 23086 125...... 23086 129...... 23086 17 CFR 241...... 22916 21 CFR 173...... 22921 40 CFR 52 (2 documents) ...... 22922, 22924 62...... 22927 180...... 22930 Proposed Rules: 52...... 22970 62...... 22970 144...... 22971 146...... 22971 44 CFR 64...... 22936 48 CFR Proposed Rules: 9...... 23134 14...... 23134 15...... 23134 31...... 23134 52...... 23134 50 CFR 17...... 22938 Proposed Rules: 17 (2 documents) ...... 22983, 22984 635...... 22994
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:01 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07MYLS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYLS 22899
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 88
Monday, May 7, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER April 26, 2001. Interested parties may 2001, grants of voluntary inspection for contains regulatory documents having general comment on this interim final rule. ratites and squabs will no longer be applicability and legal effect, most of which DATES: This interim final rule will be valid. Fees for ratite and squab are keyed to and codified in the Code of effective April 26, 2001. Comments inspection services will no longer be Federal Regulations, which is published under charged, except for overtime and 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. must be received on this interim final rule by July 2, 2001. holiday inspection services. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by ADDRESSES: Submit one original and Applications for mandatory inspection the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of two copies of written comments within must be submitted on an FSIS new books are listed in the first FEDERAL the scope of the rulemaking to FSIS application form available from any REGISTER issue of each week. Docket Clerk, Docket #01–045IF, U.S. FSIS District Office or from FSIS Department of Agriculture, Food Safety Headquarters, Washington, DC 20250. and Inspection Service, Room 102, FSIS will give notice in writing to each DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Cotton Annex, 300 12th Street, SW., applicant granted (or denied) inspection. Food Safety and Inspection Service Washington, DC 20250–3700. All comments submitted in response to this Under the regulations that implement the PPIA, before being granted Federal 9 CFR Parts 362 and 381 proposal will be available for public inspection in the Docket Clerk’s Office inspection, an establishment must have [Docket No. 01–045IF] between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., written Sanitation Standard Operating Monday through Friday. Procedures (SOPs) (§ 381.22(a)) and a RIN 0583–AC84 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Hazard Analysis and Critical Control information about the interim final rule, Point (HACCP) plan that the Mandatory Inspection of Ratites and contact Dr. Arshad Hussain, Director, establishment has validated (§ 381.22 (b) Squabs Inspection and Enforcement Standards and (c)). Establishments can receive Development Staff, Office of Policy, conditional grants of inspection for a Editorial Note: Federal Register rule Program Development, and Evaluation, period of not more than 90 days while document 01–10679 originally appeared in FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, they validate their HACCP plans the issue of Tuesday, May 1, 2001 at 66 FR Room 202, Cotton Annex, 300 12th (§ 381.22(b)). 21631–21639. Due to several errors (repeated Street, SW, Washington, DC 20250– Import Inspection text and missing text on page 21635) the 3700, (202) 720–3219. document is being reprinted in its entirety. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This interim final rule will be AGENCY: Food Safety and Inspection effective on April 26, 2001. Within 18 Service, USDA. Background months of that date, imported ratite or ACTION: Interim final rule. On October 28, 2000, the President squab products will have to originate in signed the Appropriations Act, which countries that are eligible to export SUMMARY: The Food Safety and provides that 180 days after the date of poultry to the United States and will Inspection Service (FSIS) is amending its enactment, U.S. establishments that have to be processed in establishments the Poultry Products Inspection slaughter or process ratites (such as certified by the government of the Regulations (Part 381) and the ostriches, emus, and rheas) or squabs for foreign country as eligible to export to Voluntary Poultry Inspection distribution into commerce as human the United States. Currently, these Regulations (Part 362) to include ratites food will be subject to the requirements countries include Canada, France, Great and squabs under the mandatory of the PPIA (21 U.S.C. 451, et seq.), Britain, and Israel. Hong Kong and poultry products inspection regulations. rather than the voluntary poultry Mexico have not yet been approved by The Agency is responding to the FY inspection program under section 203 of the United States to slaughter poultry; 2001 Agriculture, Rural Development, the AMA (7 U.S.C. 1622). This provision therefore, they are only eligible to Food and Drug Administration and of the Appropriation Act is effective on export to the United States processed Related Agencies Appropriations Act April 26, 2001. poultry products that originate from (the Appropriations Act), signed by the Ratites are members of a superorder Canada, France, Great Britain, Israel, or President on October 28, 2000, which (Ratitae) of flightless birds that have the United States (§ 381.196). provides that 180 days after the date of small or rudimentary wings and flat All countries exporting or wanting to its enactment, U.S. establishments breastplates, e.g., ostriches, emus, and export ratite and squabs products to the slaughtering or processing ratites or rheas. Squabs are young pigeons that United States, regardless of their current squabs for distribution into commerce have not yet flown. eligibility status regarding meat and as human food will be subject to the Ratites are currently inspected under poultry product exports to the United requirements of the Poultry Products the Voluntary Poultry Inspection States, may do so for the next 18 months Inspection Act (PPIA), rather than the Regulations as an experimental subject to the following. Countries voluntary poultry inspection program program. Operators who wish to already eligible to export poultry to the under section 203 of the Agricultural continue to slaughter or process ratites United States will be able to export Marketing Act of 1946 (AMA). The or squabs after April 26, 2001, for ratites and squabs as soon as they certify provision of the Appropriations Act transport or sale in commerce must to FSIS those establishments eligible to specifying that ratites and squabs come apply to FSIS for a grant of inspection export to the United States. These under the Agency’s mandatory for mandatory inspection service countries are Canada, Israel, Great inspection requirements is effective on (§§ 381.6 and 381.16). As of April 26, Britain, and France. Animal health
VerDate 11
restrictions continue to apply so there is comments and make a final symptoms at ante mortem will be no change with regard to the eligibility determination of equivalence. The handled differently than other diseased of specific products based on APHIS determination to list a country as poultry. regulations. equivalent, and, therefore, eligible to The Agency is amending § 381.76 to Countries eligible to export meat to export poultry products to the United add Ratite Inspection as the fifth post the United States will be permitted to States, is published as a final rule in the mortem poultry inspection system. This export ratites to the United States Federal Register, along with FSIS’s amendment is necessary because provided the animals are slaughtered in responses to the public comments. At inspection of ratites must be done in a an establishment certified to export to that time, the country’s inspection different manner than inspection of the Unites States and provided the service may certify establishments for other amenable poultry species. Thus, countries submit a request for export of poultry products, including inspection of ratites cannot be done establishing equivalency. Certified ratites and squabs, to the United States. under the existing four inspection establishments are required to meet Summary of Interim Final Rule systems. FSIS HACCP and Pathogen Reduction FSIS is amending § 381.96 to provide requirements. At this point, Australia FSIS is making a number of technical that ratite carcasses and parts that are and New Zealand, which are both changes in its regulations, which it shipped unpacked must bear the official eligible to export meat to the United believes are noncontroversial, to brand. This addition is necessary States, have indicated that they want to provide for the inspection of ratites and because ratites are the only species of export ratites. squabs. The Agency is amending 9 CFR amenable species that are likely to be Countries not eligible to export meat 362.1(d) to remove squab from the shipped unpacked. or poultry to the United States will need definition of ‘‘Poultry’’ in the Voluntary Finally, FSIS is proposing to make to submit a request for equivalency and Poultry Inspection Regulations. FSIS is some editorial changes to § 362.1 to FSIS will need to make an equivalency also amending § 362.1(e) to include correct inaccuracies and to provide for determination according to 9 CFR Part ratites and squabs with chickens, greater clarity. 327. turkeys, ducks, geese, and guineas in the As indicated above, however, each definition of ‘‘Poultry Product.’’ The Regulatory Impact Analysis country desiring to begin or continue Agency is also amending § 381.1(b) to Basis for Regulatory Action exporting such products to the United include ratites and squabs within the Currently, ratites and squabs are States will have to apply for an definition of ‘‘Poultry’’ in the Poultry inspected on a voluntary, fee-for-service equivalence determination of its ratite Products Inspection Regulations. and squab inspection system. Countries’ FSIS is amending § 381.36(b) to basis under section 203 of the AMA. ratite and squab export inspection require a pen for the ante mortem The interim final rule will amend systems must be found to be equivalent inspection of ratites. It is necessary to § 362.1(d) to remove squab from the with the U.S. domestic inspection specify that a pen be available for ratites definition of poultry in the Voluntary system within 18 months of the effective because ante mortem inspection of Poultry Inspection Regulations and will date of the Agency’s new mandatory ratites is done on an individual bird amend § 381.1 to include ratites and ratite and squab inspection basis, rather than a lot basis as is done squabs under the Agency’s mandatory requirements (April 26, 2001). for other amenable poultry. poultry inspection requirements. After the 18 month period has ended, The Agency is amending § 381.66 to Congress mandated, in the FY 2001 all shipments of ratites and squabs from exempt ratites from the chilling Agriculture Appropriation Act, that 180 eligible countries must be accompanied requirements of § 381.66 paragraphs (b), days from the date of enactment (April with the appropriate veterinary health (c), and all of (d), except for (d)(1). 26, 2001) U.S. establishments that certificate (§ 381.197) and must be Ratites are air-chilled rather than water- slaughter or process ratites or squabs presented to FSIS for import chilled, as is the case with most will come under mandatory inspection reinspection prior to entry (§ 381.199). amenable poultry. by FSIS. Countries wanting to export ratites FSIS is amending § 381.67 to include Baseline and squab to the United States should squabs with young chickens under make a written request to export poultry traditional inspection procedures. The Ratites and squabs are considered to FSIS through the United States two types of birds are of similar size and non-amenable species and are currently Embassy located in the country. FSIS weight and thus can be inspected in a inspected by the Agency on a voluntary, 1 will conduct both a document review similar manner. fee-for-service basis. These species are and an on-site audit to determine if the The Agency is amending § 381.70 to also inspected on a mandatory or country operates an equivalent poultry permit an exception to examining and voluntary basis under State programs. inspection system. inspecting ratites on the day of slaughter Ratites are an order of flightless birds During the review, FSIS will work for humane reasons or, for low volume that includes ostriches, emus, rheas, cooperatively with the Animal and establishments, under certain cassowaries, and kiwis. The most Plant Health Inspection Service, which conditions. This amendment allows the economically important species of approves the entry of poultry products humane handling of ratites to be the ratites are the ostrich and the emu. according to the disease status of the same as that for livestock. Squabs are young domesticated pigeons exporting country. FSIS is amending § 381.71 to provide that have never flown. Ratite and squab If the country’s export inspection information on how suspect and system is found to be equivalent with condemned ratites are to be handled. 1 The FMIA and PPIA do not mandate the inspection of ratites and squabs. FSIS provides, on the U.S. domestic inspection system, This amendment is necessary because a fee-for-service basis, voluntary inspection services FSIS will publish a proposal in the the treatment of suspect and condemned under the Argicultural Marketing Act of 1946 for Federal Register to list the country as ratites is different than the treatment of these species and others such as reindeer, elk, deer, eligible to export poultry products to the suspect and condemned birds of other antelope, water buffalo, bison, migratory water fowl, game birds, and rabbits. The Food and Drug United States. After the public has had amenable species. Administration has primary statutory authority over 60 days to comment on this proposed FSIS is amending § 381.72 to reflect all food animals and birds not covered by the FMIA rule, FSIS will review all of the public the fact that ratites showing disease and the PPIA.
VerDate 11
meat is valued for its flavor and Currently 99 establishments possess a ratites inspected (Table 1). Ostriches nutritional characteristics. grant of inspection. In 1999, there were made up the largest share (69%) of the Since 1992, when FSIS first granted a a total of 48,286 (76%) ratites inspected ratites inspected under the Federal request for voluntary inspection for in Federal establishments and 14,427 program, whereas emus made up the ostriches, approximately 166 (24%) ratites inspected in State largest share (56%) of the ratites establishments have been issued a grant establishments, or a total of 62,713 inspected under State programs. of inspection for ratite operations.
TABLE 1.—RATITES AND SQUAB INSPECTION VOLUME AND ESTABLISHMENTS, FY 1999
Federal State establishments establishments Species Total Number % of Number % of inspected inspected total inspected total
Ratites Ostrich ...... 33,521 86 5,254 14 38,775 Emu ...... 14,745 64 8,068 36 22,813 Other ...... 20 2 1,105 98 1,125
Ratites Total ...... 48,286 76 14,427 24 62,713 Squabs ...... 175,496 14 1,122,131 86 1,297,627
Totals ...... 223,782 16 1,136,558 84 1,360,240
Ests. Number Number
Squabs ...... 2 2 Ratites ...... 99 95
In 1999, states with a large share of Emus confusion in the industry because it ratites inspected under the Federal A mature emu reaches a height of 5 would be difficult to apply some of the program were California, Georgia, to 6 feet tall, weighing 90 to 120 current poultry regulations to ratites and Illinois, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and pounds. In 1999, 22,813 emus were squabs, e.g., chilling and certain Texas. Alabama, California, Mississippi, inspected under Federal and State handling requirements. North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas programs (Table 1). There are a number The Agency’s second option was to inspected a large share of ratites under of valuable products derived from emus make the changes required by statute State programs. There were almost an in addition to their meat. and other changes as noted above. FSIS equal number of establishments There is also significant uncertainty selected this option because it will involved in slaughter of ratites under about the annual production of emus. provide a more orderly transition from the Federal (99) and State (95) Some source indicate that there may be voluntary inspection to mandatory inspection programs. as many as 500,000 birds on 5,000 to inspection of ratites and squabs than the 6,000 farms in the U.S., with the first option at little or no additional Ostriches majority of them in Texas, Oklahoma, cost. and elsewhere in the Southwest. Ostrich is the largest bird in the Benefits world, standing about seven to eight feet Squabs There are three primary benefits that tall and weighing 300–400 pounds Squabs are young domesticated may result from extending mandatory when fully grown. Industry pigeons that have never flown. Squabs inspection services to ratites and representatives indicate that there were usually weigh 1 pound or less at the squabs: industry growth, public health, about 600 ostrich growers 1998, down time of slaughter (about 4 weeks old). In and industry cost savings. from 1000 growers in 1996. There is 1999, California and Oregon were the Having the inspection mark on the significant uncertainty about the annual only two states that inspected squabs ratite and squab products could lead to production of ostriches and other ratites under the Federal voluntary inspection greater consumer confidence and at this time. The Agency requests program. In that year, 175,496 squabs acceptability of the products. Demand reliable information on the annual were inspected (Table 1). During that could be expected to increase as a number of ratites and squab produced same period 1,122,131 squabs were result. Establishments that are able to and the number of producers. inspected under the inspection capitalize on the change in consumer programs of California and South preference may realize increased sales Ostriches are slaughtered at an Carolina. of these products. To the extent that average age of 12 months. The average inspection promotes growth in the ratite weight at slaughter is 350 pounds. Regulatory Alternatives and squab industry, society could Ostrich meat is sold as steaks, fillets, FSIS considered two options in benefit also from the increased medallions, roasts, and ground meat. developing its interim final rule. The employment and earnings of workers in Currently, ostriches are processed in first option the Agency considered was these establishments. Studies are not establishments that are equipped to to only change the definition of poultry available to identify the potential process other red meat species such as in the Poultry Products Inspection growth in the industry that may occur. cattle, sheep, goats, and swine. Regulations to include ratites and The public health benefits of squabs. This approach may have caused inspection are related to the reduction
VerDate 11
in risk associated with consumption of provisions of Pathogen Reduction/ will be the species being slaughtered in all ratite and squab meat that must be Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point the greatest number is very low. inspected using the same procedures (PR/HACCP) final rule. Under the Consequently, very few establishments employed in the meat and poultry provisions of the rule, all slaughter will be required to perform additional E. industries. HACCP systems, Sanitation establishments under mandatory coli testing for process control SOPs, and process control practices inspection are required to have HACCP verification. The costs per establishment have been shown to reduce plans and meet process control for E. coli testing are shown in Table 2. contamination by harmful foodborne requirements. Nearly all establishments The Agency is requesting information pathogens. that slaughter and process ratites and on the number of establishments where A shift to the mandatory inspection squabs because they also slaughter other ratites or squabs are, or would become, system will eliminate the payment of species under mandatory inspection the major species for slaughter. fees for inspection services. This is not have already implemented HACCP, For those establishments slaughtering a benefit from an economic perspective Sanitation SOPs, and other measures and processing ratites and squabs under as the costs of inspection are transferred consistent with the requirements of this voluntary inspection, the transition to elsewhere in the economy. Since FSIS rule. These establishments will still be mandatory inspection will not require will recover these costs through required to make changes to their changes in equipment and processing appropriated funds, the change to a HACCP or sanitation procedures to methods. Ratites are currently being mandatory inspection system results in include ratites and squabs. slaughtered and processed in an income transfer from the public to Establishments that have not included establishments that are equipped to the ratite and squab industry. The total ratites and squabs in their HACCP process cattle, sheep, goats, and swine. cost savings to the industry would be plans 2 would incur minimal costs Squabs are processed using the same about $2 million in 2001, with the associated with HACCP plan equipment and procedures as those possibility of increasing over time with modification. used for young chickens. the expansion of the industry. As poultry is subject to mandatory Federal inspection, ratites and squabs The Agency estimates that 50% of the Industry Costs will be subject to E. coli testing Federal establishments (50 The compliance cost of extending requirements. Establishments that establishments) and 25% of the State mandatory inspection to ratite and slaughter more than one kind of poultry establishments (24 establishments) may squab species will be negligible. All and livestock are required to test the be required to make minor changes in establishments involved in slaughtering kind of species slaughtered in the their HACCP plan to accommodate amenable species, as of January 25, greatest number. The number of mandatory inspection requirements for 2000, must be in compliance with the establishments where ratites and squabs ratites.
TABLE 2.—POTENTIAL COSTS FOR MANDATORY FEDERAL INSPECTION
Per est. Industry Costs (dollars) ($thousand)
Start up Cost: HACCP Plan Modification ...... 500 37.0 SSOP Modification ...... 100 7.4 Recurring Cost: E. coli Sampling (26 samples@$20 per sample per establishment) ...... 520 38.5 Recordkeeping ...... 300 22.2
Total ...... 1,420 105.1
The Agency seeks comment or further once ratites are officially defined as studies can also be used to develop information pertaining to its cost figures poultry under PPIA regulations, such performance standards for pathogen for mandatory inspection. use will not be allowed in FSIS reduction. The costs of a Other additional costs that would inspected products. FSIS does not have microbiological baseline testing for apply to all establishments applying for information on the types or amounts of ratites are $110,000 and for squabs, Federal mandatory inspection will be product affected by this change, but is $95,000 (Tables 3 and 4). seeking information. the application cost. This cost will be Chemical Residue Testing negligible, as it is limited to a one-time FSIS Costs cost for filling out an application, about The Agency anticipates the need to Chemical residue studies would help $10. The total compliance cost to the conduct baseline microbiological and the Agency determine the presence of establishments identified above are chemical residue studies. These studies violative chemical and drug residues in estimated to be $105,100. constitute the major costs to the Agency ratites and squabs. Chemical residue FSIS is aware that some State totaling $600,000. testing would be necessary to determine inspected ratite product may contain how these additional species would be sodium nitrite and/or sodium nitrate Microbiological Testing incorporated in the Agency’s annual even though the Food and Drug The microbiological studies would residue testing program. FSIS’ one-time Administration (FDA) regulations do help the Agency determine the costs for chemical residue studies for not authorize such use of these prevalence of harmful bacteria or ratites and squabs are $210,000 and substances for ratite products. However, pathogens in ratites and squabs. These $185,000, respectively (Tables 3 and 4).
2 HACCP plans are not required to cover non- amenable species.
VerDate 11
TABLE 3.—COST TO FSIS OF A MANDATORY RATITE INSPECTION PROGRAM
Inspection Thousands of One-time costs hours dollars
Chemical Residue Study ...... 210.0 Microbiological Baseline ...... 110.0
Total ...... 320.0 Transfer Payment:1 Federally-Inspected Ests ...... 38,524 1,959.0 1 The hourly rate for Federal inspection in FY 2000 is estimated to be $38.44 per hour.
TABLE 4.—FSIS MANDATORY SQUAB INSPECTION PROGRAM COSTS
Inspection Thousands of One-time costs hours dollars
Chemical Residue Study ...... 185.0 Microbiological Baseline ...... 95.0
Total ...... 280.0 Transfer Payment:1 Federally-Inspected Ests ...... 322 16.4 1 The hourly rate for Federal inspection in FY 2000 is estimated to be $38.44 per hour.
Transfer Payments inspection that would be brought under voluntary inspection program, the Under voluntary inspection, inspection. Second, an establishment Agency pays half of the inspection establishments pay for inspection currently under a State inspection program costs, or $277,191 (Table 5). services. The funds for mandatory program that is shipping ratites and Under a mandatory program, states inspection activities are appropriated squabs in interstate commerce would would no longer be able to collect fees from Federal tax revenues. The have to shift to Federal inspection to for inspection services. States may transition from voluntary to mandatory maintain its markets. It is expected that decide to terminate their ratite and inspection changes the source of 25% of the establishments under State squab inspection program. If this occurs, inspection program funding. The voluntary inspection would migrate to FSIS will take over inspection at the Agency estimates that the industry cost the Federal mandatory program. The facilities operating under a State of inspection of ratites and squabs for analysis does not take into account the program and thereby absorb the total 1999 in Federal establishments was potential increase in the demand for costs of inspection at these $1,975,000, of which ratites accounted inspection services. Both species establishments. For those states that do for $1,959,000 and squabs, $16,400, currently account for an extremely small not have a State voluntary program for including overhead (Tables 3 and 4). share of meat and poultry inspection. ratites and squabs, the impact of a When ratite and squab inspection Changes in the required level of Federal mandatory inspection program becomes mandatory, it is possible that inspection program personnel are not will be minimal. The payment of these the volume of ratites and squabs expected to be significant in the near- costs at previously State inspected inspected at Federally inspected term. establishments is an income transfer establishments will increase beyond The estimated total cost of inspection similar to that occurring for Federally what is currently being inspected. First, in State establishments is $554,400 for inspected establishments. there may be significant volumes of 14,427 ratites and 1,122,131 squabs for The total transfer payment to Federal ratites and squabs that are currently FY 1999. Under the current agreement and State establishments is $2,252,000 slaughtered and consumed without the Agency has with state having a (1,975,000 plus 277,000).
TABLE 5.—RATITES AND SQUABS INSPECTION COST AT STATE ESTABLISHMENTS—FY 1999
Total Total cost of Number inspection 1 Species inspected hours inspections required ($thousand)
Ratites ...... 14,427 11,510 442.4 Squabs ...... 1,122,131 2,912 111.9
Total ...... 1,136,558 14,422 554.4 1 FSIS hourly base rate of $38.44 times inspection hours required.
Consumer Cost these cost savings to consumers through Economic Impact on International lower prices. Trade Assessment In large part, the costs of ratite and squab inspection are transferred from Countries that previously had little producers to taxpayers. As the burden of interest in export certification may paying for inspection service is petition FSIS if additional species come eliminated, establishments may transfer under mandatory inspection. Foreign
VerDate 11
establishments that specialize in exotic of those statements and actions on the The paperwork and recordkeeping species may seek to broaden their States, on the relationship between the requirements in this final rule will be markets by exporting to the United national government and the States, or approved on an emergency basis by States. The Agency may need to on the distribution of power and OMB under control number 0583– evaluate the equivalence of a greater responsibilities among the various 01120. FSIS is seeking comments on the number of foreign food regulatory levels of government. The Federal Meat paperwork and recordkeeping inspection systems. Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry requirements in this interim final rule Products Inspection Act (PPIA) preempt so that the Agency may receive a three- Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory State and local laws in regard to the year approval for these requirements. Flexibility Act manufacture and distribution of meat Abstract: FSIS has reviewed the Because this interim final rule has and poultry products. Therefore, FSIS paperwork and record keeping been determined to be significant, the policy statements and actions impact requirements in this interim final rule in Office of Management and Budget federalism within the context of these accordance with the Paperwork (OMB) has reviewed it under Executive statutory preemptions. Reduction Act. Under this proposed Order 12866. States and local jurisdictions are rule, FSIS is requiring several The Administrator, FSIS, has preempted by the FMIA and PPIA from information collection and record determined that this interim final rule imposing any marking, labeling, keeping activities. FSIS is requiring that would not have a significant economic packaging, or ingredient requirements establishments slaughtering and impact, as defined by the Regulatory on federally inspected meat and poultry processing ratites and squabs apply for Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601), on a products that are in addition to, or Federal Inspection. Also, these substantial number of small entities. different than, those imposed under the establishments will need to develop and Small establishments will not be FMIA and the PPIA. States and local maintain Sanitation SOPs, HACCP adversely affected by this interim final jurisdictions may, however, exercise plans, and perform testing for E. coli. rule. Few establishments slaughter and concurrent jurisdiction over meat and Estimate of Burden: FSIS estimates process ratites or squabs exclusively. poultry products that are within their that the time to apply for inspection They usually slaughter and process both jurisdiction and outside official would be two hours. The time to amenable and non-amenable species. establishments for the purpose of develop a Sanitation SOP will be two For small slaughtering establishments as preventing the distribution of meat and days (16 hours) and five minutes to file. well as large ones, ratites and squabs do poultry products that are misbranded or FSIS estimates that an establishment not comprise all or even most of their adulterated under the FMIA and PPIA, will spend about 5 minutes a day business. Of the 100 establishments that or, in the case of imported articles, that developing an average of eight slaughter or process ratites and squabs, are not at such an establishment, after monitoring records, per Sanitation SOP, only two slaughter over 90% of the their entry into the United States. and two minutes a day filing each squabs consumed in the market. There Specifically, under section 301 of the record. The time to develop a HACCP are no establishments that dominate the FMIA and section 5 of the PPIA, a State plan or process schedule would take an slaughtering of ratites. Small entities may administer State meat and poultry average of two days (16 hours) and five will benefit along with the rest of the inspection programs provided that it has minutes to file. FSIS estimates that an industry with the increased developed and is effectively enforcing establishment will spend about five marketability of their product and the State meat and poultry inspection minutes a day developing an average of cost savings realized because they will requirements at least equal to those eight monitoring records, per HACCP no longer have to pay fees to either FSIS imposed under titles I and IV of the plan or process schedule, and two or the state for voluntary inspection FMIA and sections 1–4, 6–10, and 12– minutes a day filing each record. The service. 22 of the PPIA. These titles contemplate time to record E. coli testing results continuous ongoing programs. When Executive Order 12988 would be five minutes a day. States can no longer effectively enforce Respondents: Meat and poultry This interim final rule has been meat and poultry inspection product establishments and irradiation reviewed under Executive Order 12988, requirements at least equal to Federal facilities. Civil Justice Reform. This interim final requirements, they must be Estimated Number of Respondents: rule: (1) Preempts State and local laws ‘‘designated’’ by the Secretary to receive 105 (100 ratite and 5 squab and regulations that are inconsistent Federal inspection. establishments). with this rule; (2) has no retroactive When FSIS revises its meat and Estimated Number of Responses per effect; and (3) does not require poultry inspection requirements, States Respondent: 8,252. administrative proceedings before that administer their own inspection Estimated Total Annual Burden on parties may file suit in court challenging programs may be impacted, since they Respondents: 54,758 hours. this rule. However, the administrative must continue to enforce requirements Copies of this information collection procedures specified in 9 CFR 306.5, equal to those of FSIS. To minimize any assessment can be obtained from Lee 381.35, and 590.320 through 590.370, additional costs States must incur to Puricelli, Paperwork Specialist, Food respectively, must be exhausted before modify their inspection programs, FSIS Safety and Inspection Service, USDA, any judicial challenge of the application grants the States significant flexibility 112 Annex, 300 12th SW., Washington, of the provisions of this proposed rule, under the ‘‘equal to’’ provisions of the DC 20250. if the challenge involves any decision of FMIA and PPIA. Further, States are Comments are invited on: (a) Whether an FSIS employee relating to inspection eligible to receive up to 50 percent the collection of information is services provided under the PPIA. Federal matching funds to cover the necessary for the proper performance of costs of their inspection programs. the functions of the Agency, including Executive Order 13132 whether the information will have Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ Paperwork Reduction Act Requirements practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the requires that Agencies assess the Title: Mandatory Inspection of Ratites Agency’s estimate of the burden of the federalism implications of their policy and Squabs. collection of information including the statements and actions, i.e., the effects Type of Collection: New. validity of the methodology and
VerDate 11
assumptions used: (c) ways to enhance § 362.2 Types and availability of service. (3) The mark of inspection shall be the quality, utility, and clarity of the Upon application, in accordance with applied only under the immediate information to be collected; and (d) § 362.3, the following types of service supervision of an inspector. ways to minimize the burden of the may be furnished under the regulations (4) This service does not cover further collection of information on those who in this part: cutting and processing of products. are to respond, including through the (a) Inspection service. An inspection These activities must take place at an use of appropriate automated, and certification service for official establishment. electronic, mechanical, or other wholesomeness relating to the slaughter (5) The registration and recordkeeping technological collection techniques or and processing of poultry and the requirements enumerated in Part 381, other forms of information technology. processing of poultry products. All subpart Q, of this chapter shall apply to Comments are requested by July 2, provisions of Part 381 and §§ 416.1 persons requesting voluntary 2001. To be most effective, comments through 416.6 of this chapter shall apply identification service under this should be sent to OMB within 30 days to the slaughter of poultry, and the paragraph (c). of the publication date. preparation, labeling, and certification List of Subjects of the poultry and poultry products PART 381—POULTRY PRODUCTS processed under this poultry inspection INSPECTION REGULATIONS 9 CFR Part 362 service except for the following Poultry and poultry products. provisions: the definitions of ‘‘Act,’’ 3. The authority citation for Part 381 ‘‘animal food manufacturer,’’ continues to read as follows: 9 CFR Part 381 ‘‘Inspection Service,’’ ‘‘inspector,’’ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138f, 450; 21 USC 451– Poultry and poultry products. ‘‘Inspector in Charge,’’ ‘‘poultry,’’ 470; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. ‘‘poultry product,’’ ‘‘poultry food PART 362—VOLUNTARY POULTRY product,’’ ‘‘poultry products broker,’’ 4. Section 381.1 (b) is amended by INSPECTION REGULATIONS ‘‘renderer,’’ and ‘‘U.S. Refused Entry’’ in revising the definition of poultry to read §§ 381.1 (b), 381.3 (a), 381.6, 381.10, as follows: For the reasons stated in the 381.13–381.17, 381.21, 381.29, 381.39– Poultry. ‘‘Poultry’’ means any preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR 381.42, 381.175 (a)(2), 381.175 (a)(3), domesticated bird (chickens, turkeys, chapter III as follows: 381.179, 381.185–381.187, 381.192, and ducks, geese, guineas, ratites, or squabs, 1. The authority citation for part 362 381.195–381.225. also termed young flightless pigeons), is revised to read as follows: (b) Export certification service. At the whether live or dead. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 7 CFR 2.18 (g) request of any person intending to * * * * * and (i) and 2.53. export any slaughtered poultry or 5. Amend § 381.36 by revising the poultry product, inspectors may make 2. Sections 362.1 and 362.2 are first sentence of paragraph (b) to read as certification regarding products for revised to read as follows: follows: human food purposes, to be exported, as § 362.1 Definitions. meeting conditions or standards that are § 381.36 Facilities required. not imposed or are in addition to those The definitions in § 381.1 are (b) Facilities for ante mortem imposed by the regulations in this incorporated in this part except for the inspection. A suspect pen is required for chapter and the laws under which such definitions excluded in § 362.2(a). In adequate ratite inspection. * * * addition to those definitions, the regulations were issued. * * * * * following definitions will be applicable (c) Identification Service. (1) Poultry to the regulations in this part. or other product that is federally 6. Amend § 381.66 by revising the (a) Act. ‘‘Act’’ means the Agricultural inspected and passed at an official headings of paragraphs (b) and (c), and Marketing Act of 1946, as amended (60 establishment, or upon importation, by revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as Stat. 1087, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 1621 et under the Poultry Products Inspection follows: seq.). Act, is officially marked to identify it as § 381.66 Temperatures and chilling and (b) Inspector. ‘‘Inspector’’ means any federally inspected and passed. In order freezing procedures. officer or employee of the Department to facilitate the division of such poultry authorized to perform any duties under or other product into smaller portions or * * * * * the regulations in this part. its combination into larger units and (b) General chilling requirements, (c) Person. ‘‘Person’’ means any still maintain its identify as product except for ratites. *** individual, corporation, company, which has been federally inspected and (c) Ice and water chilling association, firm, partnership, society, passed and so marked, inspectors may requirements, except for ratites. *** or joint stock company, or other supervise the handling and weighing of (d) (1) Moisture absorption and organized business unit. the product and mark such portions and retention limits. units with the official mark of (d) Poultry. ‘‘Poultry’’ means any (1) Poultry washing, chilling, and migratory water fowl or game bird, inspection when they determine that identify has been maintained. draining practices and procedures shall whether dead or alive. be such as will minimize moisture (e) Poultry Product. ‘‘Poultry product’’ (2) At the time service is furnished, absorption and retention at time of means any poultry carcass or part product must be sound, wholesome, and packaging. Ratites must meet the thereof; or any human food product fit for human food. The service will be requirements of this paragraph but are which is made wholly or in part from available only on premises other than exempt from the rest of § 381.66(d). the carcass of any domesticated bird (as those of an official establishment. The defined in § 381.1(b) of this chapter) and sanitation of the place or area where * * * * * is excepted from the inspection service is furnished must comply with 7. Amend § 381.67, by revising the requirements of the Poultry Products provisions of §§ 416.1 through 416.6 of text preceding the table and the heading Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.). this chapter. of the table, to read as follows:
VerDate 11
§ 381.67 Young chicken and squab (b) Dead-on-arrival ratite carcasses shall be segregated from the other slaughter inspection rate maximums under and ratites condemned on ante mortem poultry and held for separate slaughter, traditional inspection procedure under inspection will be tagged ‘‘U.S. evisceration, and post mortem traditional inspection procedure. Condemned’’ by an establishment inspection. The inspector shall be The maximum number of birds to be employee under FSIS supervision and notified when such segregated lots are inspected by each inspector per minute disposed of by one of the methods presented for post mortem inspection, under the traditional inspection prescribed in § 381.95. and inspection of such birds shall be procedure for the different young (c) All seriously crippled ratites and conducted separately. Such procedure chicken and squab slaughter line non-ambulatory ratites, commonly for the correlation of ante mortem and configurations are specified in the termed ‘‘downers,’’ shall be identified as post mortem findings by the inspector, following table. These maximum rates ‘‘U.S. Suspects.’’ as may be prescribed or approved by the will not be exceeded. The inspector in (d) Ratites exhibiting signs of drug or Administrator, shall be carried out. charge will be responsible for reducing chemical poisoning shall be withheld (b) All ratites showing symptoms of production line rates where in the from slaughter. disease will be segregated, individually inspector’s judgment the prescribed (e) Ratites identified as ‘‘U.S. tagged as ‘‘U.S. Suspects’’ by inspection procedure cannot be Suspects’’ or ‘‘U.S. Condemned’’ may be establishment personnel under FSIS adequately performed within the time set aside for treatment. The ‘‘U.S. supervision with a serially numbered available, either because the birds are Suspect’’ or ‘‘U.S. Condemned’’ metal or plastic leg band or tag bearing not presented by the official identification device will be removed by the term ‘‘U.S. Suspect,’’ and held for establishment in such a manner that the an establishment employee under FSIS further examination by an FSIS carcasses, including both internal and supervision following treatment if the veterinarian. Depending upon the external surfaces and all organs, are bird is found to be free of disease. Such findings of the veterinarian’s readily accessible for inspection, or a bird found to have recovered from the examination, these birds will either be because the health conditions of a condition for which it was treated may passed for regular slaughter, slaughtered particular flock dictate a need for a more be released for slaughter or for purposes as suspects, withheld from slaughter, or extended inspection procedure. The other than slaughter, provided that in condemned on ante mortem. Those standards in 381.170(a) of this part the latter instance permission is first ratites affected with conditions that specify which classes of birds constitute obtained from the local, State, or would be readily detected on post young chickens and squabs. Section Federal sanitary official having mortem inspection need not be 381.76(b) specifies when either the jurisdiction over movement of such individually tagged on ante mortem traditional inspection procedure or the birds. inspection with the ‘‘U.S. Suspect’’ tag modified traditional inspection (f) When it is necessary for humane provided that such ratites are segregated procedure can or must be used. reasons to slaughter an injured ratite at and otherwise handled as ‘‘U.S. Maximum Production Line Rates— night or Sunday or a holiday, and the Suspects.’’ All ratites identified as ‘‘U.S. Chickens and Squabs-Traditional Agency veterinary medical officer Condemned’’ shall be tagged by Inspection Procedures cannot be obtained, the carcass and all establishment personnel, under FSIS * * * * * parts shall be kept for inspection, with supervision, with a serially numbered the head and all viscera except the metal or plastic leg band or tag bearing 8. Amend § 381.70 by designating the text as paragraph (a) and by adding gastrointestinal tract held by the natural the term ‘‘U.S. Condemned.’’ paragraph (b) to read as follows: attachment. If all parts are not so kept 11. Amend § 381.76 by revising the for inspection, the carcass shall be introductory text of paragraph (b) (1) to § 381.70 Ante mortem inspection; when condemned. If on inspection of a carcass read as follows: required; extent. slaughtered in the absence of an * * * * * inspector, any lesion or other evidence § 381.76 Post-mortem inspection, when (b) The examination and inspection of is found indicating that the bird was required; extent; traditional, Streamlined Inspection System (SIS), New Line Speed ratites will be on the day of slaughter, sick or diseased, or affected with any (NELS) Inspection System and the New except: other condition requiring condemnation Turkey Inspection (NTI) System; rate of (1) When it is necessary for humane of the animal on ante mortem inspection. reasons to slaughter an injured animal at inspection, or if there is lacking * * * * * night or on a Sunday or holiday, and the evidence of the condition that rendered (b)(1) There are five systems of post- FSIS veterinary medical officer cannot emergency slaughter necessary, the mortem inspection: Streamlined be obtained; or carcass shall be condemned. Ratites that Inspection System (SIS) and the New (2) In low volume establishments, are sick, dying, or that have been treated when ante mortem inspection cannot be Line Speed (NELS) Inspection System, with a drug or chemical and presented both of which shall be used only for done on the day of slaughter, and the for slaughter before the required birds to be slaughtered have received broilers and cornish game hens; the withdrawal period, are not covered by New Turkey Inspection (NTI) System, ante mortem inspection in the last 24 emergency slaughter provisions. hours, provided the establishment has which shall be used only for turkeys; an identification and control system 10. Revise § 381.72 to read as follows: Traditional Inspection; and Ratite over birds that have received ante Inspection. § 381.72 Segregation of suspects on ante * * * * * mortem inspection. mortem inspection. 9. Amend § 381.71 by designating the 12. Revise § 381.96 to read as follows: text as paragraph (a) and by adding (a) All birds, except ratites, that on paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) to ante mortem inspection do not plainly § 381.96 Wording and form of the official inspection legend. read as follows: show, but are suspected of being affected with, any disease or condition Except as otherwise provided in this § 381.71 Condemnation on ante mortem that under §§ 381.80 to 381.93 of this subpart, the official inspection legend inspection. Part may cause condemnation in whole required to be used with respect to * * * * * or in part on post mortem inspection, inspected and passed poultry products
VerDate 11
shall include wording as follows: inflation and a decrease in the projected Paperwork Reduction Act Statement ‘‘Inspected for wholesomeness by U.S. volume of copying by the NRC This final rule does not contain a new Department of Agriculture.’’ This contractor. In addition, the revisions or amended information collection wording shall be contained within a will provide for electronic copying to requirement subject to the Paperwork circle. The form and arrangement of CD–ROM. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 such wording shall be exactly as EFFECTIVE DATE: The rule is effective et seq.). indicated in the example in Figure 1, June 6, 2001. except that the appropriate official Public Protection Notification establishment number shall be shown, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If a means used to impose an and if the establishment number Thomas E. Smith, Acting Chief, Public information collection does not display appears elsewhere on the labeling Document Room, Office of the Chief a currently valid OMB control number, material in the manner prescribed in Information Officer, Nuclear Regulatory the NRC may not conduct or sponsor, § 381.123(b), it may be omitted from the Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and a person is not required to respond inspection mark. The administrator may 301–415–7204, or 1–800–397–4209 to, the information collection. approve the use of abbreviations of such (toll-free). Regulatory Analysis inspection mark; and such approved SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PDR abbreviations shall have the same force A regulatory analysis has not been retains a copy service to reproduce for and effect as the inspection mark. The prepared for this final rule because the a fee publicly available documents official inspection legend, or the final rule makes only minor conforming whatever their format. Since the NRC’s approved abbreviation thereof, shall be changes to the regulations that reference Agency-wide Document Access and printed on consumer packages and other Section 202 of the Energy Management System (ADAMS) was immediate containers of inspected and Reorganization Act and minor changes implemented in November 2000, passed poultry products, or on labels to to other regulations. making recently released documents be securely affixed to such containers of available in full text online, there has Backfit Analysis such products and may be printed or been a significant reduction in the stenciled thereon, but shall not be The NRC has determined that these volume of document reproduction. The applied by rubber stamping. When amendments do not involve any total volume of copying has fallen from provisions which would impose backfits applied by a stencil, the legend shall not over 3,000,000 pages a year to 1,600,000 as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1); be less than 4 inches in diameter. An in 2000. Based on first quarter data, the therefore a backfit analysis need not be official brand must be applied to projected level of copying for 2001 will prepared. inspected and passed carcasses and be just under 1,000,000 pages. Since the parts of ratites that are shipped Small Business Regulatory Enforcement copy service contract is at no cost to the unpacked. Fairness Act government, the contractor must Done at Washington, DC, on: April 25, provide all supplies and equipment. In accordance with the Small 2001. The NRC believes that the price increase Business Regulatory Enforcement Thomas J. Billy, is reasonable and in line with the prices Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has Administrator. charged by other Federal agencies. A determined that this action is not a [FR Doc. 01–10679 Filed 4–26–01; 1:36 pm] market survey showed that the average major rule and has verified this BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P price is 20 cents per page for paper-to- determination with the Office of Editorial Note: Federal Register rule paper copies and 27 cents for Information and Regulatory Affairs of document 01-10679 originally appeared in microfiche-to-paper copies. OMB. the issue of Tuesday, May 1, 2001 at 66 FR The contractor will offer two new List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 9 21631-21639. Due to several errors (repeated services to the public: copying Criminal penalties, freedom of text and missing text on page 21635) the documents from ADAMS to CD–ROM document is being reprinted in its entirety. information, privacy, reporting and and copying color documents from [FR Doc. R1–10679 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] recordkeeping requirements, the ADAMS to paper. The contractor will be Sunshine Act. BILLING CODE 1505–01–D able to accept orders directly online from ADAMS through the new ADAMS For the reasons set out in the Online Order Module scheduled to be preamble and under the authority of the NUCLEAR REGULATORY released shortly. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, COMMISSION the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, Because this amendment concerns an as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, 10 CFR Part 9 agency practice and procedure, the NRC the NRC is adopting the following has determined that notice and amendments to 10 CFR Part 9. [3150–AG78] comment under the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b) (A) and PART 9—PUBLIC RECORDS Charges for Reproducing Records (B), is unnecessary and that good cause 1. The authority citation for Part 9 AGENCY: exists to dispense with the comment. Nuclear Regulatory continues to read as follows: Commission. Environmental Impact: Categorical Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as ACTION: Final rule. Exclusion amended (42 U.S.C. 2201); Sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841). SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory The NRC has determined that this Commission (NRC) is revising its final rule is the type of action described Subpart A is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552 regulations to permit its contractor to in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22 and 31 U.S.C. 9701; (Pub. L. 99–570). Subpart increase the charges for copying (c) (1) and (2). Therefore, neither an B is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. Subpart C is also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552b. publicly available documents at the environmental impact statement nor an NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR). environmental assessment has been 2. Section 9.35 is amended by revising The increases are necessary to adjust for prepared for this final rule. paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
VerDate 11
§ 9.35 Duplication fees. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice (a)(1) The charges by the duplicating Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. service contractor for the duplication of Federal Aviation Administration This information may be examined at records made available under § 9.21 at the FAA, Transport Airplane the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), 14 CFR Part 39 Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville [Docket No. 2001–NM–68–AD; Amendment Renton, Washington; or at the Office of Pike, Room O–1F23, Rockville, MD. are 39–12210; AD 2001–09–05] the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol as follows: Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. RIN 2120–AA64 (i) Paper-to-paper reproduction is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim $0.15 per page for standard size (up to Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model Backman, Aerospace Engineer, ANM– 11″ × 14″). Pages 11″ × 17″ are $0.30 per A310–324, A310–325, and A300 B4– 116, International Branch, FAA, page. Pages larger than 11″ × 17″, 622R Series Airplanes Equipped with Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 including engineering drawings, are Pratt & Whitney PW4000 Series Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington $2.50 per square foot. Engines 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2797; (ii) Color drawings are $2.00 per 81⁄2″ fax (425) 227–1149. × ″ 1 ″ × ″ AGENCY: Federal Aviation 11 page. Pages larger than 8 ⁄2 11 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Administration, DOT. are $12.00 per square foot. has received reports that Pratt & (iii) Microfiche-to-paper reproduction ACTION: Final rule; request for Whitney Model PW4000 series engines is $0.15 per page. Aperture cards are comments. with certain early-production fan blades $2.50 per square foot. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a (Phase 0/1, FB2B or FB2T) installed on (iv) The charges for Electronic Full new airworthiness directive (AD) that is Airbus Model A310–324, A310–325, Text (EFT) (ADAMS documents) applicable to certain Airbus Model and A300 B4–622R series airplanes do copying are as follows: A310–324, A310–325, and A300 B4– not produce the amount of thrust (A) Electronic Full Text (EFT) copying 622R series airplanes equipped with indicated in the AFM. This thrust of ADAMS documents to paper (applies Pratt & Whitney PW4000 series engines. shortfall is due to erosion of the fan to images, OCR TIFF, and PDF text) is This action requires revising the blade’s leading edge. The flight crew has $0.15 per page. Airplane Flight Manuals (AFM) for the no indication of this shortfall in thrust. (B) Electronic Full Text (EFT) copying Model A310 and Model A300–600 This condition results in acceleration of ADAMS documents to CD–ROM is series airplanes. This action is necessary and climb performance less than that $10.00 for the first document on the to prevent acceleration and climb specified in the AFM, which, if not CD–ROM and $5.00 for each additional performance less than that specified in corrected, could result in an overrun of document per accession number on the the AFM, which could result in runway the runway or impact with an obstacle same CD–ROM. overruns or impact with obstacles or or terrain. (C) CD–ROM-to-paper reproduction is terrain. This action is intended to $0.15 per page. Explanation of Relevant Service address the identified unsafe condition. Information (v) Priority rates (rush processing) are DATES: Effective May 22, 2001. as follows: The incorporation by reference of The Direction Ge´ne´rale de l’Aviation (A) The priority rate is offered for certain publications listed in the Civile (DGAC), which is the standard size paper-to-paper regulations is approved by the Director airworthiness authority for France, has reproduction, microfiche-to-paper of the Federal Register as of May 22, requested that Airbus prepare revisions reproduction, electronic full text (EFT) 2001. to the AFM to take into account the copying of ADAMS documents to paper, Comments for inclusion in the Rules reduction in performance associated and CD–ROM-to-paper production at Docket must be received on or before with PW4000 series engines fitted with $0.20 per page. The priority rate for June 6, 2001. early-production fan blades and to standard size color prints is $2.50 per ADDRESSES: Submit comments in incorporate the necessary adjustments print. The priority rate for color triplicate to the Federal Aviation in performance. Those revisions are 1 ″ × ″ drawings larger than 8 ⁄2 11 is Administration (FAA), Transport expected to be available from Airbus in $15.00 per square foot. Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, mid-2001. Meanwhile, Airbus has (B) The priority rate for aperture cards Attention: Rules Docket Number 2001– issued the following Temporary is $3.50 per square foot. The priority NM–68–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Revisions (TR) to the AFM, each dated rate for electronic full text (EFT) to CD– Renton, Washington 98055–4056. January 22, 2001: ROM is $15.00 for the first document on Comments may be inspected at this A310 Flight Manual TR 5.03.00/01 (for the CD–ROM and $7.50 per each location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 Airbus Model A310–324 series airplanes); additional document on the same CD– p.m., Monday through Friday, except A310 Flight Manual TR 5.03.00/02 (for ROM. Federal holidays. Comments may be Airbus Model A310–325 series airplanes); (vi) Facsimile charges are $0.30 per submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. and page for local calls; $0.50 per page for Comments may also be sent via the A300–600 Flight Manual TR 5.03.00/01 (for U.S. long distance calls, and $1.00 per Internet using the following address: 9- Airbus Model A300 B4–622R series airplanes). page for foreign long distance calls. [email protected]. Comments * * * * * sent via fax or the Internet must contain These TR’s contain performance ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–68–AD’’ in the adjustments for the AFM for Model Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 25th A310–324, A310–325, and A300 B4– day of April 2001. subject line and need not be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the 622R series airplanes equipped with one For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Internet as attached electronic files must or more Pratt & Whitney Model PW4000 William D. Travers, be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for series engine with early-production fan Executive Director for Operations. Windows or ASCII text. blades. The DGAC classified these TR’s [FR Doc. 01–11387 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] The service information referenced in as mandatory and issued French BILLING CODE 7590–01–P this AD may be obtained from Airbus airworthiness directive 2001–086(B),
VerDate 11
dated March 7, 2001, in order to assure evaluating the effectiveness of the AD List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 the continued airworthiness of these action and determining whether Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation airplanes in France. additional rulemaking action would be safety, Incorporation by reference, needed. FAA’s Conclusions Safety. Submit comments using the following These airplane models are format: Adoption of the Amendment manufactured in France and are type • Organize comments issue-by-issue. Accordingly, pursuant to the certificated for operation in the United For example, discuss a request to States under the provisions of § 21.29 of authority delegated to me by the change the compliance time and a Administrator, the Federal Aviation the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 request to change the service bulletin CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral Administration amends part 39 of the reference as two separate issues. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to • For each issue, state what specific part 39) as follows: this bilateral airworthiness agreement, change to the AD is being requested. the DGAC has kept the FAA informed • Include justification (e.g., reasons or PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS of the situation described above. The data) for each request. DIRECTIVES FAA has examined the findings of the Comments are specifically invited on DGAC, reviewed all available the overall regulatory, economic, 1. The authority citation for part 39 information, and determined that AD environmental, and energy aspects of continues to read as follows: action is necessary for products of this the rule that might suggest a need to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. type design that are certificated for modify the rule. All comments § 39.13 [Amended] operation in the United States. submitted will be available, both before Explanation of Requirements of Rule and after the closing date for comments, 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness Since an unsafe condition has been in the Rules Docket for examination by directive: identified that is likely to exist or interested persons. A report that develop on other airplanes of the same summarizes each FAA-public contact 2001–09–05 Airbus Industrie: Amendment type design registered in the United concerned with the substance of this AD 39–12210. Docket 2001–NM–68–AD. States, this AD is being issued to will be filed in the Rules Docket. Applicability: Model A310–324, A310–325, prevent acceleration and climb Commenters wishing the FAA to and A300 B4–622R series airplanes; performance less than that specified in acknowledge receipt of their comments certificated in any category; equipped with Pratt & Whitney PW4000 series engines, the AFM, which could result in runway submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed, stamped except for airplanes fitted with current- overruns or impact with obstacles or production FB2C fan blades (Phase 3 fan terrain. This AD requires revising the postcard on which the following statement is made: ‘‘Comments to blades) on both engines. Performance section of the FAA- Note 1: Airbus Modification 10925 installs approved AFM’s for Model A310–324, Docket Number 2001–NM–68–AD.’’ The postcard will be date stamped and Phase 3 engines, and these are equipped with A310–325, and 300 B4–622R series FB2C (Phase 3) fan blades. Therefore, this AD airplanes to incorporate certain returned to the commenter. is not applicable to airplanes with that adjustments in performance. Regulatory Impact modification. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Determination of Rule’s Effective Date The regulations adopted herein will accomplished previously. Since a situation exists that requires not have a substantial direct effect on To prevent acceleration and climb the immediate adoption of this the States, on the relationship between performance less than that specified in the regulation, it is found that notice and the national Government and the States, Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), which could opportunity for prior public comment or on the distribution of power and result in runway overruns or impact with hereon are impracticable, and that good responsibilities among the various obstacles or terrain, accomplish the following: cause exists for making this amendment levels of government. Therefore, it is effective in less than 30 days. determined that this final rule does not AFM Revision have federalism implications under Comments Invited (a) For Model A310–324 and –325 series Executive Order 13132. airplanes: Within 30 days after the effective Although this action is in the form of The FAA has determined that this date of this AD, revise the FAA-approved a final rule that involves requirements regulation is an emergency regulation AFM to incorporate specified adjustments in affecting flight safety and, thus, was not that must be issued immediately to performance by inserting the following preceded by notice and an opportunity correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, Airbus A310 Flight Manual Temporary for public comment, comments are and that it is not a ‘‘significant Revisions (TR), all dated January 22, 2001, as invited on this rule. Interested persons regulatory action’’ under Executive applicable, into the Performance section of the AFM: 5.03.00/01 (for Airbus Model are invited to comment on this rule by Order 12866. It has been determined A310–324 series airplanes); or 5.03.00/02 (for submitting such written data, views, or further that this action involves an Airbus Model A310–325 series airplanes). arguments as they may desire. emergency regulation under DOT (b) For Model A300 B4–622R series Communications shall identify the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 airplanes: Within 30 days after the effective Rules Docket number and be submitted FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is date of this AD, revise the FAA-approved in triplicate to the address specified determined that this emergency AFM to incorporate specified adjustments in under the caption ADDRESSES. All regulation otherwise would be performance by inserting the following communications received on or before significant under DOT Regulatory A300–600 Flight Manual TR, dated January the closing date for comments will be Policies and Procedures, a final 22, 2001 into the Performance section of the AFM: 5.03.00/01 (for Airbus Model A300 B4– considered, and this rule may be regulatory evaluation will be prepared 622R series airplanes). amended in light of the comments and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy (c) When the information in the TR’s received. Factual information that of it, if filed, may be obtained from the specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD, supports the commenter’s ideas and Rules Docket at the location provided has been incorporated into FAA-approved suggestions is extremely helpful in under the caption ADDRESSES. general revisions of the applicable AFM’s,
VerDate 11
the general revisions may be incorporated in DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington the applicable AFM, and the TR’s may be 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2774; removed from the AFM’s. Federal Aviation Administration fax (425) 227–1181. Alternative Methods of Compliance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A 14 CFR Part 39 (d) An alternative method of compliance or proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal adjustment of the compliance time that [Docket No. 99–NM–74–AD; Amendment Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 39–12219; AD 2001–09–12] provides an acceptable level of safety may be include an airworthiness directive (AD) used if approved by the Manager, RIN 2120–AA64 that is applicable to certain Boeing International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Model 727–100, –100C, and –200 series Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall Airworthiness Directives; Boeing airplanes was published in the Federal submit their requests through an appropriate Model 727–100, –100C, and –200 Series Register on December 6, 1999 (64 FR FAA Principal Operations Inspector, who Airplanes 68062). For certain airplanes, that action may add comments and then send it to the proposed to require a one-time AGENCY: Federal Aviation Manager, International Branch. inspection of certain fuselage Administration, DOT. Note 2: Information concerning the circumferential skin joints to determine ACTION: Final rule. existence of approved alternative methods of the type of fasteners installed, and replacement of any aluminum fasteners compliance with this AD, if any, may be SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a with steel fasteners, if necessary; or obtained from the International Branch, new airworthiness directive (AD), modification of certain fuselage ANM–116. applicable to certain Boeing Model 727– circumferential skin joints; as 100, –100C, and –200 series airplanes, Special Flight Permits applicable. For certain other airplanes, that, for certain airplanes, requires a that action also proposed to require (e) Special flight permits may be issued in one-time inspection of certain fuselage repetitive inspections to detect accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the circumferential skin joints to determine corrosion, sealant deterioration, Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 the type of fasteners installed, and cracking, or disbonding; repair, if and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a replacement of any aluminum fasteners necessary; and modification of certain location where the requirements of this AD with steel fasteners, if necessary; or fuselage circumferential skin joints. can be accomplished. modification of certain fuselage Incorporation by Reference circumferential skin joints; as Comments applicable. For certain other airplanes, (f) The actions shall be done in accordance Interested persons have been afforded this amendment also requires repetitive with Airbus A310 Flight Manual Temporary an opportunity to participate in the inspections to detect corrosion, sealant Revision 5.03.00/01, dated January 22, 2001; making of this amendment. Due deterioration, cracking, or disbonding; Airbus A310 Flight Manual Temporary consideration has been given to the repair, if necessary; and modification of Revision 5.03.00/02, dated January 22, 2001; comments received. and Airbus A300–600 Flight Manual certain fuselage circumferential skin Temporary Revision 5.03.00/01, dated joints. This amendment is prompted by Request To Delete Certain Sections of January 22, 2001; as applicable. (Note: Only reports of corrosion between the body Proposed AD the first page to each of these Temporary skins and cold-bonded doublers at the One commenter requests that Boeing Revisions are date stamped; no other pages fuselage circumferential skin joints. The Model 727 series airplanes, line of the Temporary Revisions contain the actions specified by this AD are numbers 153, 339, 416, and 540, be revision date.) This incorporation by intended to prevent delamination of the deleted from the applicability section of reference was approved by the Director of the cold-bonded doublers, which could the proposed AD; and that paragraphs Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. result in corrosion of the body skins and (c) and (d) of the proposal, which apply 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be doublers, and consequent reduced only to those airplanes, also be deleted. obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point structural capability of the fuselage The commenter states that the Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, circumferential skin joints. manufacturer of those airplanes has France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, DATES: Effective June 11, 2001. determined that they cannot be Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind The incorporation by reference of repaired, and they were taken out-of- Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the certain publications listed in the service. Office of the Federal Register, 800 North regulations is approved by the Director The FAA does not concur with the Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, of the Federal Register as of June 11, commenter’s request; however, the FAA DC. 2001. agrees with the commenter’s intent. Part Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed ADDRESSES: The service information 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in French airworthiness directive 2001– referenced in this AD may be obtained (14 CFR part 39) states that, ‘‘No person 086(B), dated March 7, 2001. from Boeing Commercial Airplane may operate a product to which an Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Effective Date airworthiness directive applies except Washington 98124–2207. This in accordance with the requirements of (g) This amendment becomes effective on information may be examined at the that airworthiness directive.’’ The Part May 22, 2001. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 39 regulation provides compliance relief Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23, Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules for airplanes that are not being operated, 2001. Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., because affected airplanes need only be Donald L. Riggin, Renton, Washington; or at the Office of in compliance prior to return to the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Acting Manager, Transport Airplane operation. In light of this fact, the Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. airplanes having the line numbers listed [FR Doc. 01–10591 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walt above have been deleted from the Cost Sippel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Impact paragraph, below; however, the BILLING CODE 4910–13–U Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle applicability section and paragraphs (c) Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind and (d) will remain in the final rule
VerDate 11
should these airplanes be returned to (including additional fastener been converted to an all-cargo operation. replacement locations) specified in configuration (some have the original Boeing Document No. D6–54860, equipment manufacturer’s cargo door, Request To Delay or Revise Final Rule Revision C, dated December 11, 1989, not an after-market door), there is no One commenter requests that issuance ‘‘Aging Airplane Service Bulletin concern about inspecting through the of the final rule be delayed until the Structural Modification Program— doubler to the lower skin on those FAA and the B–727 Working Group Model 727;’’ or the modification airplanes. No change to the final rule is (Cargo Airline Association members) specified in Boeing Service Bulletin necessary in this regard. can develop a solution for the airplanes 727–53–0084, Revision 3, dated that have been converted from a September 28, 1989; HAS been Conclusion passenger configuration to an all-cargo accomplished. Operators that have After careful review of the available configuration. The commenter states modified their airplanes in accordance data, including the comments noted that, if the FAA and industry are to with Revision 3 of the service bulletin above, the FAA has determined that air work cooperatively to enhance safety, may have had the steel fasteners safety and the public interest require the the more appropriate course of action removed and replaced with aluminum adoption of the rule as proposed. would have been to place the issues rivets. Paragraph (a) requires operators addressed in the proposed rule before to inspect their airplanes to determine Cost Impact the Working Group, in lieu of issuing the type of fastener installed, and, if There are approximately 549 the proposed rule. The commenter notes aluminum fasteners are found, replace airplanes of the affected design in the that the FAA has worked successfully them with the correct steel fasteners. worldwide fleet. Based on a records with this group in the past to identify The need to accomplish these actions is review, the FAA estimates that only 374 and correct any cargo conversion not affected by the freighter conversion of those airplanes are still in service. problems. referenced by the commenter. The FAA estimates that 280 airplanes of The FAA does not concur. To delay 2. The actions specified in paragraph U.S. registry still in service will be this action would be inappropriate, (b) of the final rule are essentially the affected by this AD. since the FAA has determined that an same as those required by paragraph (a) unsafe condition exists and that The number of airplanes that will be of AD 90–06–09 amendment 39–6488 subject to the required one-time inspections must be conducted to (55 FR 8370, March 7, 1990). But ensure continued safety. inspection to determine the type of paragraph (b) of this final rule requires fasteners installed is unknown. For A second commenter requests that the that future modifications be proposed AD be revised to allow for the affected airplanes, it will take accomplished in accordance with approximately 45 work hours per structural benefits of the installation of Revision 4 of the referenced service the freighter conversion external airplane to accomplish the required one- bulletin, which ensures that the correct time inspection, at an average labor rate doubler and the numerous inspections steel fasteners will be installed. If the of $60 per work hour. Based on these that are currently part of the basic installation of the cargo conversion figures, the cost impact of this airplane maintenance program, as well interferes with the ability to accomplish inspection on U.S. operators is as the additional inspections required these actions, the operator should estimated to be $2,700 per airplane. by AD 98–23–51, amendment 39–10932 request approval of an AMOC, as (63 FR 67771, December 9, 1998). (That provided by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. For affected airplanes, it will take AD requires inspection/modification of 3. The AMOC approved for AD 98– approximately 192 work hours per fuselage skin longitudinal lap joints and 23–51 was for the longitudinal lap airplane to accomplish the required is applicable to Model 727 series joints. The report the commenter modification of the cold-bonded airplanes.) This revision of the proposal provided supports that AMOC request doublers of certain fuselage would be specific to those areas covered and addresses the structural integrity of circumferential skin joints, at an average by the external doubler and, as such, the longitudinal lap joints with the labor rate of $60 per work hour. would exempt converted freighters from cargo door doubler, but it does not Required parts will cost approximately the requirements of the proposed rule in demonstrate that the cargo door doubler $1,250. Based on these figures, the cost the area covered by the external cargo provides an acceptable level of safety for impact of this modification on U.S. door doubler. The commenter states that the circumferential skin joints. Based on operators is estimated to be $12,770 per the report provided with its comments this, the FAA finds that the technical airplane. was used to obtain approval of an data presented does not justify revising The cost impact figures discussed alternative method of compliance the final rule. The FAA will consider above are based on assumptions that no (AMOC) for AD 98–23–51. The report approval of AMOC’s if the appropriate operator has yet accomplished any of shows that the external doubler used in technical justification is submitted. the proposed requirements of this AD the cargo door modification is able to 4. Paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) of the action, and that no operator would carry the loads that the skin and lap final rule address four airplanes that accomplish those actions in the future if joints currently carry, even in the event were inadvertently omitted from the this AD were not adopted. applicability specified in AD 90–26–09. that the lap joints in that area were to Regulatory Impact fail. The commenter notes that these AD 90–26–09 requires that inspections same data can be used for the be accomplished, and cracks repaired, The regulations adopted herein will circumferential skin joints that are the in the same areas specified in this AD. not have a substantial direct effect on subject of this AD. The FAA has reviewed its files the States, on the relationship between The FAA does not concur to revise regarding AMOC’s to this AD and has the national Government and the States, the final rule for the following reasons: found several that pertain to airplanes or on the distribution of power and 1. Paragraph (a) is applicable to that have been converted from a responsibilities among the various airplanes on which the modification passenger configuration to an all-cargo levels of government. Therefore, it is recommended in Boeing Service configuration. Because the four determined that this final rule does not Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 2, dated airplanes that were omitted from the have federalism implications under June 5, 1972, and the additional actions applicability of AD 90–26–09 have not Executive Order 13132.
VerDate 11
For the reasons discussed above, I the fuselage circumferential skin joints, current (LFEC) inspection of the fuselage certify that this action (1) is not a accomplish the following: circumferential skin joints to detect corrosion ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a or sealant deterioration, in accordance with Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An Parts II.A. and II.B. of the Accomplishment intensive visual examination of a specific Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727– ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or Repeat the external detailed visual inspection FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) irregularity. Available lighting is normally thereafter at intervals not to exceed 15 will not have a significant economic supplemented with a direct source of good months, and repeat the LFEC inspection impact, positive or negative, on a lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 substantial number of small entities the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, months. under the criteria of the Regulatory magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface (2) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 30 months Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has cleaning and elaborate access procedures after the effective date of this AD, whichever may be required.’’ occurs first, perform a high frequency eddy been prepared for this action and it is current (HFEC) inspection of the fuselage contained in the Rules Docket. A copy One-Time Inspection/Replacement circumferential skin joints to detect cracking, of it may be obtained from the Rules (a) For airplanes on which the modification in accordance with Part II.D. of the Docket at the location provided under specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53– Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing the caption ADDRESSES. 0084, Revision 2, dated June 5, 1972, and the Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990. Repeat the HFEC List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 additional actions (including additional fastener replacement locations) specified in inspection thereafter at intervals not to Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Boeing Document No. D6–54860, Revision C, exceed 4,000 flight cycles or 48 months, safety, Incorporation by reference, dated December 11, 1989, ‘‘Aging Airplane whichever occurs first, until accomplishment of paragraph (f) of this AD. Safety. Service Bulletin Structural Modification Program—Model 727’’; or the modification (3) Within 48 months after the effective Adoption of the Amendment specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53– date of this AD, perform an internal detailed 0084, Revision 3, dated September 28, 1989; visual inspection of the fuselage Accordingly, pursuant to the has been accomplished: Within 36 months circumferential skin joints to detect cracking, authority delegated to me by the after the effective date of this AD, perform a disbonding, or sealant deterioration; in Administrator, the Federal Aviation one-time inspection of the fuselage accordance with Part II.C. of the Administration amends part 39 of the circumferential skin joints to determine the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR type of fastener installed, in accordance with Figure 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53– dated August 2, 1990. Repeat the internal part 39) as follows: 0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990. detailed visual inspection thereafter at (1) If no aluminum fasteners are found, no intervals not to exceed 48 months. PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS further action is required by this AD. Repair DIRECTIVES (2) If any aluminum fasteners are found, prior to further flight, replace with steel (d) For airplanes having line numbers 153, 1. The authority citation for part 39 fasteners, in accordance with Boeing Service 339, 416, and 540: If any discrepancy is continues to read as follows: Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, dated detected during any inspection required by Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. August 2, 1990. paragraph (c) of this AD, accomplish paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD, as § 39.13 [Amended] Modification applicable. (b) For airplanes listed in Boeing (1) If any corrosion, cracking, or 2. Section 39.13 is amended by Document No. D6–54860, Revision C, dated disbonding is detected during any inspection adding the following new airworthiness December 11, 1989, ‘‘Aging Airplane Service required by paragraph (c) of this AD, prior to directive: Bulletin Structural Modification Program— further flight, repair in accordance with Part 2001–0912 Boeing: Amendment 39–12219. Model 727’’ on which the modification III of the Accomplishment Instructions of Docket 99–NM–74–AD. specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53– Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, 0084, Revision 2, dated June 5, 1972, and the Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990, except as Applicability: Model 727–100, –100C, and additional actions specified in Boeing provided by paragraph (e) of this AD. No –200 series airplanes; line numbers 1 through Document No. D6–54860, Revision C, dated further action is required by this AD for that 549 inclusive; certificated in any category. December 11, 1989; or the modification area. Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53– (2) If the sealant has deteriorated but no identified in the preceding applicability 0084, Revision 3, dated September 28, 1989; corrosion, cracking, or disbonding is detected provision, regardless of whether it has been has not been accomplished prior to the during any inspection required by paragraph modified, altered, or repaired in the area effective date of this AD: Prior to the (c) of this AD, prior to further flight, reseal subject to the requirements of this AD. For accumulation of 60,000 total flight cycles, in accordance with Figure 5 or 6, as airplanes that have been modified, altered, or modify the fuselage circumferential skin applicable, of Boeing Service Bulletin 727– repaired so that the performance of the joints in accordance with Part IV of the 53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990. requirements of this AD is affected, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing (e) Where the service bulletin specifies that owner/operator must request approval for an Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, the manufacturer may be contacted for alternative method of compliance in dated August 2, 1990. Such action constitutes disposition of certain repair conditions, prior accordance with paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. terminating action for the modification in to further flight, repair in accordance with a The request should include an assessment of that area required by AD 90–06–09, method approved by the Manager, Seattle the effect of the modification, alteration, or amendment 39–6488. Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by in accordance with data meeting the type this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not Repetitive Inspections certification basis of the airplane approved been eliminated, the request should include (c) For airplanes having line numbers 153, by a Boeing Company Designated specific proposed actions to address it. 339, 416, and 540: Accomplish the Engineering Representative (DER) who has Compliance: Required as indicated, unless requirements of paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and been authorized by the Manager, Seattle accomplished previously. (c)(3) of this AD at the compliance time ACO, to make such findings. For a repair To prevent delamination of the cold- specified in those paragraphs. method to be approved by the Manager, bonded doublers, which could result in (1) Within 15 months after the effective Seattle ACO, or a Boeing DER, as required by corrosion of the body skins and doublers, and date of this AD, perform an external detailed this paragraph, the approval letter must consequent reduced structural capability of visual inspection and a low frequency eddy specifically reference this AD.
VerDate 11
Modification DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION helicopters. This information may be (f) For airplanes having line numbers 153, examined at the FAA, Office of the 339, 416, and 540: Prior to the accumulation Federal Aviation Administration Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, of 60,000 total flight cycles, or within 3,000 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort flight cycles after the effective date of this 14 CFR Part 39 Worth, Texas; or at the Office of the AD, whichever occurs later, modify the [Docket No. 99–SW–27–AD; Amendment Federal Register, 800 North Capitol fuselage circumferential skin joints in 39–12217; AD 2001–09–11] Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. accordance with Part IV of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RIN 2120–AA64 Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Uday Garadi, Aviation Safety Engineer, Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, Airworthiness Directives; Bell FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft dated August 2, 1990. Such action constitutes Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd., terminating action for the requirements of Helicopter Textron, Inc. Model 412 paragraph (c)(2) of this AD. Helicopters and Agusta S.p.A. Model Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone AB412 Helicopters (817) 222–5123, fax (817) 222–5961. Alternative Methods of Compliance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A (g)(1) An alternative method of compliance AGENCY: Federal Aviation proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal or adjustment of the compliance time that Administration, DOT. Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) provides an acceptable level of safety may be ACTION: Final rule. by superseding AD 98–07–03, used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Amendment 39–10421 (63 FR 14026, SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes ACO. Operators shall submit their requests March 24, 1998), which applies to an existing airworthiness directive (AD) through an appropriate FAA Principal certain serial-numbered Bell Model 412 that applies to certain serial-numbered Maintenance Inspector, who may add helicopters and Agusta Model AB412 comments and then send it to the Manager, Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell) helicopters, was published in the Seattle ACO. Model 412 helicopters and Agusta Federal Register on January 22, 2001 (2) An alternative method of compliance S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB412 (66 FR 6494). That action proposed to for paragraph (f) of this AD that provides an helicopters. That AD currently requires require a reduction of the Vne limitation acceptable level of safety may be used in a temporary reduction of the never- until an inspection of the yoke assembly accordance with data meeting the type exceed velocity (Vne) limitation until an for static and dynamic overload damage certification basis of the airplane approved inspection of the tail rotor yoke (yoke) and installation of a redesigned yoke by a Boeing Company DER who has been assembly for fatigue damage and flapping stop are accomplished and authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to installation of a redesigned yoke make such findings. includes periodic and special flapping stop are accomplished. inspections to detect a yoke overload. A Note 3: Information concerning the Recurring periodic and special correction to a technical bulletin date existence of approved alternative methods of inspections to detect occurrences of compliance with this AD, if any, may be referenced in that AD was issued on yoke overload are also required. This obtained from the Seattle ACO. July 10, 1998 (63 FR 38742, July 20, amendment requires the same actions as 1998). the previous AD but expands the Special Flight Permits Interested persons have been afforded applicability of the AD to all Bell Model (h) Special flight permits may be issued in an opportunity to participate in the 412, 412CF, 412EP, and Agusta Model accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the making of this amendment. No AB412 helicopters. This amendment is Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 comments were received on the prompted by the determination that the and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a proposal or the FAA’s determination of unsafe condition exists on all Bell location where the requirements of this AD the cost to the public. The FAA has Model 412 and all Agusta Model AB412 can be accomplished. determined that air safety and the helicopters, regardless of serial number. Incorporation by Reference public interest require the adoption of The actions specified by this AD are the rule as proposed except for (i) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of intended to prevent static and dynamic clarifying changes that were made in this AD, the actions shall be done in overload damage to the yoke that could paragraph (a) to better explain the intent accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin result in loss of the tail rotor and of the AD and editorial changes in 727–53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, subsequent loss of control of the 1990. This incorporation by reference was paragraph (d). The FAA has determined helicopter. approved by the Director of the Federal that these changes will neither increase Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) DATES: Effective June 11, 2001. the economic burden on any operator and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained The incorporation by reference of nor increase the scope of the AD. from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, certain publications listed in the The FAA estimates that 135 P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124– regulations was approved previously by helicopters of U.S. registry will be 2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, the Director of the Federal Register as of affected by this AD, that it will take Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind April 8, 1998 (63 FR 14026, March 24, approximately 6.5 work hours per Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the 1998), as corrected on July 20, 1998 (63 helicopter to install the placard, inspect Office of the Federal Register, 800 North FR 38742). the yoke assembly, and install the yoke. Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, ADDRESSES: DC. The service information Required parts will cost approximately (j) This amendment becomes effective on referenced in this AD may be obtained $511 per helicopter. Based on these June 11, 2001. from Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. figures, the total cost impact of this AD Box 482, Fort Worth, Texas 76101, on U.S. operators is estimated to be Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26, telephone (817) 280–3391, fax (817) $121,635. 2001. 280–6466 for the Bell Model 412 The regulations adopted herein will Donald L. Riggin, helicopters; and Agusta S.p.A., 21017 not have a substantial direct effect on Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Cascina Costa di Samarate (VA), Italy, the States, on the relationship between Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Via Giovanni Agusta 520, telephone 39 the national Government and the States, [FR Doc. 01–10939 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] (0331) 229111, fax 39 (0331) 229605– or on the distribution of power and BILLING CODE 4910–13–U 222595 for the Agusta Model AB412 responsibilities among the various
VerDate 11
levels of government. Therefore, it is alternative method of compliance in Temporary Revision No. 2, as applicable, determined that this final rule does not accordance with paragraph (e) of this AD. from the RFM. have federalism implications under The request should include an assessment of (d) After accomplishing the requirements Executive Order 13132. the effect of the modification, alteration, or of paragraph (c) of this AD, at intervals not repair on the unsafe condition addressed by to exceed 25 hours TIS, inspect the yoke For the reasons discussed above, I this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not assembly and tail rotor flapping stop (stop) certify that this action (1) is not a been eliminated, the request should include in accordance with Part III, Recurring 25- ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under specific proposed actions to address it. Hour Special Inspection and Conditional Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Inspection Requirement, of BHT ASB 412– ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT accomplished previously. 96–89, Revision A, dated October 17, 1997; Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 To prevent static and dynamic overload BHT ASB 412CF–96–01, dated September 3, FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) damage to the tail rotor yoke (yoke) that 1996; or Agusta Technical Bulletin No. 412– 65, dated April 17, 1997, as applicable. will not have a significant economic could result in loss of the tail rotor and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, Replace any unairworthy yoke assembly or impact, positive or negative, on a stop with an airworthy yoke assembly or stop substantial number of small entities accomplish the following: (a) Before further flight, review the before further flight. under the criteria of the Regulatory historical records of the yoke assembly for (e) An alternative method of compliance or Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has any static or dynamic overload damage that adjustment of the compliance time that been prepared for this action and it is could have imposed a bending load on the provides an acceptable level of safety may be contained in the Rules Docket. A copy yoke. The damage may not have required used if approved by the Manager, Regulations of it may be obtained from the Rules replacing the yoke assembly; for example, an Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. Operators shall submit their requests through incident in which a damaged tail rotor blade Docket at the location provided under an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, was replaced due to a blade strike. If the the caption ADDRESSES. who may concur or comment and then send records indicate that overload damage may it to the Manager, Regulations Group. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 have occurred, replace the yoke with an Note 2: Information concerning the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation airworthy yoke. (b) Before further flight, unless the existence of approved alternative methods of safety, Incorporation by reference, requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD have compliance with this AD, if any, may be Safety. been accomplished previously: obtained from the Regulations Group. Adoption of the Amendment (1) Install a Never Exceed Velocity (Vne) (f) Special flight permits may be issued in red line at 120 knots indicated airspeed accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Accordingly, pursuant to the (KIAS) on the pilot and copilot airspeed Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 authority delegated to me by the indicators using red tape or paint and a and 21.199) to operate the helicopter at slippage indicator on the instrument case and airspeeds not to exceed 120 KIAS to a Administrator, the Federal Aviation location where the requirements of this AD Administration amends part 39 of the glass. (2) Install a placard made of material that can be accomplished. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR is not easily erased, disfigured, or obscured (g) The inspections and installations shall part 39) as follows: on the instrument panel in clear view of the be done in accordance with Bell Helicopter pilot and copilot: Textron Alert Service Bulletin 412–96–89, PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS ‘‘Observe temporary Maximum Never Revision A, dated October 17, 1997; Bell DIRECTIVES Exceed (Vne) airspeed red line (marked at Helicopter Textron Alert Service Bulletin 120 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS)). Vne is 412CF–96–01, dated September 3, 1996; or 1. The authority citation for part 39 20 KIAS less than the value presented on the Agusta Bolletino Tecnico (Technical continues to read as follows: airspeed limitation placard for each ambient Bulletin) No. 412–65, dated April 17, 1997. The incorporation by reference of those Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. condition.’’ (3) Insert the applicable Bell Helicopter documents was approved previously by the § 39.13 [Amended] Textron (BHT) 412 Temporary Revision, Director of the Federal Register, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 2. Section 39.13 is amended by dated August 16, 1996, into the Model 412 Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) or the part 51, as of April 8, 1998 (63 FR 14026, removing Amendment 39–10421 (63 FR applicable section of Agusta AB412 March 24, 1998), as corrected on July 20, 14026, March 24, 1998, and 63 FR Temporary Revision No. 2, dated April 17, 1998 (63 FR 38742). Copies may be obtained from Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 38742, July 20, 1998), and by adding a 1997, into the Model AB412 RFM. 482, Fort Worth, Texas 76101, telephone new airworthiness directive (AD), (c) Within 180 calendar days: (817) 280–3391, fax (817) 280–6466; or (1) Remove yoke assembly, P/N 212–011– Amendment 39–12217, to read as Agusta, 21017 Cascina Costa di Samarate 702-all dash numbers, and replace it with an follows: (VA), Via Giovanni Agusta 520, telephone airworthy yoke assembly, P/N 212–011–702- 2001–09–11 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (0331) 229111, fax (0331) 229605–222595. all dash numbers, with zero hours time-in- Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Office and Agusta S.p.A.: Amendment 39– service (TIS), or an airworthy yoke 12217. Docket No. 99–SW–27–AD. of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, (regardless of TIS) that has passed a one-time 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Supersedes AD 98–07–03, Amendment x-ray diffraction inspection in accordance 39–10421, Docket No. 97–SW–58–AD. Texas; or at the Office of the Federal Register, with BHT Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 412– 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Applicability: Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. 96–89, Revision A, dated October 17, 1997; Model 412, 412CF, and 412EP helicopters Washington, DC. BHT ASB 412CF–96–01, dated September 3, (h) This amendment becomes effective on and Agusta S.p.A. Model AB412 helicopters, 1996; or Agusta Bolletino Tecnico (Technical June 11, 2001. with tail rotor yoke assembly, part number Bulletin) No. 412–65, dated April 17, 1997, Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed (P/N) 212–011–702-all dash numbers, whichever is applicable. in Registro Aeronautico Italiano (Italy) AD installed, certificated in any category. (2) Install an airworthy tail rotor flapping 97–223, dated August 1, 1997. Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter stop, P/N 212–011–713–103. identified in the preceding applicability (3) After the requirements of paragraphs Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 20, provision, regardless of whether it has been (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD are accomplished, 2001. otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in remove the 120 KIAS redline from the pilot Larry M. Kelly, the area subject to the requirements of this and copilot airspeed indicators; remove the AD. For helicopters that have been modified, Vne airspeed restriction placard; and remove Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, altered, or repaired so that the performance the BHT 412 Temporary Revision, dated Aircraft Certification Service. of the requirements of this AD is affected, the August 16, 1996; BHT ASB 412CF–96–01, [FR Doc. 01–10731 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] owner/operator must request approval for an dated September 3, 1996; or Agusta AB412 BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Comments List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Interested persons have been afforded Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Federal Aviation Administration an opportunity to participate in the safety, Incorporation by reference, making of this amendment. No Safety. 14 CFR Part 39 comments were submitted in response Adoption of the Amendment [Docket No. 2000–NM–263–AD; Amendment to the proposal or the FAA’s 39–12213; AD 2001–09–08] determination of the cost to the public. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the RIN 2120–AA64 Conclusion Administrator, the Federal Aviation The FAA has determined that air Airworthiness Directives; Administration amends part 39 of the safety and the public interest require the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A. adoption of the rule as proposed. (CASA), Model CN–235 Series part 39) as follows: Cost Impact Airplanes PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS The FAA estimates that 1 airplane of AGENCY: Federal Aviation DIRECTIVES Administration, DOT. U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 8 work 1. The authority citation for part 39 ACTION: Final rule. hours to accomplish the required continues to read as follows: SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a installation, and that the average labor Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. rate is $60 per work hour. Required new airworthiness directive (AD), § 39.13 [Amended] applicable to all CASA Model CN–235 parts will cost approximately $877. series airplanes, that requires installing Based on these figures, the cost impact 2. Section 39.13 is amended by a second electrical connector in the of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated adding the following new airworthiness electrical Master Central Unit. The to be $1,357. directive: The cost impact figure discussed actions specified by this AD are 2001–09–08 Construcciones Aeronauticas, above is based on assumptions that no intended to prevent the loss of electrical S.A. (CASA): Amendment 39–12213. operator has yet accomplished any of power, other than that provided by the Docket 2000–NM–263–AD. the requirements of this AD action, and Applicability: All Model CN–235 series emergency system, in the event of that no operator would accomplish disconnection of the single electrical airplanes, certificated in any category. those actions in the future if this AD Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane connector within the electrical Master were not adopted. The cost impact Central Unit. This action is intended to identified in the preceding applicability figures discussed in AD rulemaking provision, regardless of whether it has been address the identified unsafe condition. actions represent only the time modified, altered, or repaired in the area DATES: Effective June 11, 2001. necessary to perform the specific actions subject to the requirements of this AD. For The incorporation by reference of actually required by the AD. These airplanes that have been modified, altered, or certain publications listed in the figures typically do not include repaired so that the performance of the regulations is approved by the Director incidental costs, such as the time requirements of this AD is affected, the of the Federal Register as of June 11, owner/operator must request approval for an required to gain access and close up, alternative method of compliance in 2001. planning time, or time necessitated by accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. ADDRESSES: The service information other administrative actions. The request should include an assessment of referenced in this AD may be obtained Regulatory Impact the effect of the modification, alteration, or from Construcciones Aeronauticas, S.A., repair on the unsafe condition addressed by The regulations adopted herein will Getafe, Madrid, Spain. This information this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not not have a substantial direct effect on been eliminated, the request should include may be examined at the Federal the States, on the relationship between specific proposed actions to address it. Aviation Administration (FAA), the national Government and the States, Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules or on the distribution of power and accomplished previously. Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., responsibilities among the various To prevent the loss of electrical power, Renton, Washington; or at the Office of levels of government. Therefore, it is other than that provided by the emergency the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol system, in the event of disconnection of the determined that this final rule does not Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. single electrical connector within the have federalism implications under electrical Master Central Unit, accomplish FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Executive Order 13132. the following: Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, ANM–116, For the reasons discussed above, I International Branch, FAA, Transport certify that this action (1) is not a Installation Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under (a) Within 6 months after the effective date Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a of this AD: Install a second electrical 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2125; ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT connector in the Master Central Unit, in fax (425) 227–1149. accordance with CASA Service Bulletin SB– Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 235–24–14, dated June 27, 2000. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal will not have a significant economic Alternative Methods of Compliance Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to impact, positive or negative, on a (b) An alternative method of compliance or include an airworthiness directive (AD) substantial number of small entities adjustment of the compliance time that that is applicable to all CASA Model under the criteria of the Regulatory provides an acceptable level of safety may be CN–235 series airplanes was published Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has used if approved by the Manager, in the Federal Register on January 22, been prepared for this action and it is International Branch, ANM–116. Operators shall submit their requests through an 2001 (66 FR 6497). That action proposed contained in the Rules Docket. A copy appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance to require installing a second electrical of it may be obtained from the Rules Inspector, who may add comments and then connector in the electrical Master Docket at the location provided under send it to the Manager, International Branch, Central Unit. the caption ADDRESSES. ANM–116.
VerDate 11
Note 2: Information concerning the and are consistent with, the respect to any existing state or federal existence of approved alternative methods of requirements of the Electronic regulatory requirement that a contract or compliance with this AD, if any, may be Signatures in Global and National transactional record be retained.6 This obtained from the International Branch, Commerce Act. effective date is delayed, however, if an ANM–116. EFFECTIVE DATE: The guidance is agency has announced, proposed or Special Flight Permits effective on May 7, 2001. initiated, but not completed, a (c) Special flight permits may be issued in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rulemaking proceeding under the accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Michael A. Macchiaroli, Associate authority preserved in the Electronic Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 Director, 202/942–0131; Thomas K. Signatures Act.7 On February 28, 2001, and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a McGowan, Assistant Director, 202/942– the Commission announced that it location where the requirements of this AD 4886; Randall W. Roy, Special Counsel, would act shortly to provide can be accomplished. 202/942–0798, or Mathew Comstock, interpretive guidance and, where Incorporation by Reference Attorney, 202/942–0156, Division of appropriate, propose or adopt rules Market Regulation, Securities and consistent with the Electronic (d) The actions shall be done in accordance Signatures Act, thereby delaying the with CASA Service Bulletin SB–235–24–14, Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, dated June 27, 2000. This incorporation by N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549–1001. effective date with respect to reference was approved by the Director of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Commission recordkeeping rules to June The 8 Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. Securities and Exchange Commission 1, 2001. Since 1939, the Commission has 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be (‘‘Commission’’) is publishing guidance required broker-dealers, through rules obtained from Construcciones Aeronauticas, on how Rule 17a–4(f) (17 CFR 240.17a– S.A., Getafe, Madrid, Spain. Copies may be authorized under the Exchange Act, to 4(f)) under the Securities Exchange Act inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane make and maintain certain records of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) is consistent Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the Electronic Signatures in Global Washington; or at the Office of the Federal with federal securities laws and and National Commerce Act of 2000. Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite regulations.9 In 1997, after requests by 700, Washington, DC. I. Introduction industry representatives, the Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed The Electronic Signatures in Global Commission amended its record in Spanish airworthiness directive 06/00, retention rule to allow broker-dealers to dated June 27, 2000. and National Commerce Act of 2000 (the ‘‘Electronic Signatures Act’’) 1 seeks store these records using any electronic Effective Date to promote electronic commerce by storage medium, subject to certain 10 (e) This amendment becomes effective on providing greater legal certainty to requirements set forth in the rule. June 11, 2001. transactions effected by electronic These requirements are safeguards designed to ensure the accuracy, Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 24, means. To this end, the Electronic 2001. Signatures Act provides that the legal accessibility, and accurate reproduction of the electronically stored records. The Donald L. Riggin, validity of a signature or contract cannot rule’s evolution from a strictly paper Acting Manager, Transport Airplane be denied solely because it is in electronic form.2 It also encourages requirement to its present electronic Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. storage provisions reflects the [FR Doc. 01–10727 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] electronic record storage by providing that any statute, regulation, or other rule Commission’s approach of promoting BILLING CODE 4910–13–U of law that requires the retention of the use of available technologies to the contracts or other records relating to benefit of broker-dealers and investors. transactions in or affecting interstate or In anticipation of the June 1, 2001 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE foreign commerce may, with certain effective date for the electronic storage COMMISSION exceptions, be complied with by storing provisions of the Electronic Signatures the documents electronically.3 Act, we are publishing this release to 17 CFR Part 241 However, the Electronic Signatures Act explain how the electronic storage requirements of the broker-dealer record [Release No. 34–44238] requires that the electronically stored documents must accurately reflect the retention rule meet, and are consistent Commission Guidance to Broker- information in the contracts or with, the requirements of the Electronic Dealers on the Use of Electronic transactional records and be accessible Signatures Act. Storage Media Under the Electronic to all persons entitled to review them II. Background Signatures in Global and National under statute, regulation, or rule of law Commerce Act of 2000 With Respect to in a form that is capable of being A. Broker-Dealer Books and Records Rule 17a–4(f) accurately reproduced for later Rules reference.4 The Electronic Signatures Section 17(a)(1) of the Exchange Act AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Act does not define how these authorizes the Commission to issue Commission. requirements are to be met. Instead, it rules requiring broker-dealers to make ACTION: Interpretation. preserves the ability of regulatory and keep for prescribed periods, and agencies to interpret them with respect furnish copies thereof, such records as SUMMARY: The Commission is to statutes under which such agencies necessary or appropriate in the public publishing guidance on the operation of have rulemaking authority.5 its rule permitting electronic storage of On March 1, 2001, the Electronic 6 Electronic Signatures Act Section 107(b)(1). broker-dealer records in light of the 7 Signatures Act became effective with Electronic Signatures Act Section 107(b)(1)(B). recently enacted Electronic Signatures 8 Exchange Act Release No. 44014 (Feb. 28, 2001), 66 FR 13273 (March 5, 2001),
VerDate 11
interest, for the protection of investors the records to be stored immediately on record retention requirements of Rule or otherwise in furtherance of the microfilm.17 This amendment 17a–4 using optical disk storage purposes of the Exchange Act.11 In recognized that broker-dealers were technology.22 This allowed broker- 1939, the Commission adopted Rules increasingly using automated systems in dealers to take advantage of the savings 17a–3 (17 CFR 240.17a–3) and 17a–4 (17 their back office operations, and that the and of the increased productivity and CFR 240.17a–4), pursuant to this records generated on such systems quicker access to archived records authority.12 Rule 17a–3 requires broker- could be transferred to microfilm more provided by optical disk. At the same dealers to make certain records, quickly than to paper, and at time, the Division recognized that the including trade blotters, asset and substantially less expense. As the use of an electronic storage system liability ledgers, income ledgers, Commission noted at the time, ‘‘the raised audit and examination concerns. customer account ledgers, securities retention of reels of microfilm as against Consequently, the Division established records, order tickets, trade bulky hard copy records should enable certain conditions for using optical disk confirmations, trial balances, and an organization to effect substantial to help ensure that records stored in this various employment related savings in storage space and man manner would be accurate and 13 documents. Rule 17a–4 specifies the hours.’’ 18 The rule specifies certain accessible for examination purposes. manner and length of time that the requirements on the use of microfilm These conditions were consistent with records created in accordance with Rule intended to ‘‘preserve the basic the safeguards proposed by the SIA in 17a–3, and certain other records safeguards designed by [Rules 17a–3 its 1992 no-action request. For example, produced by broker-dealers, must be and 17a–4] for the protection of public the optical disk technology stores digital maintained.14 In combination, Rules 19 investors.’’ Broker-dealers who use information by employing a laser heat 17a–3 and 17a–4 require broker-dealers micrographic media must: (1) Maintain source to burn a pattern on the disk, to create, and preserve in an accessible facilities to protect the records and which makes the records non- manner, a comprehensive record of each reproduce them in an easily readable rewriteable and non-erasable. The letter securities transaction they effect and of format; (2) arrange the records and their also required: (1) Broker-dealers to file their securities business in general. indexes in a manner that permits the an undertaking signed by a third-party These rules impose minimum immediate location of a particular in which the third-party represents that recordkeeping requirements that are record; and (3) store a second copy of it will access the records at the request based on standards a prudent broker- the records in a separate location. dealer should follow in the normal In 1991, the Securities Industry of the Commission; (2) the optical disk course of business. The requirements Association (‘‘SIA’’), on behalf of its system to automatically verify the are an integral part of the investor broker-dealer members, requested that quality and accuracy of the recording protection function of the Commission, the Division of Market Regulation process; (3) the optical disk system to and other securities regulators, in that (‘‘Division’’) amend Rule 17a–4 to serialize the original and any duplicate the preserved records are the primary permit broker-dealers to store records units of the storage medium and time- means of monitoring compliance with electronically.20 The following year, the date information stored on the medium; applicable securities laws, including SIA requested that the Division not and (4) the optical disk system to have antifraud provisions and financial recommend enforcement action if the capacity to download indices and responsibility standards. broker-dealers stored records using an records. Originally, Rule 17a–4 had a paper- electronic storage technology known as In 1997, the Commission, in many only requirement for the initial optical disk.21 In its no-action request, respects, codified the Division’s no- retention of records; now, the rule the SIA set forth a list of safeguards that action letter by amending paragraph (f) allows broker-dealers to choose between it believed were appropriate. These of Rule 17a–4 to allow broker-dealers to storing records in paper form, on safeguards included that the storage store records electronically.23 However, microfilm or microfiche (‘‘micrographic system: be non-rewriteable and non- one significant difference was that the media’’) or using electronic storage erasable (or write once, read many final rule did not limit broker-dealers to media. This progression from paper to ‘‘WORM’’); automatically verify the using optical disk. Instead, it allowed electronic media is indicative of how accuracy of stored information; serialize them to employ any electronic storage the Commission encourages the use of and time-date the records; and create medium, subject to certain technological innovation when both indexes of the records. The SIA requirements. For the most part, these broker-dealers and investors will estimated that the savings realized by 15 requirements are the same safeguards benefit. switching from microfilm to optical disk proposed by the SIA in its 1992 no- As mentioned, Rule 17a–4, when would range from $250,000 a year for a action request and later required by the adopted in 1939, required broker- medium-sized firm to $1.6 million a Division in its 1993 no-action letter. It dealers to maintain records in paper year for a large firm. is these requirements of Rule 17a–4 that form for the first two years of the In 1993, the Division issued a no- we now find meet, and are consistent specified retention period, and on action letter in response to the SIA’s with, the Electronic Signatures Act.24 microfilm thereafter.16 In 1970, the 1992 request. The no-action letter Commission amended the rule to allow permitted broker-dealers to meet the 22 Letter from Michael A. Macchiaroli, Associate Director, Division, to Michael D. Udoff, Chairman, 11 15 U.S.C. 78q(a)(1). 17 Exchange Act Release No. 8875 (Apr. 30, 1970), Ad Hoc Record Retention Committee, SIA (June 18, 12 Exchange Act Release No. 2304 (Nov. 13, 1939), 35 FR 7644 (May 16, 1970). 1993). 4 FR 4578 (Jan. 2, 1940). 18 Id. 23 Adopting Release 34–38245, 62 FR 6469 (Feb. 13 17 CFR 240.17a–3. 19 Id. 12, 1997). 14 17 CFR 240.17a–4. 20 Letter from Edward I. O’Brien, President, SIA, 24 The requirements for using electronic storage 15 The Commission continues to be interested in to William Heyman, Deputy Director, Division, media for broker-dealer records are set forth in exploring ways in which technology can be used to (May 1, 1991). subsections (2)(i), (2)(ii)(A)–(D), and (3)(i)–(vii) of create efficiencies without sacrificing the 21 Letter from Michael D. Udoff, Chairman, Ad paragraph (f) of Rule 17a–4. These subsections are Commission’s regulatory objectives. Hoc Record Retention Committee, SIA, to Michael the requirements that are generally referred to 16 Exchange Act Release No. 2304 (Nov. 13, 1939), Macchiaroli, Assistant Director, Division, (May 19, throughout this release as, among other terms, ‘‘the 4 FR 4578 (Jan. 2, 1940). 1992). electronic storage requirements of Rule 17a–4(f).’’
VerDate 11
B. The Electronic Storage Requirements electronic storage requirements of Rule provision for the use of new of the Electronic Signatures Act 17a–4(f) meet these guidelines. technologies as they become available, which is consistent with the technology- III. Analysis Section 101(d)(1) of the Electronic neutral requirements in the Electronic Signatures Act permits persons who are The Electronic Signatures Act Signatures Act. legally required to retain contracts or becomes effective on June 1, 2001 with Second, the Electronic Signatures Act records relating to transactions in or respect to Rule 17a–4.30 To the extent and the electronic storage requirements affecting interstate or foreign commerce Rule 17a–4 requires the retention of the of Rule 17a–4(f) were each designed to to do so using electronic means. types of contracts and transactional allow affected parties to take advantage However, Section 101(d)(1) also requires records identified in the Electronic of the increased productivity and cost persons who opt to store such records Signatures Act, broker-dealers will be savings arising from the use of in electronic form to proceed in a able to retain them electronically under electronic storage systems. To quote manner that ensures the records are Section 101(d)(1), provided the Representative Sessions, ‘‘the accurate, accessible, and capable of electronic records are accurate, underlying legislation will allow all accurate reproduction for later accessible, and capable of being Americans to benefit from the reference. As Section 101(d)(1) reads in accurately reproduced for later efficiencies resulting from advances in full, reference. Under paragraph (f) of Rule technology.’’ 32 Similarly, the If a statute, regulation, or other rule of law 17a–4, broker-dealers are already Commission, when adopting its requires that a contract or other record permitted to retain all required electronic storage rule, stated that the relating to a transaction in or affecting records—not just these contracts and amendments were ‘‘a recognition of interstate or foreign commerce be retained, transactional records—using electronic technological developments that will that requirement is met by retaining an means, subject to the requirements set provide economic as well as time-saving electronic record of the information in the forth in that paragraph. Pursuant to the advantages for broker-dealers by contract or other record that— Commission’s interpretive authority expanding the scope of recordkeeping (A) accurately reflects the information set preserved by the Electronic Signatures 33 forth in the contract or other record; and options.* * *’’ Act, we find that the electronic storage Third, there is explicit support in the (B) remains accessible to all persons who requirements of Rule 17a–4(f) meet, and are entitled to access by statute, regulation, legislative history for our finding that are consistent with, the accuracy, Rule 17a–4(f) is consistent with the or rule of law, for the period required by such accessibility, and accurate reproduction statute, regulation, or rule of law, in a form Electronic Signatures Act. As noted by requirements of Section 101(d)(1) of the that is capable of being accurately Representative Dingell, ‘‘[t]he standards Electronic Signatures Act. Therefore, reproduced for later reference, whether by set forth in the SEC’s existing electronic 25 broker-dealers must continue to comply transmission, printing, or otherwise. recordkeeping rule, Rule 17a–4(f), such with the electronic storage requirements as the requirement that an electronic The Electronic Signatures Act does of Rule 17a–4(f) after June 1, 2001.31 recordkeeping system preserve records not specify the conditions under which A. The Electronic Storage Requirements in a non-rewriteable and non-erasable an electronic record would be deemed of Rule 17a–4(f) Are Consistent With manner, are essential to the SEC’s to have met these requirements. Section 101(d) of the Electronic investor protection mission and are However, it does preserve the ability of Signatures Act consistent with the provisions of the regulatory agencies to interpret them conference report [on the Electronic with respect to statutes under which The electronic storage requirements of Signatures Act].’’ 34 they have rulemaking authority.26 The Rule 17a–4(f) are consistent with exercise of this interpretive authority is Section 101(d) of the Electronic B. The Electronic Storage Requirements subject to certain guidelines. First, the Signatures Act. First, the Electronic of Rule 17a–4(f) Do Not Add interpretation must be ‘‘consistent’’ with Signatures Act provides that statutes or Requirements to Section 101(d) of the Section 101 of the Act.27 Second, the regulations requiring the retention of Electronic Signatures Act certain contractual or transactional interpretation may not ‘‘add to the The electronic storage requirements of 28 records may be complied with by requirements’’ of Section 101. Third, Rule 17a–4(f) do not add to the the agency, in issuing the interpretation, storing them electronically. Rule 17a– 4(f) allows for the retention of requirements of Section 101(d) of the must find that: (1) There is substantial Electronic Signatures Act. The justification for the interpretation; (2) documents in electronic form. In fact, the rule is broader than the Electronic Electronic Signatures Act requires the methods selected to carry out that electronic records to be stored in a purpose are substantially equivalent to Signatures Act because it does not limit its applicability to contracts or other manner that ensures they are accurate, the requirements imposed on records accessible, and capable of being that are not electronic; (3) the methods records that relate to transactions in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce. accurately reproduced for later selected to carry out that purpose will reference. Rule 17a–4(f) permits broker- not impose unreasonable costs on the Rather, it permits broker-dealers to electronically store all records they are dealers to store electronic records in a acceptance and use of electronic manner consistent with the Electronic records; and (4) the methods selected to required to retain under Rule 17a–4. Moreover, Rule 17a–4(f) makes specific Signatures Act. For example, the WORM carry out that purpose do not require, or requirement is designed to ensure that accord greater legal status or effect to, 30 electronic records are capable of being the implementation or application of a See 66 FR 13273 (March 5, 2001). 31 We also note that, during the debate on the accurately reproduced for later reference specific technology or technical Electronic Signatures Act, a concern was raised as 29 by maintaining the records in an specification. We believe the to whether the validity of a contract could be unalterable form. The automatic challenged because it was not retained in an accurate or accessible manner. 146 Cong. Rec. 25 Electronic Signatures Act § 101(d)(1). 32 H4349 (daily ed. June 14, 2000) (statement of Rep. 146 Cong. Rec. H4347 (daily ed. June 14, 2000) 26 Electronic Signatures Act § 104(b). Dreier). The electronic storage requirements of Rule (statement of Rep. Sessions). 27 Electronic Signatures Act § 104(b)(2)(A). 17a–4(f) are designed to ensure that electronic 33 Adopting Release, 62 FR at 6469. 28 Electronic Signatures Act § 104(b)(2)(B). records are kept in an accurate and accessible 34 146 Cong. Rec. H4358 (daily ed. June 14, 2000) 29 Electronic Signatures Act § 104(b)(2)(C). manner. (statement of Rep. Dingell) (emphasis added).
VerDate 11
verification requirement is designed to The Commission is responsible for Moreover, the securities for which a ensure the records are accurate by interpreting and enforcing federal broker-dealer has custodial providing verification that a record has securities laws and regulations—such as responsibility are frequently maintained been accurately stored in the electronic anti-fraud, sales practice and financial in different locations throughout the system. Indexing is designed to ensure responsibility requirements—aimed at world. This complexity of operations that the records are accessible by ensuring safe and sound securities makes the accurate and comprehensive providing a means to search for specific markets. Because broker-dealers play a keeping of broker-dealer books and records among the many that have been critical role in these markets, the records crucial to the securities stored. The third-party download Commission has established rules industry. A failure to maintain accurate, requirement is designed to ensure that requiring them to act in a manner that accessible, and true records may lead to records remain accessible by providing foremost is protective of the interests of situations where a firm cannot account that a person with the appropriate their customers and other market for customer property or its own assets. knowledge and expertise will access the participants. These rules, along with For these reasons, the Commission’s system at the Commission’s request. The rules promulgated by the self-regulatory broker-dealer recordkeeping serialization provision is intended to organizations (‘‘SROs’’), seek to ensure requirements are an important part of ensure both the accuracy and that broker-dealers operate in a managing systemic risk in the industry. accessibility of the records by indicating financially sound manner, maintain 2. The Electronic Storage Requirements the order in which records are stored, adequate custody of customer assets, of Rule 17a–4(f) Are Substantially thereby making specific records easier and refrain from deceptive and Equivalent to the Requirements for to locate and authenticating the storage manipulative practices. To monitor Records That Are Not Electronic process. compliance with these rules, the Commission requires broker-dealers to The electronic storage requirements of C. The Commission Makes the Findings make and maintain records that Rule 17a–4(f) are intended to ensure the Required by Section 104(b)(2)(C) of the document their transactions with prompt production of legible, true, and Electronic Signatures Act customers and overall securities complete records, a requirement In exercising its authority to interpret operations. Commission and SRO applicable to the storage of all broker- its statutes, as preserved in the examiners review these records to dealer records regardless of their form. Electronic Signatures Act, the determine whether broker-dealers are Accordingly, the requirements for Commission must make four findings: acting within the requirements of the electronic storage are substantially (1) That there is substantial justification securities laws, regulations and SRO equivalent to the requirements for the for the interpretation; (2) that the rules. Accordingly, if investors are to be other methods of record storage. methods selected to carry out that adequately protected, regulators must be The examination process, which is purpose are substantially equivalent to able to rely on these records as fundamental to the regulation of broker- the requirements imposed on records providing a true account of a broker- dealers, depends on the ability of that are not electronic; (3) that the dealer’s operations. examiners to quickly obtain records that methods selected to carry out that Commission enforcement actions are relevant to a particular examination purpose will not impose unreasonable against unscrupulous broker-dealers and that reflect the information as costs on the acceptance and use of that improperly altered or destroyed originally entered into the record. This electronic records; and (4) that the records demonstrate the need for need is complicated by the record- methods selected to carry out that measures aimed at maintaining the intensive nature of the securities purpose do not require, or accord integrity of broker-dealer records. These industry. Rule 17a–4 seeks to address greater legal status or effect to, the cases have included situations in which the tension between the need for quick implementation or application of a broker-dealer employees have changed production of specific records and the specific technology or technical or destroyed order tickets and other volume of records generated on a daily specification.35 transactional records in an effort to shift basis, by requiring that more current firm losses to their customers or to records be retained in an easily 1. There Is Substantial Justification for conceal fraudulent activities.36 accessible place. It also requires that the Commission’s Interpretation of Rule Moreover, the complexity of the every broker-dealer ‘‘shall furnish 17a–4(f) securities business makes accurate and promptly * * * legible, true and The electronic storage requirements of comprehensive recordkeeping vital to complete copies of those records’’ Rule 17a–4(f) are substantially justified the financial well being of broker- requested by representatives of the by the need to protect investors and dealers and, as a result, investors and Commission.37 ensure the soundness of the securities the securities markets. Many securities These requirements apply regardless markets. Over the last several years, firms process large volumes of of whether the records are stored in there has been significant growth in the transactions on a daily basis across paper form, on micrographic media, or number of investors entering these diverse markets, business groups and using electronic media. However, given markets. For example, we estimate that geographic areas. Each trade generates the differences in the methods of the number of securities accounts at several separate records that must be storage, the rule sets forth, with respect U.S. broker-dealers has grown from retained. In addition, broker-dealers to micrographic and electronic media, approximately 35 million in 1990 to 82 hold cash and a wide range of domestic certain requirements designed to ensure million in 1999. In part, this growth has and foreign securities on behalf of their the prompt production of legible, true, been driven by advances in information customers. The amount of securities and complete records. These and trade processing technology, which under a firm’s control constantly requirements do not impose greater make it easier for investors to purchase changes as it effects transactions. burdens on broker-dealers for using and hold securities. The increase in the micrographic or electronic storage number of investors has emphasized the 36 See e.g., In the Matter of Del Mar Financial methods; rather, they address the Services, Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release No. need for a safe and sound market place. 42421 (Feb. 14, 2000); In the Matter of A.S. unique characteristics of each storage Goldmen & Co., Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release 35 Electronic Signatures Act § 104(b)(2)(C). No. 41601 (July 7, 1999). 37 17 CFR 240.17a–4(j).
VerDate 11
method and seek to put them all on an 3. The Electronic Storage Requirements the rule.40 Moreover, in discussing the equal footing. For example, the ability to of Rule 17a–4(f) Do Not Impose WORM provision of the rule, the promptly produce legible, true, and Unreasonable Costs on the Acceptance Commission made clear that this did not complete paper records requires keeping and Use of Electronic Records mean only one type of storage them in an accessible location and filed The costs associated with the methodology. As the Commission stated in a way that particular documents can electronic storage requirements of Rule in the release, be identified and retrieved. Conversely, 17a–4(f) are reasonable, given their In the Proposing Release, the Commission it is not enough to simply keep investor protection objective and goal of did not intend the definition of optical microfilm tapes or optical disks easily reducing storage expenses. Broker- storage technology to include only ablative accessible. There must also be facilities dealers have had the option since 1993 methodology of storage. The Commission recognizes that other methods of electronic to locate the appropriate records, to read of storing records electronically on storage technology exist, including optical them, and to print them. Therefore, optical disk, and since 1997 on any type tape and CD–ROM, which is available in a paragraph (f) of Rule 17a–4 specifies of electronic media. The requirements WORM, non-rewriteable version. The that broker-dealers using micrographic for using electronic storage media (e.g., Commission is adopting a rule today, which, or electronic media must have such WORM, automatic verification, instead of specifying the type of storage retrieval facilities available.38 Requiring indexing, third-party undertaking) have technology that may be used, sets forth standards that the electronic storage media such facilities for electronically stored been in place since the Division’s 1993 no-action letter. Our interpretation must satisfy to be considered an acceptable records is similar to requiring that paper method of storage under Rule 17a–4. records be in an accessible place. today does not add to these Specifically, because optical tape, CD–ROM, Moreover, the indexing requirement for requirements, and therefore, will not and certain other methods of electronic records stored using micrographic or increase the costs of electronic storage, storage are available in WORM and can electronic media allows for the retrieval which have likely decreased since 1993 provide the same safeguards against data and should continue to drop as manipulation and erasure that optical disk of specific records in a manner technological advances occur. provides, the final rule clarifies that broker- equivalent to the way that particular Moreover, the costs of storing large dealers may employ any electronic storage paper records can be pulled from volumes of records electronically are media that meets the conditions set forth in 41 designated files. likely to be substantially lower than the final rule. Furthermore, paper and micrographic storing them on paper or on The Commission also acknowledged media both store exact images of the micrographic media. that, with respect to the WORM information as it was originally entered We believe the electronic storage provision, several storage into the record. Electronic media, on the requirements in Rule 17a–4(f) are methodologies, in addition to the other hand, store the original necessary to ensure the accuracy, ablative method mentioned above, were information in digital or computerized accessibility, and accurate reproduction available.42 For these reasons, the form. The WORM provision is designed of broker-dealer records stored electronic storage requirements of Rule to ensure that the original information is electronically. Accordingly, we believe 17a–4 do not require, or accord greater preserved in an unalterable manner so they are reasonable, particularly when legal status to, the implementation or that it can be accurately reproduced for measured against the problems that application of a specific technology or later reference. could arise if the ability of securities technical specification. regulators to enforce compliance with D. The Electronic Storage Requirements Paper records are accessible if securities laws and regulations was examiners can obtain and use them. In of Rule 17a–4(f) Would Be Permissible compromised due to inadequate and Performance Standards Under Section contrast, accessing electronic storage unreliable electronic recordkeeping. media systems requires varying degrees 104(b)(3) of the Electronic Signatures Moreover, as discussed in the next Act of technical expertise (depending on the section, the requirements are medium used) and, very likely, technology-neutral and, therefore, allow Even if the electronic storage knowledge of the proprietary for the use of new technologies as they requirements of Rule 17a–4(f) accorded characteristics (e.g., passwords and become available. This flexibility is greater legal status to the source codes) of a given system. incorporated in the rule to keep record implementation or application of a Therefore, Rule 17a–4(f) requires an retention costs as low as possible. specific technology or technical undertaking that a third party can specification, the requirements would 4. The Electronic Storage Requirements provide access to these records. In the still be permissible under the Electronic of Rule 17a–4(f) Do Not Require, or Signatures Act. The Electronic absence of such an undertaking, Accord Greater Legal Status or Effect to, examiners could find it difficult, if not Signatures Act contains an exception to the Implementation or Application of a the limitation against the impossible, to obtain electronic records Specific Technology or Technical implementation or application of a from a broker-dealer that had gone out Specification specific technology or technical of business or was refusing to cooperate. specification.43 The exception permits Consequently, attempting to retrieve The Commission first proposed amending Rule 17a–4 to allow an agency to specify performance records from an electronic storage electronic storage in 1993.39 The standards to ensure the accuracy, medium without the requisite proposed amendments would have accessibility, and integrity of records technological knowledge would be no limited broker-dealers to using optical that are required to be retained, even if different than attempting to obtain disk. However, the Commission records from a broker-dealer that stored ultimately adopted a rule that allows the 40 Adopting Release, 62 FR 6469. paper records in an inaccessible place. use of any electronic storage medium 41 Adopting Release, 62 FR at 6470. 42 Adopting Release, 62 FR at 6470 n.10 (The that meets the general requirements of other methodologies identified in the release were alloying, bubble-forming, moth-eye (Plasmon), 39 Exchange Act Release No. 32609 (July 9, 1993), phase-change, dye/polymer, and magneto-optic). 38 17 CFR 240.17a-4(f)(3)(i) and (ii). 58 FR 38092 (July 15, 1993). 43 Electronic Signatures Act Section 104(b)(3)(A).
VerDate 11
those standards require implementation Commission’s mandate to protect with, the requirements of the Electronic or application of a specific technology investors. Accordingly, the Signatures Act. or technical specification. Under the Commission’s regulatory function is List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 241 Electronic Signatures Act, such undermined to the extent that these performance standards must: (1) Serve records are inaccurate, retained in a Securities. an important governmental objective; non-accessible manner, or capable of Amendments to the Code of Federal and (2) be substantially related to the alteration. The Commission’s Regulations achievement of that objective.44 Even if enforcement record against the electronic storage requirements of unscrupulous broker-dealers that have For the reasons set forth in the Rule 17a–4(f) must be evaluated under changed or destroyed records preamble, the Commission is amending Section 104(b)(3)(A) of the Electronic demonstrates how such conduct can title 17, chapter II of the Code of Federal Signatures Act, they serve an important harm investors and the public interest.47 Regulations as set forth below: governmental objective and are 2. The Electronic Storage Requirements substantially related to achieving that PART 241—INTERPRETATIVE of Rule 17a–4(f) Are Substantially RELEASES RELATING TO THE objective. Related to the Important Governmental SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 1. The Electronic Storage Requirements Interest AND GENERAL RULES AND of Rule 17a–4(f) Serve an Important The electronic storage requirements REGULATIONS THEREUNDER Governmental Interest are designed to ensure that the 1. Part 241 is amended by adding Section 17(a)(1) of the Exchange Act Commission can promptly obtain Release No. 34–44238 and the release authorizes the Commission to issue legible, true, and complete records. date of May 1, 2001 to the list of rules requiring broker-dealers to make Because the Commission relies on this interpretive releases. and keep for prescribed periods, and ability to fulfill its responsibilities, the furnish copies thereof, such records as requirements are substantially related to Dated: May 1, 2001. By the Commission. necessary or appropriate in the public the Commission’s regulatory function. interest, for the protection of investors The Commission, in the release Margaret H. McFarland, or otherwise in furtherance of the adopting the electronic storage Deputy Secretary. purposes of the Exchange Act.45 This requirements of Rule 17a–4, noted the [FR Doc. 01–11333 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] grant of authority recognizes the ‘‘importance for recordkeeping of ready BILLING CODE 8010–01–U importance of broker-dealer access, reliability, and permanence of recordkeeping to the Commission’s records.’’ 48 Therefore, the release made regulatory function and investor clear that the electronic storage DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND protection objective. Rule 17a–4, requirements were intended as HUMAN SERVICES adopted by the Commission pursuant to ‘‘safeguards against data erasure’’ and to this authority, sets forth the ‘‘facilitate full access to the records Food and Drug Administration requirements for keeping and furnishing during examinations.’’ 49 As noted by broker-dealer records. In so doing, the Senator Leahy, the Electronic Signatures 21 CFR Part 173 rule serves the important governmental Act specifically authorizes agencies ‘‘to [Docket No. 00F–1487] interest of assisting adequate set performance standards to assure the supervision of broker-dealers by the accuracy, integrity, and accessibility of Secondary Direct Food Additives Commission and the SROs. During the records that are required to be Permitted in Food for Human debate on the Electronic Signatures Act, retained.’’ 50 Statements of Senators Consumption the importance of accurate Hollings, Wyden and Sarbanes, and of Representative Dingell indicate that the AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, recordkeeping in regulated industries HHS. was noted. To quote a statement by intent behind this section of the ACTION: Final rule. Senators Hollings, Wyden and Sarbanes, Electronic Signatures Act was to allow ‘‘bank and other financial regulators agencies to have standards designed to, SUMMARY: The Food and Drug need to require that records be retained among other things, prevent companies Administration (FDA) is amending the in order that their examiners can insure from retaining materials in an easily food additive regulations to provide for 51 the safety and soundness of the alterable form. The electronic storage the safe use of acidified sodium chlorite institutions and compliance with all requirements of Rule 17a–4(f), such as solutions as a component of a post-chill relevant regulatory requirements.’’ 46 WORM, are designed for this purpose. carcass spray or dip when applied to Investor protection depends on the IV. Conclusion poultry meat, organs, or related parts or examination process, which, in turn, For the foregoing reasons, we find that trim. This action is in response to a relies on the records that broker-dealers petition filed by Alcide Corp. are required to make and maintain. The the electronic storage requirements of Rule 17a–4(f) meet, and are consistent DATES: This rule is effective May 7, electronic storage requirements of Rule 2001. Submit written objections and 17a–4(f) are designed to ensure that 47 requests for a hearing by June 6, 2001. broker-dealers will meet their obligation See e.g., In the Matter of Del Mar Financial Services, Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release No. ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to under Section 17(a)(1) and Rule 17a–4 42421 (Feb. 14, 2000); In the Matter of A.S. the Dockets Management Branch (HFA– to promptly furnish legible, true and Goldmen & Co., Inc., et al., Exchange Act Release 305), Food and Drug Administration, complete copies of such records as are No. 41601 (July 7, 1999). 48 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, requested by the Commission or its Adopting Release, 62 FR at 6470. 49 MD 20852. representatives. This is crucial to the Id. 50 146 Cong. Rec. S5221 (daily ed. June 15, 2000) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (statement of Sen. Leahy). Robert L. Martin, Center for Food Safety 44 Id. 51 See 146 Cong. Rec. S5230 (daily ed. June 15, 45 15 U.S.C. 78q(a)(1). 2000) (statement of Sens. Hollings, Wyden and and Applied Nutrition (HFS–215), Food 46 146 Cong. Rec. S5230 (daily ed. June 14, 2000) Sarbanes); 146 Cong. Rec. H4358 (daily ed. June 14, and Drug Administration, Washington, (statement of Sens. Hollings, Wyden, and Sarbanes). 2000) (statement of Rep. Dingell). DC 20204–0001, 202–418–3074.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice specify with particularity the provisions ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION published in the Federal Register of of the regulation to which objection is AGENCY September 11, 2000 (65 FR 54855), FDA made and the grounds for the objection. announced that a food additive petition Each numbered objection on which a 40 CFR Part 52 (FAP 0A4722) had been filed by Alcide hearing is requested shall specifically so [Region II Docket No. 45–216; FRL–6924– Corp., 8561 154th Ave., NE., Redmond, state. Failure to request a hearing for 3] WA 98052. The petition proposed to any particular objection shall constitute amend the food additive regulations in a waiver of the right to a hearing on that Approval and Promulgation of § 173.325 Acidified sodium chlorite objection. Each numbered objection for Implementation Plans; New York; solution (21 CFR 173.325) to provide for which a hearing is requested shall Motor Vehicle Inspection and the safe use of acidified sodium chlorite include a detailed description and Maintenance Program solutions as a component of a post-chill analysis of the specific factual carcass spray or dip when applied to information intended to be presented in AGENCY: Environmental Protection poultry meat, organs, or related parts or support of the objection in the event Agency (EPA). trim. that a hearing is held. Failure to include ACTION: Final rule. FDA has evaluated data in the such a description and analysis for any SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection petition and other relevant material. particular objection shall constitute a Agency is announcing the approval of a Based on this information, the agency waiver of the right to a hearing on the State Implementation Plan revision concludes that the proposed use of the objection. Three copies of all documents submitted by New York. This revision additive is safe, that the additive will are to be submitted and are to be consists of New York’s demonstration of achieve its intended technical effect, identified with the docket number the effectiveness of the enhanced motor and, therefore, that the regulation in found in brackets in the heading of this vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/ § 173.325 should be amended as set document. Any objections received in M) program decentralized testing forth below. response to the regulation may be seen network which satisfies the In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR in the Dockets Management Branch requirements of section 348 of the 171.1(h)), the petition and the between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday National Highway Systems Designation documents that FDA considered and through Friday. relied upon in reaching its decision to Act (NHSDA). In addition, EPA is approve the petition are available for List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173 approving New York’s test method, inspection at the Center for Food Safety NYTEST, and its effectiveness in Food additives. and Applied Nutrition by appointment relation to the IM240 test method and with the information contact person Therefore, under the Federal Food, the regulations implementing the listed above. As provided in § 171.1(h), Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under program. The intended effect of this the agency will delete from the authority delegated to the Commissioner action is to fully approve New York’s documents any materials that are not of Food and Drugs and redelegated to enhanced I/M program, a requirement of available for public disclosure before the Director, Center for Food Safety and the Clean Air Act. making the documents available for Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will be inspection. amended as follows: effective June 6, 2001. In the notice of filing, FDA gave ADDRESSES: Copies of the State interested parties an opportunity to PART 173—SECONDARY DIRECT submittals are available at the following submit comments on the petitioner’s FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN addresses for inspection during normal environmental assessment. FDA FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION business hours: Environmental received no comments in response to 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air that notice. The agency has carefully considered part 173 continues to read as follows: Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th the potential environmental effects of Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348. Floor, New York, New York 10007– 1866; New York State Department of this action. FDA has concluded that the 2. Section 173.325 is amended by Environmental Conservation, Division action will not have a significant impact removing ‘‘or’’ at the end of paragraph of Air Resources, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, on the human environment, and that an (b)(1)(iii), removing the period at the New York 12233; and Environmental environmental impact statement is not end of paragraph (b)(1)(iv) and adding ‘‘; Protection Agency, Air and Radiation required. The agency’s finding of no or’’ in its place, and adding paragraph Docket and Information Center, Air significant impact and the evidence (b)(1)(v) to read as follows: supporting that finding, contained in an Docket (6102), 401 M Street, SW., environmental assessment, may be seen § 173.325 Acidified sodium chlorite Washington, DC 20460. solutions. in the Dockets Management Branch FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (address above) between 9 a.m. and 4 * * * * * Judy-Ann Mitchell, Air Programs p.m., Monday through Friday. (b)(1)*** Branch, Environmental Protection This final rule contains no collection (v) As a component of a post-chill Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New of information. Therefore, clearance by carcass spray or dip solution when York, New York 10278, (212) 637–4249. the Office of Management and Budget applied to poultry meat, organs, or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: under the Paperwork Reduction Act of related parts or trim. I. Background 1995 is not required. * * * * * Any person who will be adversely On October 2, 2000 (65 FR 58698), affected by this regulation may at any Dated: April 27, 2001. EPA published a notice of proposed time file with the Dockets Management L. Robert Lake, rulemaking for the State of New York. Branch (address above) written Director of Regulations and Policy, Center The notice proposed approval of objections by June 6, 2001. Each for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. revisions to the State Implementation objection shall be separately numbered, [FR Doc. 01–11330 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Plan (SIP) for New York’s enhanced and each numbered objection shall BILLING CODE 4160–01–S inspection and maintenance (I/M)
VerDate 11
program. The formal SIP revision was 1, 217–2, and 217–4, that became to use VCS in place of a SIP submission submitted on May 24, 1999 and effective on May 22, 1997. These are that otherwise satisfies the provisions of additional information was submitted also found at 15NYCRR Part 79, Motor the Clean Air Act. Thus, the on October 7, 1999 and October 29, Vehicle Inspection, Sections 79.1–79.15, requirements of section 12(d) of the 1999. A description of New York’s 79.17, 79.20, 79.21, 79.24–79.26, that National Technology Transfer and submittals and EPA’s rationale for our became effective on June 4, 1997. Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. proposed action were presented in the This approval removes the interim 272 note) do not apply. As required by proposal and will not be restated here. status of EPA’s interim approval section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 promulgated on October 24, 1997 (64 FR FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing II. Public Comments/Response to 32411). this final rule, EPA has taken the Comments Administrative Requirements necessary steps to eliminate drafting One comment was submitted to the errors and ambiguity, minimize docket during the comment period for Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR potential litigation, and provide a clear the notice of proposed rulemaking 51735, October 4, 1993), this final action legal standard for affected conduct. EPA published in the October 2, 2000 is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ has complied with Executive Order Federal Register. Copies of the original and therefore is not subject to review by 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by comment letter are available at EPA’s the Office of Management and Budget. examining the takings implications of Region II Office at the address listed in This final action merely approves State the rule in accordance with the the ADDRESSES section of this document. law as meeting federal requirements and ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental The commentor, an emissions imposes no additional requirements Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk inspection and automotive repair station beyond those imposed by State law. and Avoidance of Unanticipated owner, commented on problems he has Accordingly, the Administrator certifies Takings’’ issued under the executive that this final rule will not have a been experiencing with his NYTEST order. This rule does not impose an significant economic impact on a equipment including the responsiveness information collection burden under the substantial number of small entities of the New York State Department of provisions of the Paperwork Reduction under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). and the equipment manufacturer. U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements The Congressional Review Act, 5 Through discussions with the NYSDEC, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small EPA has learned that the State has been under State law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond Business Regulatory Enforcement working with the commentor to address Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides his concerns. These comments to the that required by State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or that before a rule may take effect, the docket do not address the approvability agency promulgating the rule must of New York’s I/M program nor do they significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the submit a rule report, which includes a address the emissions reduction copy of the rule, to each House of the effectiveness of the NYTEST test type. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). For the same Congress and to the Comptroller General Therefore, these comments will not be of the United States. EPA will submit a addressed in this document. reason, this final rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the report containing this rule and other III. Conclusion communities of tribal governments, as required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and EPA is approving New York’s specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 the Comptroller General of the United enhanced I/M program SIP revision FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This final rule States prior to publication of the rule in pursuant to section 348 of the NHSDA will not have substantial direct effects the Federal Register. This rule is not a and the Clean Air Act. By so doing, EPA on the states, on the relationship ‘‘major’’ rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. is finding that New York has adequately between the national government and 804(2). This rule will be effective June remedied the six de minimus the states, or on the distribution of 6, 2001. deficiencies previously identified and power and responsibilities among the has demonstrated that its decentralized various levels of government, as Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean I/M program network is substantially as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 Air Act, petitions for judicial review of effective as a centralized program FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it this action must be filed in the United network in achieving emission merely approves a State rule States Court of Appeals for the reductions according to the following: implementing a federal standard, and appropriate circuit by July 6, 2001. • 88 percent as effective for HC does not alter the relationship or the Filing a petition for reconsideration by emission reductions. distribution of power and the Administrator of this final rule does • 84 percent as effective for CO responsibilities established in the Clean not affect the finality of this rule for the emission reductions. Air Act. This final rule also is not purposes of judicial review nor does it • 86 percent as effective for NOX subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR extend the time within which a petition emission reductions. 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not for judicial review may be filed, and In addition, EPA is affording economically significant. shall not postpone the effectiveness of emissions reduction credit to the In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s such rule or action. This action may not NYTEST as follows: role is to approve state choices, be challenged later in proceedings to • 95 percent of IM240 credit for HC. provided that they meet the criteria of enforce its requirements. (See section • 99 percent of IM240 credit for CO. the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 307(b)(2).) • absence of a prior existing requirement 99 percent of IM240 credit for NOX. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 EPA is approving the latest revisions for the State to use voluntary consensus to the enhanced I/M program standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Environmental protection, Air regulations. Specifically, these are to disapprove a SIP submission for pollution control, Carbon monoxide, found at 6NYCRR Part 200, General failure to use VCS. It would thus be Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by Provisions, Section 200.9 and Part 217, inconsistent with applicable law for reference, Intergovernmental relations, Motor Vehicle Emissions, Subparts 217– EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
VerDate 11
Dated: December 15, 2000. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (C) October 7, 1999, supplemental William J. Muszynski, Program, submitted on March 6, 1996, submittal of the demonstration of the Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2. May 24, 1999, October 7, 1999, October effectiveness of New York’s Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code 29, 1999, and May 22, 2000 by the New decentralized inspection and of Federal Regulations is amended as York State Department of maintenance program network. follows: Environmental Conservation. (D) October 29, 1999, letter clarifying (i) Incorporation by reference. October 7, 1999, supplemental PART 52—[AMENDED] Revision to 6NYCRR Part 217, Motor submittal. 1. The authority citation for part 52 Vehicle Emissions, Subparts 217–1, (E) May 22, 2000, Instrumentation/ continues to read as follows: 217–2, and 217–4, that became effective Protocol Assessment Pilot Study on May 22, 1997 and revisions to analysis of the NYTEST. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 15NYCRR Part 79, Motor Vehicle 3. In § 52.1679, the table is amended Subpart HH—New York Inspection, Sections 79.1–79.15, 79.17, by: 79.20, 79.21, 79.24–79.26, that became a. Adding a new heading for ‘‘Title 6’’ 2. Section 52.1670 is amended by effective on June 4, 1997. to the beginning of the table; adding new paragraph (c)(99) to read as (ii) Additional material: b. Revising the entry for part 217; follows: (A) March 6, 1996, submittal of c. Adding a new heading for ‘‘Title § 52.1670 Identification of plan. revisions to the enhanced motor vehicle 15’’ and new entries for part 79 to the end of the table. * * * * * inspection and maintenance program. The revisions and entries read as (c) * * * (B) May 24, 1999, submittal of the follows: * * * * * demonstration of the effectiveness of (99) Revisions to the New York State New York’s decentralized inspection § 52.1679 EPA-approved New York State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Motor and maintenance program network. regulations.
New York State regulation State effective date Latest EPA approval date Comments
Title 6:
******* Part 217, Motor Vehicle Emissions: Subpart 217–1, Motor Vehicle Enhanced Inspection May 22, 1997 ...... May 7, 2001, 66 FR 22924. and Maintenance Program Requirements. Subpart 217–2, Motor vehicle NY91 Inspection and May 22, 1997 ...... May 7, 2001, 66 FR 22924. Maintenance Program Requirements. Subpart 217–4, Inspection and Maintenance Pro- May 22, 1997 ...... May 7, 2001, 66 FR 22924. gram Audits.
******* Title 15: Part 79, Motor Vehicle Inspection: Sections 79.1–79.15, 79.17, 79.20, 79.21, and June 4, 1997 ...... May 7, 2001, 66 FR 22924. 79.24–79.26.
§ 52.1683 [Amended] SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 4. Section 52.1683 is amended by action on revisions to the Maryland Federal Register and inform the public removing and reserving paragraphs (b), State Implementation Plan (SIP) that the rule will not take effect. submitted by the Maryland Department (c), (d), and (e). ADDRESSES: Written comments should of Environment (MDE). The revisions [FR Doc. 01–10429 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief, Air replace the existing regulation and BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Quality Planning and Information adopt a new regulation for control of Services Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. volatile organic compounds (VOC) from Environmental Protection Agency, expandable polystyrene operations ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Region III, 1650 Arch Street, (EPO), establish VOC reasonably AGENCY Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. available control technology (RACT) Copies of the documents relevant to this 40 CFR Part 52 standards for facilities that recycle action are available for public bakery and confectionary waste, adopt [MD 064/109/111/113–3065a; FRL–6973–3] inspection during normal business by reference the EPA definition of VOC hours at the Air Protection Division, and include other miscellaneous Approval and Promulgation of Air U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revisions. EPA is approving these Quality Implementation Plans; State of Region III, 1650 Arch Street, revisions to the State of Maryland’s SIP Maryland; Approval of Revisions to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the in accordance with the requirements of Volatile Organic Compounds, Air and Radiation Docket and the Clean Air Act. Regulations and Miscellaneous Information Center, U.S. Environmental Revisions DATES: This rule is effective on July 6, Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, AGENCY: Environmental Protection 2001 without further notice, unless EPA Washington, DC 20460; and the Agency (EPA). receives adverse written comment by Maryland Department of the June 6, 2001. If EPA receives such Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, ACTION: Direct final rule. comments, it will publish a timely Baltimore, Maryland, 21224.
VerDate 11
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose exempt compound Maryland then had emissions, encourage use of recycled Quinto at (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail to amend its definition of VOC to add materials and is approvable. at [email protected] for information the newly exempted compound. A new regulation, COMAR concerning the EPO regulation or Kelly Amending Maryland’s definition 26.11.19.28, is being added for the L. Bunker at (215) 814–2177, or by e- requires draft regulations to be control of VOC emissions from bread mail at [email protected] for the prepared, processed, put through public and snack food drying operations. The remaining regulation revisions. hearing and comment, adopted and then purpose of the regulation is to establish SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submitted to EPA. Since Maryland RACT standards for facilities that accepts the EPA test results on VOC recycle bakery and confectionary waste I. Summary of SIP Revision exempt compounds it is appropriate for products for use as animal feed. The On February 6, 1998, October 20, Maryland to adopt the federal definition facilities dry the waste products to 2000, October 31, 2000 and November of VOC as it appears in 40 CFR § 51.100 reduce moisture content and in the 16, 2000 the State of Maryland (s) as of a specified date. process VOCs are released. The new submitted formal revisions to its SIP. COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53) was regulation requires a source with VOC The SIP revisions consist of a new subsequently amended to update the emissions of 25 tons or more per year regulation which replaces the existing federal reference for incorporation of the to install a control device with 85% or regulation for control of VOC from EPOs EPA definition of VOC found at 40 CFR more removal efficiency to reduce (COMAR 26.11.19.19), establish VOC § 51.100(s) from the 1996 to the 1999 emissions from the dryer stack. The RACT regulations for facilities that edition of the CFR. regulation applies statewide and recycle bakery and confectionary waste The amendments to COMAR includes compliance testing, monitoring (COMAR 26.11.19.28), adopt by 26.11.01.01B(37) and COMAR and recordkeeping requirements. The reference the EPA definition of VOC 26.11.06.14 update the reference for regulation will reduce VOC emissions (COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53)), update the incorporation of the federal PSD and is approvable. Maryland regulation references to the regulations found at 40 CFR § 52.21 A more detailed analysis of federal definition of VOC at 40 CFR from the 1993 to the 1996 edition and Maryland’s submittal is contained in a 51.100(s) and the federal PSD then again from the 1996 to the 1999 Technical Support Document (TSD) regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 PSD edition. These revisions are approvable. which is available from the Region III (COMAR 26.11.01.01B(37) and (53) and The amendment to COMAR office listed in the ADDRESSES section of COMAR 26.11.06.14) and include other 26.11.06.06 A(1)(d) will clarify the this notice. general VOC regulation and will affect miscellaneous revisions (COMAR II. Final Action 26.11.01.01B(6–1) and COMAR VOC sources that are currently, or will 26.11.06.06A(1)(d)) . These regulatory be in the future, subject to a RACT EPA is approving revisions to the revisions became effective on October 2, regulation in Chapter 19, VOCs from Maryland SIP that replace the existing 2000, October 16, 2000, June 30, 1997 Specific Processes. The amendment will regulation and adopt a new regulation and September 22, 1997. exempt any source that is subject to a for control of VOC from EPOs (COMAR The amendment to COMAR source specific regulation in Chapter 19 26.11.19.19), establish VOC RACT 26.11.01.01B adds the definition of from the general VOC requirements in regulations for facilities that recycle ‘‘commercial bakery oven’’ to the COMAR 26.11.06.06. These bakery and confectionary waste general definitions section of the modifications are approvable. (COMAR 26.11.19.28), adopt by Maryland air regulations. EPA approved The amendment to COMAR reference the EPA definition of VOC Maryland’s commercial bakery oven 26.11.19.19 will replace the existing found at 40 CFR 51.100(s) (COMAR RACT regulation, including a definition regulation and adopt a new regulation 26.11.01.01B(53)), update the Maryland for ‘‘commercial bakery oven’’, found at for control of VOCs from expandable regulation references to the federal COMAR 26.11.19.21 on October 15, polystyrene operations (EPO). On definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) 1997 (62 FR 53544). The definition for October 15, 1997 (62 FR 53544) EPA (COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53)) and the ‘‘commercial bakery oven’’ found in approved a new regulation which federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 COMAR 26.11.19.21 is identical to the established VOC RACT for EPOs. The (COMAR 26.11.01.01B(37) and definition being added at COMAR existing regulation requires VOC 26.11.06.14), add a definition for the 26.11.01.01B(6–1). The addition of the emissions to be reduced through the use term ‘‘commercial bakery oven’’ definition for the term ‘‘commercial of various control options including (COMAR 26.11.01.01B(6–1) and other bakery oven’’ is approvable. incineration and a combination of low miscellaneous revisions (COMAR The amendment to COMAR VOC beads (7 percent or less) and 26.11.06.06A(1)(d)). The revisions 26.11.01.01B(53) adopts by reference the recycled material use. Since the became effective on October 2, 2000, EPA definition of ‘‘volatile organic adoption of the existing regulation, the October 16, 2000, June 30, 1997 and compound’’ found at Title 40, Part bead manufacturers have been September 22,1997. 51.100(s) of the Code of Federal successful in producing an ‘‘ultra low EPA is publishing this rule without Regulations (CFR), as per the 1996 VOC’’ bead (6 percent or less). These prior proposal because the Agency edition. The amendment ensures that ‘‘ultra low VOC’’ beads, however, views this as a noncontroversial Maryland’s definition of the term is cannot be used for all products. But the amendment and anticipates no adverse identical to the federal definition. EPA production of the ‘‘ultra low VOC’’ bead comment since the revisions are defines VOCs as any organic compound has made available other cost-effective administrative changes to the state that contributes to ground-level ozone compliance options for specific product regulations. However, in the ‘‘Proposed formation and lists as exclusions the types at the EPO facilities. The existing Rules’’ section of today’s Federal compounds that have negligible regulation is being replaced with a new Register, EPA is publishing a separate photochemical reactivity. As EPA regulation which allows the use of document that will serve as the proposal completes its reactivity testing, the list conventional VOC control methods and to approve the SIP revision if adverse of exempt compounds expands. In the adds the use of ultra low VOC beads as comments are filed. This rule will be past, each time that EPA amended its’ an additional alternative control option. effective on July 6, 2001 without further definition of VOC to include another This regulation will further reduce VOC notice unless EPA receives adverse
VerDate 11
comment by June 6, 2001. If EPA standards (VCS), EPA has no authority and miscellaneous revisions may not be receives adverse comment, EPA will to disapprove a SIP submission for challenged later in proceedings to publish a timely withdrawal in the failure to use VCS. It would thus be enforce its requirements. (See section Federal Register informing the public inconsistent with applicable law for 307(b)(2).) that the rule will not take effect. EPA EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 will address all public comments in a to use VCS in place of a SIP submission subsequent final rule based on the that otherwise satisfies the provisions of Environmental protection, Air proposed rule. EPA will not institute a the Clean Air Act. Thus, the pollution control, Hydrocarbons, second comment period on this action. requirements of section 12(d) of the Incorporation by reference, Any parties interested in commenting National Technology Transfer and Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, must do so at this time. Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Particulate matter, Reporting and 272 note) do not apply. As required by recordkeeping requirements. III. Administrative Requirements section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 Dated: April 24, 2001. A. General Requirements FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing William C. Early, this rule, EPA has taken the necessary Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. steps to eliminate drafting errors and 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for therefore is not subject to review by the affected conduct. EPA has complied PART 52—[AMENDED] Office of Management and Budget. This with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR action merely approves state law as 1. The authority citation for part 52 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the meeting federal requirements and continues to read as follows: takings implications of the rule in imposes no additional requirements accordance with the ‘‘Attorney Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. beyond those imposed by state law. General’s Supplemental Guidelines for Accordingly, the Administrator certifies Subpart V—Maryland the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of that this rule will not have a significant Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under 2. Section 52.1070 is amended by economic impact on a substantial the executive order. This rule does not adding paragraph (c)(156) through number of small entities under the impose an information collection (c)(159) to read as follows: Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 burden under the provisions of the et seq.). Because this rule approves pre- Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 § 52.1070 Identification of plan. existing requirements under state law U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). * * * * * and does not impose any additional (c) * * * enforceable duty beyond that required B. Submission to Congress and the (156) Revision to the Maryland by state law, it does not contain any Comptroller General Regulations replacing the existing unfunded mandate or significantly or The Congressional Review Act, 5 regulation and adopting a new uniquely affect small governments, as U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small regulation for control of volatile organic described in the Unfunded Mandates Business Regulatory Enforcement compounds (VOC) from expandable Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides polystyrene operations (EPO) submitted This rule also does not have a that before a rule may take effect, the on October 20, 2000 by the Maryland substantial direct effect on one or more agency promulgating the rule must Department of the Environment: Indian tribes, on the relationship submit a rule report, which includes a (i) Incorporation by reference. between the Federal Government and copy of the rule, to each House of the (A) Letter of October 20, 2000 from Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Congress and to the Comptroller General the Maryland Department of the power and responsibilities between the of the United States. EPA will submit a Environment transmitting the EPO Federal Government and Indian tribes, report containing this rule and other regulations. as specified by Executive Order 13175 required information to the U.S. Senate, (B) The Maryland EPO regulations (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor the U.S. House of Representatives, and found at COMAR 26.11.19.19, effective will it have substantial direct effects on the Comptroller General of the United October 2, 2000. This rule replaces the States, on the relationship between States prior to publication of the rule in COMAR 26.11.19.19, effective July 3, the national government and the States, the Federal Register. This rule is not a 1995. or on the distribution of power and ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. (ii) Additional Material.—Remainder responsibilities among the various 804(2). of the October 20, 2000 submittal. levels of government, as specified in (157) Revision to the Maryland Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, C. Petitions for Judicial Review Regulations establishing VOC August 10, 1999), because it merely Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean reasonably available control technology approves a state rule implementing a Air Act, petitions for judicial review of (RACT) standards for facilities that federal standard, and does not alter the this action must be filed in the United recycle bakery and confectionary waste relationship or the distribution of power States Court of Appeals for the submitted on October 31, 2000 by the and responsibilities established in the appropriate circuit by July 6, 2001. Maryland Department of the Clean Air Act. This rule also is not Filing a petition for reconsideration by Environment: subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR the Administrator of this final rule does (i) Incorporation by reference. 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not not affect the finality of this rule for the (A) Letter of October 31, 2000 from economically significant. purposes of judicial review nor does it the Maryland Department of the In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s extend the time within which a petition Environment transmitting the VOC role is to approve state choices, for judicial review may be filed, and RACT regulations for facilities that provided that they meet the criteria of shall not postpone the effectiveness of recycle bakery and confectionary waste. the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the such rule or action. This action granting (B) The Maryland VOC RACT absence of a prior existing requirement full approval of the State of Marylands’ regulations for facilities that recycle for the State to use voluntary consensus volatile organic compounds regulations bakery and confectionary waste found at
VerDate 11
COMAR 26.11.19.28, effective October (ii) Additional Material.—Remainder III. What does the South Carolina State Plan 2, 2000. of the November 16, 2000 submittal. contain? IV. Is my HMIWI subject to these regulations? (ii) Additional Material.—Remainder [FR Doc. 01–11279 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] of the October 31, 2000 submittal. V. What steps do I need to take? BILLING CODE 6560–50–P VI. Why is the South Carolina HMIWI State (158) Revision to the Maryland Plan approvable? Regulations which adopt by reference VII. Administrative Requirements the EPA definition of VOC found at 40 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CFR 51.100(s), update the Maryland AGENCY I. What Action Is Being Taken by EPA regulation references to the federal PSD Today? regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 and include 40 CFR Part 62 other miscellaneous revisions submitted [SC–038–200102(a); FRL–6973–9] We are approving the South Carolina on February 6, 1998 by the Maryland State Plan, as submitted on September Department of the Environment: Approval and Promulgation of State 19, 2000, for the control of air emissions (i) Incorporation by reference. Plans for Designated Facilities and from HMIWIs, except for those HMIWIs Pollutants: South Carolina located in Indian Country. When EPA (A) Letter of February 6, 1998 from developed our New Source Performance AGENCY: the Maryland Department of the Environmental Protection Standard (NSPS) for HMIWIs, we also Agency. Environment transmitting the adoption developed EG to control air emissions of the federal definition of VOC, federal ACTION: Direct final rule. from older HMIWIs. (See 62 FR 48348– reference updates and other 48391, September 15, 1997, 40 CFR part miscellaneous revisions. SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 60, subpart Ce [Emission Guidelines and (B) The amendment to COMAR is approving the section 111(d)/129 Plan Compliance Times for HMIWIs] and 26.11.01.01B(37) and COMAR submitted by the South Carolina subpart Ec [Standards of Performance 26.11.06.14 which updates the Department of Health and for HMIWIs for Which Construction is references for incorporation of the Environmental Control (DHEC) for the Commenced After June 20, 1996]). The federal PSD regulations found at 40 CFR State of South Carolina on September South Carolina DHEC developed a State 52.21 from the 1993 to the 1996 edition 19, 2000, to implement and enforce the Plan, as required by sections 111(d) and of the CFR and include other Emissions Guidelines (EG) for existing 129 of the Clean Air Act (the Act), to miscellaneous revisions (COMAR Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste adopt the EG into their body of 26.11.01.01B(6–1) and COMAR Incinerator (HMIWI) units. regulations, and we are acting today to 26.11.06.06A(1)(d)), effective June 30, DATES: This direct final rule is effective approve it. 1997. on July 6, 2001, without further notice, (C) The amendment to COMAR We are publishing this action without unless EPA receives adverse comment prior proposal because we view this as 26.11.01.01B(53) which adopts by by June 6, 2001. If EPA receives adverse reference the EPA definition of VOC a noncontroversial amendment and comment, we will publish a timely anticipate no adverse comments. found at 40 CFR 51.100(s), 1996 edition withdrawal of the direct final rule in the of CFR, effective September 22, 1997. However, in a separate document in this Federal Register and inform the public Federal Register publication, we are (ii) Additional Material.—Remainder that the rule will not take effect. proposing to approve the revision of the February 6, 1998 submittal. ADDRESSES: You should address should significant, material, and adverse (159) Revision to the Maryland comments on this action to Gregory comments be filed. This action is Regulations updating the references to Crawford, EPA Region 4, Air Planning effective July 6, 2001, unless by June 6, Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, the federal definition of VOC at 40 CFR 2001, adverse or critical comments are Georgia 30303–3104. 51.100(s) and the federal PSD received. If we receive such comments, regulations at 40 CFR 52.21, submitted Copies of all materials considered in this action will be withdrawn before the on November 16, 2000 by the Maryland this rulemaking may be examined effective date by publishing a Department of the Environment: during normal business hours at the subsequent notice that will withdraw (i) Incorporation by reference. following locations: EPA Region 4, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 the final action. All public comments (A) Letter of November 16, 2000 from Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia received will be addressed in a the Maryland Department of the 30303–3104; and at the South Carolina subsequent final rule based on this Environment transmitting the updates to Department of Health and action serving as a proposed rule. We the Maryland regulation references to Environmental Control, Bureau of Air will not institute a second comment the federal definition of VOC at 40 CFR Quality Control, 2600 Bull Street, period on this action. Any parties 51.100(s) and the federal PSD Columbia, South Carolina 29201. interested in commenting on this action regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: should do so at this time. If no such (B) The amendments to COMAR Gregory Crawford at (404) 562–9046 or comments are received, this action is 26.11.01.01B(37) and COMAR Scott Davis at (404) 562–9127. effective July 6, 2001. 26.11.06.14 which update the reference SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: for incorporation of the federal PSD II. The HMIWI State Plan Requirement regulations found at 40 CFR 52.21 from Table of Contents What Is a HMIWI State Plan? the 1996 to the 1999 edition of the CFR I. What action is being taken by EPA today? and the amendment to COMAR II. The HMIWI State Plan Requirement A HMIWI State Plan is a plan to 26.11.01.01B(53) which updates the What is a HMIWI State Plan? control air pollutant emissions from federal reference for incorporation of the Why are we requiring South Carolina to existing incinerators which burn submit a HMIWI State Plan? EPA definition of VOC found at 40 CFR Why do we need to regulate air emissions hospital waste or medical/infectious 51.100(s) from the 1996 to the 1999 from HMIWIs? waste. The plan also includes source edition of the CFR, effective October 16, What criteria must a HMIWI State Plan and emission inventories of these 2000. meet to be approved? incinerators in the State.
VerDate 11
Why Are We Requiring South Carolina of the Act, a State Plan must be at least which your incinerator must meet. See To Submit a HMIWI State Plan? as protective as the EG regarding Table I of Section III (Emission States are required under sections applicability, emission limits, Limitations) of Standard Number 3.1, to 111(d) and 129 of the Act to submit compliance schedules, performance determine the specific emission limits State Plans to control emissions from testing, monitoring and inspections, which apply to you. The emission limits existing HMIWIs in the State. The State operator training and certification, apply at all times, except during startup, Plan requirement was triggered when waste management plans, and shutdown, or malfunctions, provided EPA published the EG for HMIWIs recordkeeping and reporting. Under that no waste has been charged during under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce (see section 129(e), State Plans must ensure these events. 3. There are provisions to address 62 FR 48348, September 15, 1997). that affected HMIWI facilities submit small rural incinerators (if your unit is Under section 129, EPA is required to Title V permit applications to the State applicable). promulgate EG for several types of by September 15, 2000. Under the 4. You must meet a 10% opacity limit existing solid waste incinerators. These requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart on your discharge, averaged over a six- EG establish the Maximum Achievable B, the criteria for an approvable section minute block. Control Technology (MACT) standards 111(d) plan include demonstration of legal authority, enforceable 5. You must have a qualified HMIWI that States must adopt to comply with operator available to supervise the the Act. The HMIWI EG also establishes mechanisms, public participation documentation, source and emission operation of your incinerator. This requirements for monitoring, operator operator must be trained and qualified training, permits, and a waste inventories, and a State progress report commitment. through a State-approved program, or a management plan that must be included training program that meets the in State Plans. III. What Does the South Carolina State requirements listed under Section IX The intent of the State Plan Plan Contain? (Operator Training and Qualification requirement is to reduce several types of The South Carolina DHEC adopted Requirements) of Standard Number 3.1. air pollutants associated with waste the Federal EG and NSPS into Chapter 6. Your operator must be certified, as incineration. 61 of the South Carolina Code, discussed in 5 above, no later than May Why Do We Need To Regulate Air Regulation No. 61–62.5, Standard 26, 2001. Emissions From HMIWIs? Number 3.1, ‘‘Hospital/Medical/ 7. You must develop and submit to Infectious Waste Incinerators.’’ The South Carolina DHEC a waste The State Plan establishes control management plan. This plan must be requirements which reduce the State rules were effective on May 26, 2000. The South Carolina State Plan developed under guidance provided by following emissions from HMIWIs: the American Hospital Association particulate matter; sulfur dioxide; contains: 1. A demonstration of the State’s legal publication, An Ounce of Prevention: hydrogen chloride; nitrogen oxides; authority to implement the section Waste Reduction Strategies for Health carbon monoxide; lead; cadmium; 111(d)/129 State Plan; Care Facilities, 1993, and must be mercury; and dioxin/furans. These 2. State rule, Standard Number 3.1, as submitted to South Carolina DHEC no pollutants can cause adverse effects to the enforceable mechanism; later than 60 days following the initial the public health and the environment. 3. An inventory of approximately 4 performance test for the affected unit. Dioxin, lead, and mercury known designated facilities, along with 8. You must conduct an initial bioaccumulate through the food web. estimates of their potential air performance test to determine your Serious developmental and adult effects emissions; incinerators compliance with these in humans, primarily damage to the 4. Emission limits that are as emission limits. This performance test nervous system, have been associated protective as the EG; must be completed no later than May with exposures to mercury. Exposure to 5. A compliance date of May 26, 2001; 26, 2001, and as required under 40 CFR dioxin and furans can cause skin 6. Testing, monitoring, reporting and 60.37e and Section IV (Performance disorders, cancer, and reproductive recordkeeping requirements for the Specifications) of Standard Number 3.1. effects such as endometriosis. Dioxin designated facilities; 9. You must install and maintain and furans can also affect the immune 7. Records from the public hearing on devices to monitor the parameters listed system. Acid gases affect the respiratory the State Plan; and, under Table IV of Section V (Monitoring tract, as well as contribute to the acid 8. Provisions for progress reports to Requirements) of Standard 3.1. rain that damages lakes and harms EPA. 10. You must document and maintain forests and buildings. Exposure to information concerning pollutant particulate matter has been linked with IV. Is My HMIWI Subject to These concentrations, opacity measurements, adverse health effects, including Regulations? charge rates, and other operational data. aggravation of existing respiratory and The EG for existing HMIWIs affect any This information must be maintained cardiovascular disease and increased HMIWI built on or before June 20, 1996. for a period of five years. risk of premature death. Nitrogen oxide If your facility meets this criterion, you 11. You must submit an annual report emissions contribute to the formation of are subject to these regulations. to South Carolina DHEC containing ground level ozone, which is associated records of annual equipment V. What Steps Do I Need To Take? with a number of adverse health and inspections, any required maintenance, environmental effects. You must meet the requirements and unscheduled repairs. This annual listed in South Carolina Regulation No. What Criteria Must a HMIWI State Plan report must be signed by the facilities 61–62.5, Standard Number 3.1, Meet To Be Approved? manager.y summarized as follows: The criteria for approving a HMIWI 1. Determine the size of your VI. Why Is the South Carolina HMIWI State Plan include requirements from incinerator by establishing its maximum State Plan Approvable? sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act and design capacity. EPA compared the South Carolina 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. Under the 2. Each size category of HMIWI has rules (Chapter 61 of the South Carolina requirements of sections 111(d) and 129 certain emission limits established Code, Regulation No. 61–62.5, Standard
VerDate 11
Number 3.1) against our HMIWI EG. and responsibilities established in the of this final rule does not affect the EPA finds the South Carolina rules to be Clean Air Act. This rule also is not finality of this rule for the purposes of at least as protective as the EG. The subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR judicial review nor does it extend the South Carolina State Plan was reviewed 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not time within which a petition for judicial for approval against the following economically significant. review may be filed, and shall not criteria: 40 CFR 60.23 through 60.26, In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s postpone the effectiveness of such rule Subpart B—Adoption and Submittal of role is to approve state choices, or action. This action may not be State Plans for Designated Facilities; 40 provided that they meet the criteria of challenged later in proceedings to CFR 60.30e through 60.39e, Subpart the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the enforce its requirements. (See section Ce—Emission Guidelines and absence of a prior existing requirement 307(b)(2).) Compliance Times for Hospital/ for the State to use voluntary consensus Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators; standards (VCS), EPA has no authority List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 and, 40 CFR 62.14400 through 62.14495, to disapprove a SIP submission for Environmental protection, failure to use VCS. It would thus be Subpart HHH—Federal Plan Administrative practice and procedure, inconsistent with applicable law for Requirements for Hospital/Medical/ Air pollution control, Hospital/medical/ EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, Infectious Waste Incinerators infectious waste incineration, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission Constructed on or before June 20, 1996. Intergovernmental relations, Reporting that otherwise satisfies the provisions of The South Carolina State Plan satisfies and recordkeeping requirements. the requirements for an approvable the Clean Air Act. Thus, the section 111(d)/129 plan under subparts requirements of section 12(d) of the Dated: April 12, 2001. B and Ce of 40 CFR part 60 and subpart National Technology Transfer and A. Stanley Meiburg, HHH of 40 CFR part 62. For these Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. reasons, we are approving the South 272 note) do not apply. As required by Carolina HMIWI State Plan. section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 40 CFR part 62 of the Code of Federal FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing Regulations is amended as follows: VII. Administrative Requirements this rule, EPA has taken the necessary Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR steps to eliminate drafting errors and PART 62—[AMENDED] 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and and provide a clear legal standard for 1. The authority citation for part 62 therefore is not subject to review by the affected conduct. EPA has complied continues to read as follows: Office of Management and Budget. This with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7642. action merely approves state law as 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the meeting federal requirements and takings implications of the rule in Subpart PP—South Carolina imposes no additional requirements accordance with the ‘‘Attorney beyond those imposed by state law. General’s Supplemental Guidelines for 2. Section 62.10100 is amended by Accordingly, the Administrator certifies the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of adding paragraphs (b)(5) and (c)(5) to that this rule will not have a significant Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under read as follows: economic impact on a substantial the executive order. This rule does not number of small entities under the impose an information collection § 62.10100 Identification of plan. Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 burden under the provisions of the * * * * * et seq.). Because this rule approves pre- Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 (b) * * * existing requirements under state law U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and does not impose any additional The Congressional Review Act, 5 (5) South Carolina Designated Facility enforceable duty beyond that required U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by Plan (Section 111(d)/129) for Hospital/ by state law, it does not contain any the Small Business Regulatory Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators, unfunded mandate or significantly or Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, submitted on September 19, 2000, by uniquely affect small governments, as generally provides that before a rule the South Carolina Department of described in the Unfunded Mandates may take effect, the agency Health and Environmental Control. Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). promulgating the rule must submit a (c) * * * This rule also does not have a rule report, which includes a copy of (5) Existing hospital/medical/ substantial direct effect on one or more the rule, to each House of the Congress infectious waste incinerators. Indian tribes, on the relationship and to the Comptroller General of the between the Federal Government and United States. EPA will submit a report 3. Subpart PP is amended by adding Indian tribes, or on the distribution of containing this rule and other required a new § 62.10170 and a new power and responsibilities between the information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. undesignated center heading to read as Federal Government and Indian tribes, House of Representatives, and the follows: as specified by Executive Order 13175 Comptroller General of the United Air Emissions From Hospital/Medical/ (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor States prior to publication of the rule in Infectious Waste Incinerators will it have substantial direct effects on the Federal Register. A major rule the States, on the relationship between cannot take effect until 60 days after it § 62.10170 Identification of sources. the national government and the States, is published in the Federal Register. The plan applies to existing hospital/ or on the distribution of power and This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as medical/infectious waste incinerators responsibilities among the various defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2). for which construction, reconstruction, levels of government, as specified in Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, or modification was commenced before Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, petitions for judicial review of this June 20, 1996, as described in 40 CFR August 10, 1999), because it merely action must be filed in the United States part 60, subpart Ce. approves a state rule implementing a Court of Appeals for the appropriate federal standard, and does not alter the circuit by July 6, 2001. Filing a petition [FR Doc. 01–10988 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] relationship or the distribution of power for reconsideration by the Administrator BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION for inspection in the Public Information Cat- NAICS Examples of Poten- AGENCY egories tially Affected Entities and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson 40 CFR Part 180 32532 Pesticide manufac- Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30 turing [OPP–301122; FRL–6781–4] a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB RIN 2070–AB78 This listing is not intended to be telephone number is (703) 305–5805. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide Forchlorfenuron; Time-Limited for readers regarding entities likely to be II. Background and Statutory Findings Pesticide Tolerance affected by this action. Other types of In the Federal Register of July 28, entities not listed in the table could also 1998 (63 FR 40273)(FRL–5799–3), EPA AGENCY: Environmental Protection be affected. The North American Agency (EPA). issued a notice pursuant to section 408 Industrial Classification System of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic ACTION: Final rule. (NAICS) codes have been provided to Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a as assist you and others in determining SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a amended by the Food Quality Protection whether or not this action might apply time-limited tolerance forresidues of Act of 1996 (FQPA) (Public Law 104– to certain entities. If you have questions Forchlorfenuron; N-(2-chloro-4- 170) announcing the filing of a pesticide regarding the applicability of this action pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea in or on petition (PP 7G4906) for tolerance by to a particular entity, consult the person almond, apple, blueberry, cranberry, fig, KIM-C1, LLC, 6333 East Liberty Avenue, listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION grapes, kiwifruit, olive, pear, and plums Fresno, California 93727. This notice CONTACT. (fresh). Siemer & Associates included a summary of the petition Incorporated, agent for KIM-C1, LLC B. How Can I Get Additional prepared by KIM-C1, the registrant. requested this tolerance under the Information, Including Copies of this The petition requested that 40 CFR Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Document and Other Related part 180 be amended by establishing a as amended by the Food Quality Documents? time-limited tolerance for residues of the plant growth regulator N-(2-chloro- Protection Act of 1996. The tolerance 1. Electronically. You may obtain 4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea, in or on will expire on April 1, 2004. electronic copies of this document, and almond, apple, blueberry, cranberry, fig, DATES: This regulation is effective May certain other related documents that grapes, kiwifruit, olive, pear, and plums 7, 2001. Objections and requests for might be available electronically, from (fresh) at 0.01 part per million (ppm). hearings, identified by docket control the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// The tolerance will expire on April 1, number OPP–301122 must be received www.epa.gov/. To access this 2004. by EPA on or before July 6, 2001. document, on the Home Page select One comment was received in ADDRESSES: Written objections and ‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations response to the Notice of Filing. The hearing requests may besubmitted by and Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up comment was received on December 7, mail, in person, or by courier. Please the entry for this document under the 2000 as a letter dated December 1, 2000 follow the detailed instructions for each ‘‘FederalRegister—Environmental from Mr. Robert Bianco, Desert Grape method as provided in Unit VI. of the Documents.’’ You can also godirectly to Growers League of California. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure the Federal Register listings at http:// League requested that the Agency proper receipt by EPA, your objections www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. To access the reduce the number of table grape acres, and hearing requests must identify OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines investigate allegations regarding taste, docket control number OPP–301122 in referenced in this document, go directly and that the Experimental Use Permit be the subject line on the first page of your to the guidelines at http://www.epa.gov/ crop destruct. In response to the first response. opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm. A issue, it is noted that the registrant has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By frequently updated electronic version of subsequently submitted a revised testing mail: Cynthia Giles-Parker, Registration 40 CFR part 180 is available at http:// program that incorporates a reduced Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/ number of table grape acres. Regarding Programs, Environmental Protection cfrhtml_180/Title_40/40cfr180_00.html, the issue of requiring a crop destruct Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., a beta site currently under development. condition on the grapes treated in the Washington, DC 20460; telephone 2. In person. The Agency has Experimental Use Permit due to a number: 703–305–7740; and e-mail established an official record for this difference in taste of the harvested address: [email protected]. action under docket control number grapes, the Agency has determined that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OPP–301122. The official record requiring a crop destruct condition may consists of the documents specifically be imposed only in response to I. General Information referenced in this action, and other concerns relating to human health. A. Does this Action Apply to Me? information related to this action, Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA including any information claimed as allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the You may be affected by this action if Confidential Business Information (CBI). legal limit for a pesticide chemical you are an agricultural producer, food This official record includes the residue in or on a food) only if EPA manufacturer, or pesticide documents that are physically located in determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’ manufacturer. Potentially affected the docket, as well as the documents Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) defines ‘‘safe’’ to categories and entities may include, but that are referenced in those documents. mean that ‘‘there is a reasonable are not limited to: The public version of the official record certainty that no harm will result from does not include any information aggregate exposure to the pesticide Cat- Examples of Poten- egories NAICS tially Affected Entities claimed as CBI. The public version of chemical residue, including all the official record, which includes anticipated dietary exposures and all Industry 111 Crop production printed, paper versions of any electronic other exposures for which there is 112 Animal production comments submitted during an reliable information.’’ This includes 311 Food manufacturing applicable comment period is available exposure through drinking water and in
VerDate 11
residential settings, but does not include 62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL–5754– A. Toxicological Profile occupational exposure. Section 7). 408(b)(2)(C) requires EPA to give special EPA has evaluated the available III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and toxicity data and considered its validity, consideration to exposure of infants and Determination of Safety children to the pesticide chemical completeness, and reliability as well as residue in establishing a tolerance and Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D), the relationship of the results of the to ‘‘ensure that there is a reasonable EPA has reviewed the available studies to human risk. EPA has also scientific data and other relevant certainty that no harm will result to considered available information information in support of this action. infants and children from aggregate concerning the variability of the EPA has sufficient data to assess the exposure to the pesticide chemical sensitivities of major identifiable hazards of and to make a determination residue....’’ subgroups of consumers, including on aggregate exposure, consistent with infants and children. The nature of the EPA performs a number of analyses to section 408(b)(2), for a tolerance for toxic effects caused by N-(2-chloro-4- determine the risks from aggregate ′ residues of N-(2-chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N - pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea are discussed exposure to pesticide residues. For phenylurea on almond, apple, in the following Table 1 as well as the further discussion of the regulatory blueberry, cranberry, fig, grapes, no observed adverse effect level requirements of section 408 and a kiwifruit, olive, pear, and plums (fresh) (NOAEL) and the lowest observed complete description of the risk at 0.01 ppm. EPA’s assessment of assessment process, see the final rule on exposures and risks associated with adverse effect level (LOAEL) from the Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR establishing the tolerance follows. toxicity studies reviewed.
TABLE 1.— SUBCHRONIC, CHRONIC, AND OTHERTOXICITY
Guideline No. Study Type Results
870.3100 90–Day oral toxicity rodents NOAEL = M*≥400; F*=84 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = M*=not determined, F=428 mg/kg/day based on decrease BW*, BW gain & food efficiency.
870.3150 90–Day oral toxicity in non- NOAEL = M=1608; F=19.1 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = M=162.4; F=188.7 mg/kg/day based on de- rodents creases (≥10%) in BW gain, FC & food efficiency.
870.3700a Prenatal developmental in ro- Maternal NOAEL = 200 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day based on increased incidence of alo- dents pecia; decrease in BW & BW gains. Developmental NOAEL = 200 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day based on decreased mean fetalBW.
870.3700b Prenatal developmental in Maternal NOAEL = ≥100 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = not determined. Developmental NOAEL = ≥100 nonrodents mg/kg/day; LOAEL = not determined.
870.3800 Reproduction and fertility ef- Parental/Systemic NOAEL = M=11/13;F=13/15 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = 144–202 mg/kg/day based fects on decreasedFC F0 & F1; clinical signs of toxicity & lower BW in F1M& F and growth retarda- tion in F1 & F2 pups. Reproductive NOAEL = M144/168; F=169/202 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = 544– 926 mg/kg/day based on increased pup mortality (F1a, F1b and F2a), emaciation in F1b, anddecrease in F1 pups litter.
870.4300 Carcinogenicity mice NOAEL = M=7; F=9 mg/kg/day; LOAEL = M=93; F=122 mg/kg/day based on reduced BW & BW gain & FC; kidney toxicity (M=suppurative inflammation, F = non-suppurative interstitial nephri- tis. no evidence of carcinogenicity. *M=Male; F=Female; BW=Body Weight; FC=Food Consumption
B. Toxicological Endpoints interspecies differences and 10X for when 100 is the appropriate UF (10X to intraspecies differences. account for interspecies differences and The dose at which no adverse effects For dietary risk assessment (other 10X for intraspecies differences) the are observed (the NOAEL) from than cancer) the Agency uses the UF to LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of thetoxicology study identified as calculate an acute or chronic reference the NOAEL to exposures (margin of appropriate for use in risk assessment is dose (acute RfD or chronic RfD) where exposure (MOE) = NOAEL/exposure) is used to estimate the toxicological level the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided calculated and compared to the LOC. of concern (LOC). However, the lowest by the appropriate UF (RfD = NOAEL/ The linear default risk methodology dose at which adverse effects of concern UF). Where an additional safety factor is (Q*) is the primary method currently are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes retained due to concerns unique to the used by the Agency to quantify used for risk assessment if no NOAEL FQPA, this additional factor is applied carcinogenic risk. The Q* approach was achieved in the toxicology study to the RfD by dividing the RfD by such assumes that any amount of exposure selected. An uncertainty factor (UF) is additional factor. The acute or chronic will lead to some degree of cancer risk. applied to reflect uncertainties inherent Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD or A Q* is calculated and used to estimate in the extrapolation from laboratory cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to risk which represents a probability of animal data to humans and in the accommodate this type of FQPA Safety occurrence of additional cancer cases variations in sensitivity among members Factor. (e.g., risk is expressed as 1 × 10-6 or one of the human population as well as For non-dietary risk assessments in a million). Under certain specific other unknowns. An UF of 100 is (other than cancer) the UF is used circumstances, MOE calculations will routinely used, 10X to account for todetermine the LOC. For example, be used for the carcinogenic risk
VerDate 11
assessment. In this non-linear approach, though it may be a different value for N-(2-chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′- a ‘‘point of departure’’ is identified derived from the dose response curve. phenylurea used for human risk below which carcinogenic effects are To estimate risk, a ratio of the point of assessment is shown in the following not expected. The point of departure is departure to exposure (MOEcancer = point Table 2: typically a NOAEL based on an of departure/exposures) is calculated. A endpoint related to cancer effects summary of the toxicological endpoints
TABLE 2.— SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR N-(2-CHLORO-4-PYRIDINYL)-N’-PHENYLUREA FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT
Dose Used in Risk FQPA SF* and Level of Exposure Scenario Assessment, UF Concern for Risk Study and Toxicological Effects (mg/kg/day) Assessment
Acute Dietary ...... None ......
Chronic Dietary ...... NOAEL = 7.0 ...... Decreases in body weight, body 2–year rat feeding study weight gain and food con- sumption as well as effects on the kidney at the LOAEL of 93 and 122 mg/kg/day for males and females, respec- tively. The risk assessment is required...... UF = 100; FQPA = 10X ...... Chronic RfD=0.07 mg/kg/day cPAD=0.007 mg/kg/day Apply to all population subgroups.
Short-Term Dermal...... NOAEL=200 ...... Decreases in maternal body developmental rat study weights and body weight gains as well as decrease in mean fetal body weights..
Intermediate-Term Dermal ...... NOAEL=17 ...... Based on decreases in body 90–day feeding study in dogs weight gain and food con- sumption..
Long-Term Dermal ...... None ......
Short-Term Inhalation ...... NOAEL=200 ...... Same as short-term dermal...... developmental rat study
Intermediate-Term Inhalation ...... NOAEL=17 ...... Same as intermediate-term der- 90–day feeding study in dogs mal..
Long-Term Inhalation ...... None ......
Cancer ...... Not yet classified ...... * The reference to the FQPA Safety Factor refers to any additional safety factor retained due to concerns unique to the FQPA.
C. Exposure Assessment 1989–1992 nationwide Continuing anticipated residue values would yield 1. Dietary exposure from food and Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals lower estimates of chronic dietary feed uses. Risk assessments were (CSFII) and accumulated exposure to exposure. conducted by EPA to assess dietary the chemical for each commodity. The iii. Cancer. No concern for cancer exposures from N-(2-chloro-4- following assumptions were made for risks were identified. Data from ′ the chronic exposure assessments: This pyridinyl)-N -phenylurea in food as available studies do not indicate a follows: chronic dietary DEEM analysis was a treatment-related tumor problem and i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk Tier 1 (assumptions: time-limited cancer risk endpoints have not been assessments are performed for a food- tolerance level residues of the subject identified. use pesticide if a toxicological study has commodities and 100% crop treated). 2. Dietary exposure from drinking indicated the possibility of an effect of The DEEM default concentration water. The Agency lackssufficient concern occurring as a result of a one factors were used for the processed monitoring exposure data to complete a day or single exposure. An acute commodities of all the subject crops. comprehensive dietary exposure exposure assessment is unnecessary The resulting dietary food exposures occupy 1.5% of the cPAD for the most analysis and risk assessment for N-(2- because no toxicological endpoint was ′ selected. highly exposed population subgroup, chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N -phenylurea in ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting non-nursing infants. These results drinking water. Because the Agency this chronic dietary risk assessment the should be viewed as conservative does not have comprehensive Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (health protective) risk estimates. monitoring data, drinking water (DEEM) analysisevaluated the Refinements such as the use of percent concentration estimates are made by individual food consumption as crop-treated information (this is a reliance on simulation or modeling reported by respondents in the USDA limited acreage EUP use) and/or taking into account data on the physical
VerDate 11
characteristics of N-(2-chloro-4- 3. From non-dietary exposure. The pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea for this EUP pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea. term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in and exposure data are complete or are The Agency uses the Generic this document to refer to non- estimated based on data that reasonably Estimated Environmental occupational, non-dietary exposure accounts for potential exposures. For Concentration(GENEEC) or the Pesticide (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, the purposes of the experimental use Root Zone/Exposure Analysis Modeling indoor pest control, termiticides, and permit only, the FQPA safety factor will System(PRZM/EXAMS) to estimate flea and tick control on pets). be retained (10X) and applied to all pesticide concentrations in surface N-(2-Chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′- groups for assessing chronic dietary water and SCI-GROW, which predicts phenylurea is not registered for use on risk. pesticide concentrations in any sites that would result in residential exposure. E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of groundwater. In general, EPA will use Safety GENEEC (a tier 1 model) before using 4. Cumulative exposure to substances PRZM/EXAMS (a tier 2 model) for a with a common mechanismof toxicity. To estimate total aggregate exposure screening-level assessment for surface Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) requires that, to a pesticide from food, drinking water, water. The GENEEC model is a subset of when considering whether to establish, and residential uses, the Agency the PRZM/EXAMS model that uses a modify, or revoke a tolerance, the calculates DWLOCs which are used as a specific high-end runoff scenario for Agency consider ‘‘available point of comparison against the model pesticides. GENEEC incorporates a farm information’’ concerning the cumulative estimates of a pesticide’s concentration pond scenario, while PRZM/EXAMS effects of a particular pesticide’s in water (EECs). DWLOC values are not incorporate an index reservoir residues and ‘‘other substances that regulatory standards for drinking water. environment in place of the previous have a common mechanism of toxicity.’’ DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on EPA does not have, at this time, pond scenario. The PRZM/EXAMS a pesticide’s concentration in drinking available data to determine whether N- model includes a percent crop area water in light of total aggregate exposure (2-chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea to a pesticide in food and residential factor as an adjustment to account for has a common mechanism of toxicity uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the the maximum percent crop coverage with other substances or how to include Agency determines how much of the within a watershed or drainage basin. this pesticide in a cumulative risk acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is None of these models include assessment. Unlike other pesticides for available for exposure through drinking consideration of the impact processing which EPA has followed a cumulative water e.g., allowable chronic water (mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw risk approach based on a common exposure (mg/kg/day) = cPAD - (average water for distribution as drinking water mechanism of toxicity, N-(2-chloro-4- food + residential exposure). This would likely have on the removal of pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea does not allowable exposure through drinking pesticides from the source water. The appear to produce a toxic metabolite water is used to calculate a DWLOC. primary use of these models by the produced by other substances. For the A DWLOC will vary depending on the Agency at this stage is to provide a purposes of this tolerance action, toxic endpoint, drinking coarse screen for sorting out pesticides therefore, EPA has not assumed that N- waterconsumption, and body weights. for which it is highly unlikely that (2-chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea Default body weights and consumption drinking water concentrations would has a common mechanism of toxicity values as used by the USEPA Office of ever exceed human health levels of with other substances. For information Water are used to calculate DWLOCs: concern. regarding EPA’s efforts to determine 2L/70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult Since the models used are considered which chemicals have a common female), and 1L/10 kg (child). Default to be screening tools in the risk mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate body weights and drinking water assessment process, the Agency does the cumulative effects of such consumption values vary on an not use estimated environmental chemicals, see the final rule for individual basis. This variation will be concentrations (EECs) from these Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR taken into account in more refined models to quantify drinking water 62961, November 26, 1997). screening-level and quantitative exposure and risk as a %RfD or %PAD. drinking water exposure assessments. Instead, drinking water levels of D. Safety Factor for Infants and Different populations will have different comparison (DWLOCs) are calculated Children DWLOCs. Generally, a DWLOC is and used as a point of comparison 1. Safety factor for infants and calculated for each type of risk against the model estimates of a children—In general. FFDCA section assessment used: acute, short-term, pesticide’s concentration in water. 408 provides that EPA shall apply an intermediate-term, chronic, and cancer. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on additional tenfold margin of safety for When EECs for surface water and a pesticide’s concentration in drinking infants and children in the case of groundwater are less than the calculated water in light of total aggregate exposure threshold effects to account for prenatal DWLOCs, the Office of Pesticide to a pesticide in food, and from and postnatal toxicity and the Programs (OPP) concludes with residential uses. Since DWLOCs address completeness of the data base on reasonable certainty that exposures to total aggregate exposure to N-(2-chloro- toxicity and exposure unless EPA the pesticide in drinking water (when 4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea they are determines that a different margin of considered along with other sources of further discussed in the aggregate risk safety will be safe for infants and exposure for which OPP has reliable sections below. children. Margins of safety are data) would not result in unacceptable Based on the GENEEC and SCI-GROW incorporated into EPA risk assessments levels of aggregate human health risk at models the EECs of N-(2-chloro-4- either directly through use of a margin this time. Because OPP considers the pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea for acute and of exposure (MOE) analysis or through aggregate risk resulting from multiple chronic exposures are estimated to be using uncertainty (safety) factors in exposure pathways associated with a 4.7 parts per billion (ppb) (peak and 56– calculating a dose level that poses no pesticide’s uses, levels of comparison in day average) for surface water and 26 appreciable risk to humans. drinking water may vary as those uses ppb (acute and chronic) for ground 2. Conclusion. There is an adequate change. If new uses are added in the water. toxicity databasefor N-(2-chloro- future, OPP will reassess the potential
VerDate 11
impacts of residues of the pesticide in pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea from food will addition, there is potential for chronic drinking water as a part of the aggregate utilize 0.3% of the cPAD for the U.S. dietary exposure to N-(2-chloro-4- risk assessment process. population, 1.5% of the cPAD for non- pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea in drinking 1. Acute risk. Not applicable; no acute nursing infants and 1.0% of the cPAD water. After calculating DWLOCs and dietary endpointwas identified. for children (1–6 years). There are no comparing them to the EECs for surface 2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure residential uses for N-(2-chloro-4- and ground water, EPA does not expect assumptions described in this unit for pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea that result in the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% chronic exposure, EPA has concluded chronic residential exposure to N-(2- of the cPAD, as shown in the following that exposure to N-(2-chloro-4- chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea. In Table 3:
TABLE 3.— AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC (NON-CANCER) EXPOSURE TO N-(2-CHLORO-4-PYRIDINYL)-N ′- PHENYLUREA
Surface Ground Chronic Population Subgroup cPAD mg/ % cPAD Water EEC Water EEC DWLOC kg/day (Food) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
U.S. Population (total) 0.007 0.3 4.7 26 240
Females (13–50 years) 0.007 0.1 4.7 26 210
Infants/Children 0.007 0.4-1.5 4.7 26 70
Other 0.007 0.3 4.7 26 240
3. Short-term risk. Short-term detection (HPLC/UV) procedure which VI. Objections and Hearing Requests aggregate exposure takes into account measures parent N-(2-chloro-4- Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as residential exposure plus chronic ′ pyridinyl)-N -phenylurea. For the amended by the FQPA, any personmay exposure to food and water (considered purpose of the Experimental Use Permit, file an objection to any aspect of this to be a background exposure level). the method has been adequately ′ regulation and may also request a N-(2-Chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N - validated. The limit of quantitation phenylurea is not registered for use on hearing on those objections. The EPA (LOQ) is 0.01 ppm and the limit of procedural regulations which govern the any sites that would result in residential detection is 0.003 ppm. exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk submission of objections and requests is the sum of the risk from food and 2. Animals. Depending on the results for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. water, which do not exceed the of a ruminant metabolism study, an Although the procedures in those Agency’s level of concern. enforcement method for the regulated regulations require some modification to 4. Intermediate-term risk. residue in animal commodities may be reflect the amendments made to the Intermediate-termaggregate exposure required to support a Section 3 FFDCA by the FQPA of 1996, EPA will takes into account residential exposure registration with permanent tolerances. continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the plus chronic exposure to food and water Adequate enforcement methodology (considered to be a background necessary modifications can be made. is available to enforce the exposure level). The new section 408(g) provides N-(2-Chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′- toleranceexpression. The method may essentially the same process for persons phenylurea is not registered for use on be requested from: Calvin Furlow, to ‘‘object’’ to a regulation for an any sites that would result in residential PIRIB, IRSD (7502C), Office of Pesticide exemption from the requirement of a exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk Programs, Environmental Protection tolerance issued by EPA under new is the sum of the risk from food and Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., section 408(d), as was provided in the water, which do not exceed the Washington, DC 20460; telephone old FFDCA sections 408 and 409. Agency’s level of concern. number: (703) 305–5229; e-mail address: However, the period for filing objections 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. [email protected]. is now 60 days, rather than 30 days. population. No concern for cancer risks A. What Do I Need to Do to File an were identified. Data from available B. International Residue Limits Objection or Request a Hearing? studies do not indicate a treatment- There are no Codex, Canadian, or related tumor problem and cancer risk Mexican IRLs for N-(2-chloro-4- You must file your objection or endpoints have not been identified. pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea. request a hearing on this regulation in 6. Determination of safety. Based on accordance with the instructions these risk assessments, EPA concludes C. Conditions provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part that there is a reasonable certainty that 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, no harm will result to the general There are no conditions for the you must identify docket control population, and to infants and children registration. number OPP–301122 in the subject line from aggregate exposure to N-(2-chloro- V. Conclusion on the first page of your submission. All 4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea residues. requests must be in writing, and must be IV. Other Considerations Therefore, the time-limited tolerance mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk is established for residues of N-(2- on or before July 6, 2001. A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea in or 1. Filing the request. Your objection 1. Plants. The proposed enforcement on almond, apple, blueberry, cranberry, must specify thespecific provisions in method is a high performance liquid fig, grapes, kiwifruit, olive, pear, and the regulation that you object to, and the chromatography using ultraviolet plums (fresh) at 0.01 ppm. grounds for the objections (40 CFR
VerDate 11
178.25). If a hearing is requested, the Unit VI.A., you should also send a copy Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, objections must include a statement of of your request to the PIRIB for its 1994); or OMB review or any Agency the factual issues(s) on which a hearing inclusion in the official record that is action under Executive Order 13045, is requested, the requestor’s contentions described in Unit I.B.2. Mail your entitled Protection of Children from on such issues, and a summary of any copies, identified by docket control Environmental Health Risks and Safety evidence relied upon by the objector (40 number OPP–301122, to: Public Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). CFR 178.27). Information submitted in Information and Records Integrity This action does not involve any connection with an objection or hearing Branch, Information Resources and technical standards that would require request may be claimed confidential by Services Division (7502C), Office of Agency consideration of voluntary marking any part or all of that Pesticide Programs, Environmental consensus standards pursuant to section information as CBI. Information so Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 12(d) of the National Technology marked will not be disclosed except in Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. In Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 accordance with procedures set forth in person or by courier, bring a copy to the (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the location of the PIRIB described in Unit 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since information that does not contain CBI I.B.2. You may also send an electronic tolerances and exemptions that are must be submitted for inclusion in the copy of your request via e-mail to: opp- established on the basis of a petition public record. Information not marked [email protected]. Please use an ASCII under FFDCA section 408(d), such as confidential may be disclosed publicly file format and avoid the use of special the tolerance in this final rule, do not by EPA without prior notice. characters and any form of encryption. require the issuance of a proposed rule, Mail your written request to: Office of Copies of electronic objections and the requirements of the Regulatory the Hearing Clerk (1900),Environmental hearing requests will also be accepted Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. You ASCII file format. Do not include any Agency has determined that this action may also deliver your request to the CBI in your electronic copy. You may will not have a substantial direct effect Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. C400, also submit an electronic copy of your on States, on the relationship between Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., request at many Federal Depository the national government and the States, Washington, DC 20460. The Office of Libraries. or on the distribution of power and the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a.m. responsibilities among the various to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing? levels of government, as specified in excluding legal holidays. The telephone Executive Order 13132, entitled A request for a hearing will be granted number for the Office of the Hearing Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, if the Administrator determines that the Clerk is (202) 260–4865. 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires 2. Tolerance fee payment. If you file material submitted shows the following: EPA to develop an accountable process an objection orrequest a hearing, you There is a genuine and substantial issue to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input must also pay the fee prescribed by 40 of fact; there is a reasonable possibility by State and local officials in the CFR 180.33(i) or request a waiver of that that available evidence identified by the development of regulatory policies that fee pursuant to 40 CFR 180.33(m). You requestor would, if established resolve have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies must mail the fee to: EPA Headquarters one or more of such issues in favor of that have federalism implications’’ is Accounting Operations Branch, Office the requestor, taking into account defined in the Executive Order to of Pesticide Programs, P.O. Box uncontested claims or facts to the include regulations that have 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Please contrary; and resolution of the factual ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, identify the fee submission by labeling issues(s) in the manner sought by the it ‘‘Tolerance Petition Fees.’’ requestor would be adequate to justify on the relationship between the national EPA is authorized to waive any fee the action requested (40 CFR 178.32). government and the States, or on the requirement ‘‘when inthe judgement of distribution of power and VII. Regulatory Assessment the Administrator such a waiver or responsibilities among the various Requirements refund is equitable and not contrary to levels of government.’’ This final rule the purpose of this subsection.’’ For This final rule establishes a tolerance directly regulates growers, food additional information regarding the under FFDCA section 408(d) inresponse processors, food handlers and food waiver of these fees, you may contact to a petition submitted to the Agency. retailers, not States. This action does not James Tompkins by phone at (703) 305– The Office of Management and Budget alter the relationships or distribution of 5697, by e-mail at (OMB) has exempted these types of power and responsibilities established [email protected], or by mailing a actions from review under Executive by Congress in the preemption request for information to Mr. Tompkins Order 12866, entitled Regulatory provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). at Registration Division (7505C), Office Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, For these same reasons, the Agency of Pesticide Programs, Environmental October 4, 1993). This final rule does has determined that this rule does not Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania not contain any information collections have any ‘‘tribal implications’’ as Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. subject to OMB approval under the described in Executive Order 13175, If you would like to request a waiver Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 entitled Consultation and Coordination of the tolerance objection fees, you must U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR mail your request for such a waiver to: enforceable duty or contain any 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive James Hollins, Information Resources unfunded mandate as described under Order 13175, requires EPA to develop and Services Division (7502C), Office of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates an accountable process to ensure Pesticide Programs, Environmental Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Law 104–4).Nor does it require any officials in the development of Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. special considerations under Executive regulatory policies that have tribal 3. Copies for the Docket. In addition Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal to filing an objection or hearing request Address Environmental Justice in implications’’ is defined in the with the Hearing Clerk as described in Minority Populations and Low-Income Executive Order to include regulations
VerDate 11
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on Expiration/ SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP one or more Indian tribes, on the Commodity Parts per million Revocation enables property owners to purchase relationship between the Federal Date flood insurance which is generally not government and the Indian tribes, or on Almond ...... 0.01 4/1/04 otherwise available. In return, the distribution of power and Apple ...... 0.01 4/1/04 communities agree to adopt and responsibilities between the Federal Blueberry .. 0.01 4/1/04 administer local floodplain management government and Indian tribes.’’ This Cranberry .. 0.01 4/1/04 aimed at protecting lives and new rule will not have substantial direct Fig ...... 0.01 4/1/04 construction from future flooding. effects on tribal governments, on the Grape ...... 0.01 4/1/04 Section 1315 of the National Flood relationship between the Federal Kiwifruit ..... 0.01 4/1/04 Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 government and Indian tribes, or on the Olive ...... 0.01 4/1/04 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance Pear ...... 0.01 4/1/04 distribution of power and coverage as authorized under the responsibilities between the Federal Plum 0.01 4/1/04 (fresh). National Flood Insurance Program, 42 government and Indian tribes, as U.S.C. 4001 et seq., unless an specified in Executive Order 13175. (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. appropriate public body adopts Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not [Reserved] adequate floodplain management apply to this rule.’’ (c) Tolerances with regional measures with effective enforcement VIII. Submission to Congress and the restrictions. [Reserved] measures. The communities listed in Comptroller General (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. this document no longer meet that [Reserved] statutory requirement for compliance The Congressional Review Act, 5 with program regulations, 44 CFR part U.S.C. 801 et seq., asadded by the Small [FR Doc. 01–11414 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] 59 et seq. Accordingly, the communities Business Regulatory Enforcement BILLING CODE 6560–50–S will be suspended on the effective date Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides in the third column. As of that date, that before a rule may take effect, the flood insurance will no longer be agency promulgating the rule must FEDERAL EMERGENCY available in the community. However, submit a rule report, which includes a MANAGEMENT AGENCY some of these communities may adopt copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General 44 CFR Part 64 and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain of the United States. EPA will submit a [Docket No. FEMA–7761] report containing this rule and other management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual required information to the U.S. Senate, Suspension of Community Eligibility the U.S. House of Representatives, and suspension date. These communities the Comptroller General of the United AGENCY: Federal Emergency will not be suspended and will continue States prior to publication of this final Management Agency, FEMA. their eligibility for the sale of insurance. rule in the Federal Register. This final ACTION: Final rule. A notice withdrawing the suspension of rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by the communities will be published in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). SUMMARY: This rule identifies the Federal Register. communities, where the sale of flood In addition, the Federal Emergency List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 insurance has been authorized under Management Agency has identified the Environmental protection, the National Flood Insurance Program special flood hazard areas in these Administrative practice and (NFIP), that are suspended on the communities by publishing a Flood procedure,Agricultural commodities, effective dates listed within this rule Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of Pesticides and pests, Reporting and because of noncompliance with the the FIRM if one has been published, is recordkeepingrequirements. floodplain management requirements of indicated in the fourth column of the the program. If the Federal Emergency Dated: April 30, 2001. table. No direct Federal financial Management Agency (FEMA) receives assistance (except assistance pursuant to James Jones, documentation that the community has Director, Registration Division, Office of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief adopted the required floodplain and Emergency Assistance Act not in Pesticide Programs. management measures prior to the connection with a flood) may legally be effective suspension date given in this Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is provided for construction or acquisition rule, the suspension will be withdrawn amended as follows: of buildings in the identified special by publication in the Federal Register. PART 180— [AMENDED] flood hazard area of communities not EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date of participating in the NFIP and identified 1. The authority citation for part 180 each community’s suspension is the for more than a year, on the Federal continues to read as follows: third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the third Emergency Management Agency’s column of the following tables. Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and initial flood insurance map of the 371. ADDRESSES: If you wish to determine community as having flood-prone areas whether a particular community was 2. Section 180.569 is added to read as (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster suspended on the suspension date, follows: Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. contact the appropriate FEMA Regional 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition § 180.569 Forchlorfenuron; tolerances for Office or the NFIP servicing contractor. against certain types of Federal residues. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: assistance becomes effective for the (a) General. Time-limited tolerances Donna M. Dannels, Division Director, communities listed on the date shown are established forresidues of the plant Policy and Assessment Division, in the last column. The Associate growth regulator forchlorfenuron; N-(2- Mitigation Directorate, 500 C Street, Director finds that notice and public chloro-4-pyridinyl)-N ′-phenylurea in or S.W., Room 411, Washington, D.C. comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are on the food commodities: 20472, (202) 646–3098. impracticable and unnecessary because
VerDate 11
communities listed in this final rule appropriate public body adopts October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., have been adequately notified. adequate floodplain management p. 252. Each community receives a 6-month, measures with effective enforcement Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice 90-day, and 30-day notification measures. The communities listed no Reform addressed to the Chief Executive Officer longer comply with the statutory that the community will be suspended requirements, and after the effective This rule meets the applicable unless the required floodplain date, flood insurance will no longer be standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive management measures are met prior to available in the communities unless Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR the effective suspension date. Since they take remedial action. 55195, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 309. these notifications have been made, this List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64 final rule may take effect within less Regulatory Classification than 30 days. This final rule is not a significant Flood insurance, Floodplains. National Environmental Policy Act regulatory action under the criteria of Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of amended as follows: This rule is categorically excluded September 30, 1993, Regulatory from the requirements of 44 CFR part Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. PART 64—[AMENDED] 10, Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact assessment has Paperwork Reduction Act 1. The authority citation for part 64 been prepared. continues to read as follows: This rule does not involve any Regulatory Flexibility Act Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; collection of information for purposes of Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, The Associate Director has the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, determined that this rule is exempt from 3501 et seq. 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. the requirements of the Regulatory Executive Order 12612, Federalism Flexibility Act because the National § 64.6 [Amended] Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as This rule involves no policies that 2. The tables published under the amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits have federalism implications under authority of § 64.6 are amended as flood insurance coverage unless an Executive Order 12612, Federalism, follows:
Date certain Federal assist- Community Effective date authorization/cancellation of Current effective ance no longer State and location No. sale of flood insurance in community map date available in spe- cial flood hazard areas
Region I Maine: Winslow, town of, Kennebec County 230071 May 22, 1974, Emerg., September 30, May 7, 2001 ..... May 7, 2001. 1987, Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Region II New York: Litchfield, town of, Herkimer 360309 July 19, 1983, Emerg., September 24, ...... do ...... Do. County. 1984, Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Region IV Georgia: Decatur, city of, DeKalb County ... 135159 June 19, 1970, Emerg., June 11, 1971, ...... do ...... Do. Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Region VI Arkansas: Mansfield, city of, Sebastian 050202 July 29, 1975, Emerg., June 18, 1987, ...... do ...... Do. County Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Sebastian County, unincorporated 050462 January 27, 1983, Emerg., April 1, 1988, ...... do ...... Do. areas. Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. New Mexico: Raton, city of, Colfax 350008 December 5, 1974, Emerg., March 1, 1986, ...... do ...... Do. County. Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Texas: Huntsville, city of, Walker County ...... 480639 January 20, 1975, Emerg., February 4, ...... do ...... Do. 1981, Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Walker County, unincorporated areas.. 481042 August 18, 1978, Emerg., May 1, 1987, Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Region IX California: Solano County, unincorporated areas .. 060631 March 23, 1979, Emerg., August 2, 1982, ...... do ...... Do. Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Vacaville, city of, Solano County...... 060373 February 18, 1975, Emerg., August 2, May 21, 2001 ... May 21, 2001. 1982, Reg. May 7, 2001, Susp. Region I Rhode Island: Coventry, town of Kent 440004 November 21, 1973, Emerg., September 1, County. 1978, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Region II New Jersey: Stafford, township of, Ocean 340393 September 15, 1972, Emerg., September ...... do ...... Do. County. 14, 1979, Reg., May 21, 2001, Susp. New York: Holland Patent, village of, Onei- 360530 April 25, 1975, Emerg., April 17, 1985, da County. Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp.
VerDate 11
Date certain Federal assist- Community Effective date authorization/cancellation of Current effective ance no longer State and location No. sale of flood insurance in community map date available in spe- cial flood hazard areas
Region III Pennsylvania: Bern, township of, Berks County...... 421050 March 25, 1974, Emerg., November 19, ...... do ...... Do. 1980, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Heidelberg, township of, Berks County 421069 March 7, 1977, Emerg., May 3, 1990, Reg...... do ...... Do. May 21, 2001, Susp. Leesport, borough of, Berks County.... 420138 December 26, 1973, Emerg., May 16, ...... do ...... Do. 1977, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Marion, township of, Berks County...... 421079 October 28, 1975, Emerg., January 2, ...... do ...... Do. 1981, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Muhlenberg, township of, Berks Coun- 420144 March 9, 1973, Emerg., September 1, ...... do ...... Do. ty. 1977, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Ontelaunee, township of, Berks County 420966 September 5, 1973, Emerg., June 1, 1977, ...... do ...... Do. Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Spring, township of, Berks County ...... 421108 June 27, 1974, Emerg., April 18, 1983, ...... do ...... Do. Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Tulpehocken, township of, Berks 421115 April 19, 1978, Emerg., August 4, 1988, ...... do ...... Do. County. Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Wyomissing, borough of, Berks County 421375 August 28, 1974, Emerg., April 18, 1983, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Region V Illinois: Winnebago, unincorporated areas .. 170720 February 16, 1973, Emerg., November 19, 1980, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Region VII Kansas: Augusta, city of, Butler County ...... 200038 June 25, 1975, Emerg., August 15, 1980, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Region VIII Colorado: Durango, city of, La Plata County ...... 080099 April 30, 1974, Emerg., January 17, 1979, ...... do ...... Do. Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. La Plata County, unincorporated areas 080097 December 12, 1974, Emerg., December ...... do ...... Do. 15, 1981, Reg. May 21, 2001, Susp. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp—Suspension.
Dated: April 25, 2001. as amended for the Great Lakes breeding received, as well as supporting Margaret E. Lawless, population of the piping plover. The documentation used in the preparation Acting Executive Associate Director for Great Lakes breeding population of the of this final rule, will be available for Mitigation. piping plover is listed as an endangered public inspection, by appointment, [FR Doc. 01–11363 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] species under the Act. A total of during normal business hours at the BILLING CODE 6718–05–U approximately 325 km (201 mi) of Great U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bishop Lakes shoreline (extending 500 m (1640 Henry Whipple Federal Building, 1 ft) inland) in 26 counties in Minnesota, Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, MN 55111. Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York, is Laura J. Ragan at the above address Fish and Wildlife Service designated as critical habitat for the (telephone 612/713–5157; facsimile Great Lakes population of the piping 612/713–5292). TTY users may contact 50 CFR Part 17 plover. The total length of designated us through the Federal Relay Service at shoreline is divided among 35 separate 1–800–877–8339. RIN 1018–AG14 critical habitat units. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 7 of the Act requires Federal Endangered and Threatened Wildlife agencies to ensure that actions they Background and Plants; Final Determination of authorize, fund, or carry out are not Critical Habitat for the Great Lakes The piping plover (Charadrius likely to destroy or adversely modify melodus), named for its melodic mating Breeding Population of the Piping critical habitat. As required by section 4 Plover call, is a small, pale-colored North of the Act, we considered economic and American shorebird. It weighs 43–63 other relevant impacts prior to making AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, grams (1.5–2.5 ounces) and is 17–18 Interior. a final decision on what areas to centimeters (cm) (6–7 inches (in.)) long designate as critical habitat. ACTION: Final rule. (Haig 1992). Its light, sand-colored EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is plumage blends in well with the sandy SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and effective June 6, 2001. beach, its primary habitat. Plumage and Wildlife Service (Service), designate ADDRESSES: The complete leg color help distinguish this bird from critical habitat pursuant to the administrative record for this rule, other plover species. During the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, including comments and materials breeding season, the legs are bright
VerDate 11
orange, and the short, stout bill is Michigan and, recently, at one site in exclosure fencing have all contributed orange with a black tip. There are two northern Wisconsin. to the improving status of the Great single dark bands, one around the neck Piping plovers are migratory birds. Lakes piping plover. and one across the forehead between the They leave the breeding grounds Great Lakes piping plovers nest on eyes. The female’s neck band is often between late July and early September shoreline and island sandy beaches with incomplete and is usually thinner than and head for their wintering grounds, sparse vegetation and the presence of the male’s (Haig 1992). In winter, the where they spend more than eight small stones (greater than 1 cm (0.4 in.)) bill turns black, the legs fade to pale months of the year. Although the called cobble. Piping plovers spend 3 to orange, and the black plumage bands on breeding ranges of the three piping 4 months a year on the breeding the head and neck are lost. Chicks have plover populations are separate, their grounds. Nesting in the Great Lakes speckled gray, buff, and brown down, wintering ranges overlap and extend region begins in early to mid-May. black beaks, pale orange legs, and a along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts from Plovers lay 3 to 4 eggs in a small white collar around the neck. Juveniles North Carolina to Mexico and into the depression they scrape in the sand resemble wintering adults and obtain West Indies and Bahamas. Resightings among the cobblestones and are, their adult plumage the spring after they of color-banded birds from the Great therefore, very difficult to see. Both fledge (USFWS 1994). Lakes breeding population have sexes are involved in incubating the Dominant plants within Great Lakes occurred along the coastlines of North eggs, which hatch in about 28 days. piping plover habitat include marram and South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Young plovers can walk almost as soon grass (Ammophila brevigulata), beach Louisiana, and Texas. as they hatch, but remain vulnerable to wormwood (Artemesia campestris), Pre-settlement populations of piping predation and disturbance for another silverweed (Potentilla anserina), Lake plovers in the Great Lakes are estimated 21–30 days until they are able to fly. Huron tansy (Tanacetum huronense), at 492–682 breeding pairs (Russell Nesting piping plovers are highly pitcher’s thistle (Cirsium pitcheri), 1983), although these estimates may be susceptible to disturbance by people beach pea (Lathyrus maritimus var. high (F. Cuthbert, professor, University and pets on the beach. Human of Minnesota, Minneapolis, pers. disturbance disrupts adult birds’ care of glaber), sea rocket (Cakile edentula), comm., 2000). In recent decades, piping their nests and young and may inhibit sedges (Carex spp.), goldenrods (Solidago plover populations have declined incubation of eggs (USFWS 1994). spp.), sand cherry (Prunus pumila), drastically, especially in the Great Furthermore, adults may leave the nest bearberry (Arctostaphylus uva-ursi), Lakes, coinciding with industrial to lure away an intruder, leaving the creeping juniper (Juniper horizontalis), development, urbanization, and eggs or chicks vulnerable to predators cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and increased recreational pressures. In and exposure to weather. Ultimately, willow (Salix spp.). 1973, the piping plover was placed on disturbance may lead to the The breeding range of the piping the National Audubon Society’s Blue abandonment of nests (USFWS 1994). plover extends throughout the northern List of threatened species. By that time, As a result of disturbance and other Great Plains, the Great Lakes, and the piping plovers had been extirpated from natural and human-caused factors such Atlantic Coast in the United States and beaches in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, New as high water levels, flooding, eroding Canada. Based on this distribution, York, Pennsylvania, and Ontario, and beaches, and beach-front commercial, three breeding populations of piping only a few birds were continuing to nest recreational, and residential plovers have been described: the in Wisconsin (Russell, 1983). By 1977, development, reproduction of Great Northern Great Plains population, the the Great Lakes breeding population had Lakes piping plovers has been severely Great Lakes population, and the Atlantic decreased to 31 nesting pairs (Lambert affected, resulting in perilously low Coast population. and Ratcliff 1981) and by the time the numbers of nesting plovers (USFWS The northern Great Plains breeding species was listed under the Endangered 1994). range extends from southern Alberta, Species Act in 1985, the Great Lakes This rule applies only to the breeding northern Saskatchewan, and southern breeding population had dwindled to range of the Great Lakes population in Manitoba, south to eastern Montana, the only 17 breeding pairs, and the breeding the United States. Dakotas, southeastern Colorado, Iowa, areas had been reduced from sites in Previous Federal Actions Minnesota, and Nebraska, and east to eight States to only portions of northern Lake of the Woods in north-central Michigan. On December 30, 1982, we published Minnesota. The majority of the United Since the species was listed, the Great a notice of review in the Federal States pairs in this population are in the Lakes breeding population has gradually Register (47 FR 58454) that identified Dakotas, Nebraska, and Montana increased and expanded its range within vertebrate animal taxa being considered (USFWS 1994). Occasionally, Great Michigan and into Wisconsin. In 1999, for addition to the List of Threatened Plains birds nest in Oklahoma and 31 pairs of piping plovers nested on the and Endangered Wildlife. We included Kansas. On the Atlantic coast, piping Great Lakes shoreline of northern the piping plover in that review list as plovers nest from Newfoundland, Michigan and 1 pair nested in northern a Category 2 Candidate species, southeastern Quebec, and New Wisconsin (Stucker and Cuthbert, 1999). indicating that we believed the species Brunswick to North Carolina. Sixty- In 2000, 30 pairs were documented, all might warrant listing as threatened or eight percent of all nesting pairs breed in northern Michigan (Stucker et al. endangered, but that we had insufficient in Massachusetts, New York, New 2000). The slow population increase data to support a proposal to list at that Jersey, and Virginia (USFWS 1999). In over the past 15 years has been aided by time. Subsequent review of additional the Great Lakes watershed, piping intense State, Tribal, Federal, and data indicated that the piping plover plovers formerly nested throughout private conservation actions directed at warranted listing, and in November, much of the north-central United States the protection of the piping plover. 1984, we published a proposed rule in and south-central Canada on beaches in Activities such as habitat surveys, beach the Federal Register (49 FR 44712) to Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, restoration, public education, habitat list the piping plover as endangered in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, protection and enhancement, and the the Great Lakes watershed and as Wisconsin, and in Ontario, Canada. protection of nests from predators and threatened along the Atlantic Coast, the Currently they are limited to northern disturbance through the use of predator Northern Great Plains, and elsewhere in
VerDate 11
their range. The proposed listing was 1997. During November and December Critical Habitat based on the decline of the species and 1999, and January 2000, we began Critical habitat is defined in section 3 the existing threats, including habitat negotiating a schedule for piping plover of the Act as (i) the specific areas within destruction, disturbance by humans and critical habitat decisions with the geographical area occupied by a pets, high levels of predation, and Defenders. On February 7, 2000, before species, at the time it is listed in contaminants. the settlement negotiations were accordance with the Act, on which are After a review of the best scientific concluded, the United States District found those physical or biological data available and all comments Court for the District of Columbia issued features (I) essential to the conservation received in response to the proposed an order directing us to publish a of the species and (II) that may require rule, we published the final rule (50 FR proposed critical habitat designation for special management consideration or 50726) on December 11, 1985, listing nesting and wintering areas of the Great protections; and (ii) specific areas the piping plover as endangered in the Lakes population of the piping plover outside the geographic area occupied by Great Lakes watershed (Illinois, Indiana, by June 30, 2000, and for nesting and a species at the time it is listed, upon Michigan, northeastern Minnesota, New wintering areas of the Northern Great York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, a determination that such areas are Plains piping plover population by May and Ontario, Canada) and as threatened essential for the conservation of the 31, 2001. A subsequent order, after along the Atlantic coast (Quebec, species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use Newfoundland, Maritime Provinces, requesting the court to reconsider its of all methods and procedures that are and States from Maine to Florida), and original order relating to final critical necessary to bring an endangered or a in the Northern Great Plains region habitat designation, directs us to finalize threatened species to the point at which (Iowa, northwestern Minnesota, the critical habitat designations for the listing under the Act is no longer Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Great Lakes population by April 30, necessary. South Dakota, Alberta, Manitoba, and 2001, and for the Northern Great Plains Critical habitat receives protection Saskatchewan). All piping plovers on population by March 15, 2002. For under section 7 of the Act through the migratory routes outside of the Great biological and practical reasons, we prohibition against destruction or Lakes watershed or on their wintering chose to propose critical habitat for the adverse modification of critical habitat grounds are considered threatened. We Great Lakes breeding birds and for all with regard to actions carried out, did not designate critical habitat for the wintering birds in two separate rules funded, or authorized by a Federal species at that time. published concurrently. agency. Section 7 also requires conferences on Federal actions that are After 1986, we focused our efforts on On July 6, 2000, we published a likely to result in the destruction or recovery by forming two recovery teams, proposed determination for the adverse modification of proposed the Great Lakes/Northern Great Plains designation of critical habitat for the Piping Plover Recovery Team and the critical habitat. In our regulations at 50 Great Lakes breeding population of the CFR 402.02, we define destruction or Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Recovery piping plover (65 FR 41812). A total of Team. In 1988 the Great Lakes and adverse modification as ‘‘. . . the direct approximately 305 km (189 mi) or indirect alteration that appreciably Northern Great Plains (USFWS 1988b) (extending 1 km (0.6 mi) inland) was and Atlantic Coast (USFWS 1988a) diminishes the value of critical habitat proposed as critical habitat for this for both the survival and recovery of a Recovery Plans were published. In 1994, piping plover population in 27 counties the Great Lakes/Northern Great Plains listed species. Such alterations include, in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, but are not limited to, alterations Recovery Team began to revise the Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Recovery plan for these two populations adversely modifying any of those and New York. The comment period (USFWS 1994). The 1994 draft included physical or biological features that were was open until September 5, 2000. updated information on the species and the basis for determining the habitat to During this 60-day comment period, we was distributed for public comment. be critical.’’ Aside from the added held seven public hearings (Ashland, Subsequently, we decided that the protection that may be provided under recovery of these two inland Wisconsin, on July 17; Green Bay, section 7, the Act does not provide other populations would benefit from separate Wisconsin, on July 18; Newberry, forms of protection to lands designated recovery plans. Individual recovery Michigan, on July 19; Traverse City, as critical habitat. Critical habitat plans for the Great Lakes and Northern Michigan, on July 20; Indiana Dunes, designation would not afford any Great Plains populations are presently Indiana, on July 24; Cleveland, Ohio, on additional protections under the Act under development. July 25; and Watertown, New York, on against activities on private or other The final listing rule for the piping July 27). On September 19, 2000, we non-Federal lands that do not involve a plover indicated that designation of published a document (65 FR 56530) Federal nexus because the requirement critical habitat was not determinable. announcing the reopening of the for consultation under section 7 of the Thus, designation was deferred. No comment period on the proposal to Act does not apply to activities on these further action was subsequently taken to designate critical habitat for the Great types of lands. designate critical habitat for piping Lakes breeding population of the piping In order to be included in a critical plovers. On December 4, 1996, plover and a notice of the availability of habitat designation, the habitat must Defenders of Wildlife (Defenders) filed a the draft economic analysis on the first be ‘‘essential to the conservation of suit (Defenders of Wildlife and Piping proposed determination. Our intention the species.’’ Critical habitat Plover v. Babbitt, Case No. 96CV02965) was for this comment period to be designations identify, based on the best against the Department of the Interior reopened for 60 days, but the document scientific and commercial data and the Service over the lack of stated that the comment period closed available, habitat areas that provide designated critical habitat for the Great on October 19, 2000, or 30 days. essential life cycle needs of the species Lakes population of the piping plover. Therefore, on September 28, 2000, we (i.e., areas on which are found the Defenders filed a similar suit (Defenders published a document (65 FR 58258) primary constituent elements, as of Wildlife and Piping Plover v. Babbitt, correcting the closing date of the defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)). Case No. 97CV000777) for the Northern reopened comment period to November Within the geographic area occupied Great Plains piping plover population in 20, 2000. by the species, we will designate only
VerDate 11
areas currently known to be essential. designation of critical habitat may not required to base critical habitat Essential areas should already have the include all of the habitat areas that may determinations on the best scientific features and habitat characteristics that eventually be determined to be and commercial data available. We also are necessary to sustain the species necessary for the recovery of the are required to consider those physical (primary constituent elements). We will species. For these reasons, it should be and biological features that are essential not speculate about what areas might be understood that critical habitat to the conservation of the species and found to be essential if better designations do not signal that habitat that may require special management information became available, or what outside the designation is unimportant considerations and protection. Such other areas may become essential over or may not be required for recovery. features include, but are not limited to: time. If the information available at the Areas outside the critical habitat space for individual and population time of designation does not show that designation will continue to be subject growth, and for normal behavior; food, an area provides essential life cycle to conservation actions that may be water, air, light, minerals, or other needs of the species, then the area implemented under section 7(a)(1) and nutritional or physiological should not be included in the critical to the regulatory protections afforded by requirements; cover or shelter; sites for habitat designation. Within the the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard breeding, reproduction, and rearing of geographic area occupied by the species, and the section 9 take prohibition, as offspring; and habitats that are protected we will not designate areas that do not determined on the basis of the best from disturbance or are representative of now have the primary constituent available information at the time of the the historical geographical and elements, as defined at 50 CFR action. Federally funded or assisted ecological distributions of a species. 424.12(b), that provide essential life projects affecting listed species outside The primary constituent elements for cycle needs of the species. their designated critical habitat areas the Great Lakes breeding population of Our regulations state that, ‘‘The may still result in jeopardy findings in the piping plover are those habitat Secretary shall designate as critical some cases. Similarly, critical habitat components that are essential for habitat areas outside the geographic area designations made on the basis of the successful foraging, nesting, rearing of presently occupied by the species only best available information at the time of young, intra-specific communication, when a designation limited to its designation will not control the genetic exchange, roosting, dispersal, or present range would be inadequate to direction and substance of future sheltering. ensure the conservation of the species’’ recovery plans, habitat conservation The primary constituent elements (50 CFR 424.12(e)). Accordingly, unless plans, or other species conservation required to sustain the Great Lakes the best scientific and commercial data planning efforts if new information breeding population of the piping demonstrates that the conservation available to these planning efforts calls plover are found on Great Lakes islands needs of the species require designation for a different outcome. and mainland shorelines that support of critical habitat outside of occupied open, sparsely vegetated sandy habitats, areas, we will not designate critical Methods such as sand spits or sand beaches, that habitat in areas outside the geographic In determining areas that are essential are associated with wide, unforested area occupied by the species. However, to conserve the Great Lakes breeding systems of dunes and inter-dune if unoccupied areas are essential to the population of the piping plover, the best wetlands. In order for habitat to be recovery of the species, they may be scientific and commercial data available physically and biologically suitable for designated as critical habitat. included information solicited from piping plovers, it must have a total The Service’s policy on Information knowledgeable biologists and available shoreline length of at least 0.2 km (0.12 Standards Under the Endangered information pertaining to habitat mi) of gently sloping, sparsely vegetated Species Act, published in the Federal requirements of the species. In an effort (less than 50 percent herbaceous and Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271), to map areas essential to the low woody cover) sand beach with a provides criteria, establishes conservation of the species, we used total beach area of at least 2 hectares procedures, and provides guidance to data of known piping plover breeding (ha) (5 acres (ac)). ensure that decisions made by the locations, records of historical nesting Appropriately sized sites must also Service represent the best scientific and sites, International Census data, and have areas of at least 50 meters (m) (164 commercial data available. It requires those areas that were identified in the feet (ft)) in length where (1) the beach Service biologists, to the extent 1988 recovery plan and 1994 draft width is more than 7 m (23 ft), (2) there consistent with the Act and with the use recovery plan as essential for the is protective cover for nests and chicks, of the best scientific and commercial recovery of the population. We have and (3) the distance to the treeline (from data available, to use primary and chosen the 35 critical habitat units in the normal high water line to where the original sources of information as the order to protect adequate habitat to meet forest begins) is more than 50 m (164 ft). basis for recommendations to designate the recovery criteria, contained in the Beach width is defined as the distance critical habitat. When determining recovery plan and draft recovery plan, from the normal high water line to the which areas are critical habitat, a of 100 breeding pairs in Michigan and foredune (a low barrier dune ridge primary source of information should be 50 breeding pairs in the other Great immediately inland from the beach) the listing package for the species. Lakes States combined. In addition, edge, or to the sand/vegetation Additional information may be obtained information provided in comments on boundary in areas where the foredune is from a recovery plan, articles in peer- the proposed designation and draft absent. The beach width may be reviewed journals, conservation plans economic analysis were evaluated and narrower than 7 m (23 ft) if appropriate developed by States and counties, taken into consideration in the sand and cobble areas of at least 7 m (23 scientific status surveys and studies, development of this final designation. ft) exist between the dune and the and biological assessments or other treeline. unpublished materials (i.e. gray Primary Constituent Elements Protective cover for nests and chicks literature). In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) consists of small patches of herbaceous Habitat is often dynamic, and species of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR vegetation, cobble (stones larger than 1 may move from one area to another over 424.12, in determining which areas to cm (0.4 inches (in)) diameter), gravel time. Furthermore, we recognize that propose as critical habitat, we are (stones smaller than 1 cm (0.4 in)
VerDate 11
diameter), or debris such as driftwood, occupied habitat in the Great Lakes has Critical habitat designation is effective wrack, root masses, or dead shrubs. declined from historical occupation of year-round, even if the primary These areas must have a low level of more than 70 sites in eight States to constituent elements are temporarily disturbance from human activities and approximately 32 sites in two States obscured by snow, ice, or other from domestic animals. As the nesting (Wemmer 2000). The currently occupied temporary features. season progresses, the level of sites and recently occupied (since 1985) In defining critical habitat boundaries, disturbance tolerated by piping plovers sites in Michigan may have the capacity it was not possible to exclude all increases. A lower level of disturbance to support an estimated 56 to 136 existing human-made features and is required at the beginning of the breeding pairs (Wemmer 2000). Because structures, such as buildings, roads, nesting period during nest site selection, of this severe reduction in range and marinas, piers, parking lots, bridges, egg laying, and incubation. Beach numbers of piping plovers, we have boat ramps, lighthouses, and other such activities that may be associated with a determined it is essential to the human-made features, within the area high level of disturbance include, but conservation of this species to include designated. These features do not are not limited to, walking pets off all currently occupied habitat and all contain most or all of the primary leash, loud noise, driving all terrain recently occupied habitat that still constituent elements and thus are not vehicles (ATVs), or activities that contains the primary constituent considered to be critical habitat despite significantly increase the level of people elements in this critical habitat their being within the geographic using the beach. The level of designation. boundaries. Federal actions limited to disturbance is relative to the proximity As we proceed with recovery efforts, those features, therefore, would not to the nest, intensity, and frequency of expansion of the present small trigger a section 7 consultation, unless these and other similar activities. population will require more habitat they affect the species and/or primary The dynamic ecological processes that than is currently occupied by piping constituent elements within a critical create and maintain piping plover plovers along the Great Lakes (Wemmer habitat unit. habitat are also important primary 2000, USFWS 1988b, 1994). In an effort In summary, in determining areas that constituent elements. These geologically to protect sufficient habitat to allow for are essential to the conservation of the dynamic lakeside regions are controlled the expansion of the species, our second Great Lakes breeding population of the by processes of erosion, accretion, plant step was to evaluate the essential habitat piping plover, we used the best succession, and lake-level fluctuations. areas outlined in the Recovery Plan that scientific and commercial information The integrity of the habitat depends are documented as historical piping available to us. The critical habitat areas upon regular sediment transport plover habitat. In addition to evaluating described below constitute our best processes, as well as episodic, high- those areas identified by the Recovery assessment of areas needed for the magnitude storm events. By their Plan as essential habitat, we solicited species’ conservation and recovery. nature, Great Lakes shorelines are in a information from habitat experts on Critical Habitat Designation constant state of change; habitat features areas that contain the primary may disappear, or be created nearby. constituent elements and that would At this time, the critical habitat units The critical habitat boundaries reflect provide suitable piping plover nesting discussed below are our best appraisal these natural processes and the dynamic habitat. Based upon consultation with of areas needed for the conservation of character of Great Lakes shorelines. Great Lakes piping plover habitat the Great Lakes breeding population of experts, we determined which the piping plover. Very little suitable Criteria Used To Identify Critical historically occupied sites contain the piping plover habitat remains in the Habitat primary constituent elements and are Great Lakes region, and all the areas All of the designated critical habitat suitable for supporting nesting piping identified here are essential for the areas are considered essential to the plovers. We designated historically recovery of the species because these conservation of the Great Lakes breeding occupied habitat in the Great Lakes areas represent the habitat necessary to population of the piping plover as watershed (in the United States) that achieve the recovery goal of 100 described in the approved 1988 still contain the primary constituent breeding pairs in Michigan and 50 Recovery Plan for the Great Lakes and elements. breeding pairs in the other Great Lakes Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Much known historical habitat in the States combined. Critical habitat (Plan) and the 1994 Draft Revised Great Lakes region has been destroyed designations may be subsequently Recovery Plan for the Great Lakes or altered in such ways that it can no revised if new information becomes Piping Plover. The designation longer support piping plovers (Wemmer available after this final rule is encompasses those areas considered 2000, USFWS 1988b). As a result, published. Any additional areas of necessary to achieve the recovery goals suitable habitat areas that are currently/ critical habitat will be designated, or of 150 breeding pairs (USFWS 1988b, recently occupied, or that were other changes made to this designation, 1994) for this population. documented to be historically occupied, only after a formal proposal and To identify critical habitat units, we are not sufficient to meet the opportunity for public comment. first examined those sites identified as conservation goals outlined in the The approximate length of proposed ‘‘essential habitat’’ in the approved approved Recovery Plan and draft critical habitat shoreline identified by Recovery Plan and draft revised revised Recovery Plan. Thus, as a final land ownership is shown in Table 1. Recovery Plan. We began by evaluating step, we evaluated those essential Critical habitat includes Great Lakes those essential habitat areas that are habitat areas identified in the Recovery piping plover habitat throughout the currently (at least once during the past Plan where occupation has not been species’ breeding range in the United 5 years) or were recently (in the last 5 documented, but habitat features similar States. Lands proposed as critical to 15 years) occupied by piping plovers to currently occupied sites occur. To habitat are under private, State, in the Great Lakes. Through site visits reach the minimum amount of habitat municipal, Tribal, and Federal and consultation with local habitat sufficient to meet the recovery plan ownership, with Federal lands experts, we determined which of these goals, we designated those areas that are including lands managed by the sites still contain the primary known to contain the primary National Park Service, U.S. Forest constituent elements. Piping plover constituent elements as critical habitat. Service, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army
VerDate 11
Corp of Engineers, and by us. Estimates reflect the total area within critical habitat unit boundaries.
TABLE 1.—KILOMETERS OF GREAT LAKES SHORELINE PROPOSED AS CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE PIPING PLOVER IN EACH GREAT LAKES STATE SUMMARIZED BY FEDERAL, STATE, MUNICIPAL, PRIVATE AND OTHER OWNERSHIP
Ownership km shoreline (% within each State) Federal State Municipal Private Other Total
Michigan ...... 40.9 (18.3) 107.9 (48.1) 6.9 (3.1) 66.1 (29.1) 1.6 TNC (0.7) 223.4 Minnesota ...... 0 0.2 (100) 0 0 0 0.2 Wisconsin ...... 18.1 (40.0) 8.7 (19.2) 4.4 (9.7) 9.0 (19.9) 5.1 Tribal (11.2) 45.3 Illinois ...... 0 4.7 (46.1) 1.3 (12.7) 4.2 (41.2) 0 10.2 Indiana ...... 2.9 (36.7) 5.0 (63.3) 0 0 0 7.9 Ohio ...... 0 2.0 (50) 0 2.0 (50) 0 4.0 Pennsylvania ...... 0 6.0 (100) 0 0 0 6.0 New York ...... 0 12.4 (45.3) 0 14.6 (53.3) 0.4 TNC (1.5) 27.4
Total (% of) ...... 61.9 (19.1) 146.9 (45.2) 12.6 (3.9) 95.9 (29.5) 7.1 (2.2) 324.4
Critical habitat has been designated in primary constituent elements may vary occasionally nest. A brief description of 35 units in the Great Lakes region. All depending on the extent of the open each unit and reasons for designating it critical habitat unit boundaries extend dune system. This area is needed to as critical habitat are presented below 500 meters (1640 feet) inland from the provide foraging habitat as well as and in Table 2. More detailed normal high water line, although the incorporate cobble pans between the descriptions are included with the inland edge of the area that contains the dunes where piping plovers maps.
TABLE 2.—LOCATION, OWNERSHIP, PIPING PLOVER USE, AND ESTIMATED LENGTH OF CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS WITHIN MAPPED CONSERVATION UNITS IN THE U.S. GREAT LAKES REGION
USGS 7.5′ quad Est. Habit unit Location name County map(s) Land ownership 1 Plover use 2 length 1:24,000 scale (km)
Whitefish Point to Grand Marais—
MI–1 ...... Whitefish Point ...... Chippewa ...... Whitefish Point (1951) Federal (USFWS), pri- Recent past, transient 2.5 vate. Vermilion/ Luce ...... Vermilion (1951) ...... Private ...... Current ...... 2.3 Weatherhogs Beach. Crisp Point ...... Luce ...... Betsy Lake North Municipal private ...... Recent past ...... 1.0 (1968). Little Lake Harbor ...... Luce ...... Betsy Lake North Private ...... Recent past ...... 1.6 (1968). Deer Park ...... Luce ...... Muskallonge Lake State, private ...... Recent past ...... 2.8 East (1968); Muskallonge Lake West (1968). Grand Marais Inner Alger ...... Grand Marais (1968) Multiple private, mu- Current ...... 2.9 Harbor and Lone- nicipal. some Point. Grand Marais Supe- Alger ...... Grand Marais (1968) Multiple private, Fed- Current ...... 1.2 rior Beach. eral (NPS). MI–2 ...... Point Aux Chenes ...... Mackinac ...... Pointe Aux Chenes Federal (USFS), pri- Current ...... 2.0 (1964, photorevised vate. 1975). MI–3 ...... Port Inland ...... Schoolcraft Hughes Point (1972) .. Private/State ...... Current ...... 3.0 Mackinac.
Waugoshance Point to beach west of McCort Hill—
MI–4 ...... Waugoshance Point Emmet ...... Big Stone Bay (1964, State ...... Current ...... 5.0 Temperance and photoinspected Crane Islands. 1975), Waugoshance Is- land (provisional 1982). Sturgeon Bay ...... Emmet ...... Bliss (1982) ...... State ...... Current ...... 3.9 Bliss Township Park .. Emmet ...... Bliss (1982) ...... Municipal ...... Current ...... 1.1 Sturgeon Bay Point .... Emmet ...... Bliss (1982) Cross Vil- Multiple private ...... Current ...... 2.4 lage (1982).
VerDate 11
TABLE 2.—LOCATION, OWNERSHIP, PIPING PLOVER USE, AND ESTIMATED LENGTH OF CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS WITHIN MAPPED CONSERVATION UNITS IN THE U.S. GREAT LAKES REGION—Continued
USGS 7.5′ quad Est. Habit unit Location name County map(s) Land ownership 1 Plover use 2 length 1:24,000 scale (km)
Cross Village Beach .. Emmet ...... Cross Village (1982) .. Municipal, multiple pri- Current ...... 1.3 vate. Beach West McCort Emmet ...... Cross Village (1982) .. Multiple private ...... Current ...... 1.4 Hill.
Sevenmile Point to Thorneswift Nature Preserve—
MI–5 ...... Sevenmile Point ...... Emmet ...... Forest Beach (1983 Multiple private ...... Suitable ...... 0.5 provisional). Thorneswift Nature Emmet ...... Forest Beach (1983 Multiple private ...... Current ...... 0.4 Preserve. provisional). MI–6 ...... Petoskey State Park .. Emmet ...... Harbor Springs (1983 State, private ...... Historical ...... 2.0 provisional). MI–7 ...... North Point ...... Charlevoix ...... Ironton (1983), Municipal ...... Suitable ...... 1.1 Charlevoix (1983). MI–8 ...... Fisherman’s Island Charlevoix ...... Charlevoix (1983) ...... State ...... Current ...... 1.3 State Park.
Indian Point to McCauley’s Point, Beaver Island—
MI–9 ...... Donegal Bay-Beaver Charlevoix ...... Garden Island West Multiple private ...... Current ...... 2.0 Island. (1980), Beaver Is- land North (1986). McCauley’s Point- Charlevoix ...... Beaver Island North State ...... Recent past ...... 0.6 Beaver Island. (1986). MI–10 ...... Greenes Bay-Beaver Charlevoix ...... Beaver Island North State/private ...... Recent past ...... 0.8 Island. (1986). MI–11 ...... High Island ...... Charlevoix ...... High Island (1986) ..... State ...... Current ...... 1.8
Cathead Bay to Christmas Cove—
MI–12 ...... Cathead Bay ...... Leelanau ...... Northport (provisional State/private ...... Current ...... 2.6 1983). Cathead Point to Leelanau ...... Northport/Northport Private ...... Suitable ...... 2.5 Christmas Cove. NW (provisional 1983). MI–13 ...... South Fox Island ...... Leelanau ...... South Fox Island (pro- State ...... Historical ...... 6.0 visional 1986). MI–14 ...... North Manitou ...... Leelanau ...... North Manitou Island Federal (NPS) ...... Current ...... 3.3 (provisional 1983). MI–15 ...... Crystal Run to Empire Leelanau ...... Glen Arbor (1983), Municipal, Federal ..... Suitable ...... 18.6 Beach. Glen Haven (1983), Empire (1983).
Esch Road to Sutter Road and Point Betsie—
MI–16 ...... Platte Bay and Platte Benzie ...... Empire (1983), Beulah Federal (NPS) ...... Suitable/current ...... 13.8 River Point and (provisional 1983). beach. Point Betsie ...... Benzie ...... Frankfort (1983) ...... Federal (USCG) TNC Historical ...... 4.8 managed, private. MI–17 ...... Nordhouse Dunes to Mason ...... Manistee NW (provi- Federal (USFS), State Transient, historical .... 13.4 Ludington. sional 1982), Ham- lin Lake (1982). MI–18 ...... Muskegon State Park Muskegon ...... Muskegon West State ...... Historical ...... 2.5 (1972, photoinspected 1980). MI–19 ...... Lake Superior State Chippewa ...... Albany Island (1964, State ...... Historical ...... 3.0 Forest, St. Vital photoinspected Point. 1976), DeTour Vil- lage (1964).
Lighthouse Point to Cordwood Point—
MI–20 ...... Lighthouse Point ...... Cheboygan .... Cheboygan (1982) ..... State ...... Recent past ...... 1.4 Grass Bay ...... Cheboygan .... Cordwood Point TNC preserve ...... Historical transient ..... 1.6 (1982).
VerDate 11
TABLE 2.—LOCATION, OWNERSHIP, PIPING PLOVER USE, AND ESTIMATED LENGTH OF CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS WITHIN MAPPED CONSERVATION UNITS IN THE U.S. GREAT LAKES REGION—Continued
USGS 7.5′ quad Est. Habit unit Location name County map(s) Land ownership 1 Plover use 2 length 1:24,000 scale (km)
MI–21 ...... PH Hoeft State Park .. Pesque Isle .... Roger’s City (1971), State ...... Suitable ...... 3.7 Moltke (1971). MI–22 ...... Thompson’s Harbor ... Presque Isle ... Thompson’s Harbor State, private ...... Suitable ...... 2.8 (1971). MI–23 ...... Tawas Point State Iosco ...... East Tawas (1989) .... State ...... Suitable, transient ...... 2.0 Park. MN/WI–1 ...... Duluth Harbor ...... St. Louis ...... West Duluth (1953, State, private ...... Recent past ...... 0.6 photorevised 1969). WI–1 ...... Wisconsin Point ...... Douglas ...... Parkland (1954, Municipal, Federal Historical ...... 4.0 photorevised 1975), (USACE). Superior (1954, photorevised 1983). WI–2 ...... Long Island- Ashland ...... Cedar (1964, Federal (NPS) tribal Current ...... 25.3 Chequamegon Pt. photorevised 1975), (Bad River), private. Chequamegon Point (1964, photorevised 1975), Long Island (1964). WI–3 ...... Western Michigan Is- Ashland ...... Michigan Island Federal (NPS) ...... Suitable ...... 6.5 land. (1963). WI–4 ...... Seagull Bar ...... Marinette ...... Marinette East (1963, State, municipal ...... Suitable ...... 1.5 photorevised 1969). WI–5 ...... Point Beach State Manitowoc ...... Two Rivers (1978) ..... State ...... Suitable ...... 8.0 Forest. IL–1 ...... Illinois Beach State Lake ...... Zion, Ill. (1993), Wau- Municipal, State, pri- Historical ...... 10.2 Park to Waukegan kegan (1993). vate. Beach. IN–1 ...... Indiana Dunes Na- Porter ...... Ogden Dunes (1991), Federal (NPS), State Historical, transient .... 7.9 tional Lakeshore/In- Dunes Acres (1991). diana Dunes State Park. OH–1 ...... Sheldon Marsh ...... Erie ...... Huron (1969), San- State, private ...... Transient ...... 3.2 dusky (1969, photorevised 1975). OH–2 ...... Headlands Dunes ...... Lake ...... Mentor (1963, revised State ...... Historical/suitable ...... 0.8 1992). PA–1 ...... Presque Isle State Erie ...... Erie North (1957, re- State ...... Historical, transient .... 6.0 Park. vised 1969 and 1975, photoinspected 1977). NY–1 ...... Salmon River to Stony Oswego, Jef- Pulaski (1956), State, multiple private Historical ...... 27.4 Point. ferson. Ellisburg (1958), Henderson (1959). 1 USACE = U.S. Army Corp of Engineers;NPS = National Park Service;TNC = The Nature Conservancy;USFS = U.S. Forest Service;USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;USCG = U.S. Coast Guard. 2 Current = used for nesting since 1995; recent past = used for nesting since 1985; historical = used for nesting prior to 1985; transient = re- cent (since 1990) sightings of piping plovers; suitable = no known record of use but habitat appears suitable for nesting and is within the historic range of piping plover.
Michigan km (22.4 mi) are privately owned, and Unit MI–2: Pointe Aux Chenes approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi) are part Unit MI–1: Whitefish Point to Grand of Whitefish Point National Wildlife This unit encompasses approximately Marais Refuge. This unit also includes a small 1.7 km (1.1 mi) of Lake Michigan shoreline in Mackinac County on the This unit encompasses approximately area of municipal property at Crisp Upper Peninsula of Michigan. It 83.5 km (50 mi) of Lake Superior Point. This unit extends from just includes areas that are currently shoreline in Chippewa, Luce, and Alger southwest of Whitefish Point, around occupied by piping plovers. The Counties on the Upper Peninsula of and including the Point, and westward majority of the unit (1.1 km (0.7 mi)) is Michigan. It includes long stretches of to the Pictured Rocks National within the Hiawatha National Forest habitat that have been recently used by Lakeshore property boundary, excluding and is being considered for a Research piping plovers in addition to areas the area from the junction of Highway and Natural Area. The rest of the unit currently used by plovers. 58 and Morris Road to the breakwall Approximately 47 km (29.2 mi) are part north of the harbor near the former (approximately 0.6 km (0.4 mi)) is of Muskallonge State Park and Lake Coast Guard station in Grand Marais. privately owned land. This unit extends Superior State Forest, approximately 36 from the mouth of the Pointe Aux
VerDate 11
Chenes river to the Hiawatha National Park. This unit extends from the mouth plovers. The entire designated area is Forest property boundary. of Tannery Creek to Mononaqua Beach. part of the Beaver Islands State Wildlife Research Area. This unit includes all Unit MI–3: Port Inland to Hughes Point Unit MI–7: North Point Lake Michigan shoreline within T39N This unit encompasses approximately This unit encompasses approximately R11W section 32 and T38N R11W 3 km (1.8 mi) of Lake Michigan 1.1 km (0.7 mi) of Lake Michigan section 5 on the western side of the shoreline in western Mackinac and shoreline in Charlevoix County, island and within T39N R11W section eastern Schoolcraft Counties on the Michigan. It includes areas of suitable 27 on the northeastern corner of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. It piping plover nesting habitat. The entire island. includes areas that are currently designated area is a city park owned by the city of Charlevoix. It includes all Unit MI–12: Cathead Bay to Christmas occupied by piping plovers. Cove Approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of the Lake Michigan shoreline within T34N designated shoreline is owned by Port R8W section 14. This unit encompasses approximately 5.1 km (3.2 mi) of Lake Michigan Inland Stone and Dolomite Quarry and Unit MI–8: Fisherman’s Island State shoreline in Leelanau County, the remaining 2.2 km (1.4 mi) are part Park of the Lake Superior State Forest. This Michigan. It includes areas that are unit extends from the westernmost This unit encompasses approximately currently occupied by piping plovers breakwall at the Port Inland Gaging 1.3 km (0.8 miles) of Lake Michigan and areas of suitable piping plover Station to the mouth of Swan Creek. shoreline in Charlevoix County, nesting habitat. Approximately 1.9 km Michigan. It includes areas that are (1.2 mi) are part of Leelanau State Park, Unit MI–4: Waugoshance Point to currently occupied by piping plovers. and the remaining 3.2 km (2.0 mi) are McCort Hill Beach The entire designated area is within privately owned land. This unit extends This unit encompasses approximately Fisherman’s Island State Park. This unit from the northwest end of Cathead Bay 32 km (19.2 mi) of Lake Michigan extends from the junction of the line southward to just north of Christmas shoreline in Emmet County, Michigan, separating T34N R8W section 31 and Cove, excluding lands of the Magic and includes Temperance and T33N R8W section 6 from the Lake Carpet Woods Association HCP. Michigan shore to the Fisherman’s Waugoshance islands. It includes areas Unit MI–13: South Fox Island that are currently occupied by piping Island State Park property boundary at This unit encompasses approximately plovers and supports about half of the the end of Lakeshore Drive, including 6 km (3.8 mi) of Lake Michigan current Great Lakes piping plover Fisherman Island. shoreline on South Fox Island in population. Approximately 8.5 km (5.3 Unit MI–9: Indian Point to McCauley’s Leelanau County, Michigan. It includes mi) are privately owned and 1 km (0.6 Point, Beaver Island areas that were historically occupied by mi) is municipal land (Bliss Township This unit encompasses approximately piping plovers. The entire designated beach and Cross Village beach). The 5 km (3.1 mi) of Lake Michigan area is part of the Beaver Island State remaining 22.5 km (14 mi) are part of shoreline on Beaver Island in Wildlife Research Area. This unit Wilderness State Park. This unit extends Charlevoix County, Michigan. It includes all Lake Michigan shoreline from the junction of the northeast corner includes areas that are currently within T34N R13W sections 15, 16, and of T39N R5W section 28 and the Lake occupied, as well as areas that have 21 on the south end of the island and Michigan shoreline in Wilderness State been recently used by piping plovers. within T35N R13W section 30 on the Park, including Waugoshance and Approximately 4.4 km (2.7 mi) are north end of the island. Temperance Islands, to the southwest privately owned and 0.6 km (0.4 mi) is boundary of T37N R6W section 5 south part of Beaver Islands State Wildlife Unit MI–14: North and South Manitou of Cross Village. Research Area. This unit extends from Islands Unit MI–5: Sevenmile Point to Indian Point southward to the junction This unit encompasses approximately Thornswift Nature Preserve of the dividing line of T39 N R10W and 3.3 km (2.1 mi) of Lake Michigan T38N R10W and the Lake Michigan shoreline on North Manitou Island in This unit encompasses approximately shoreline. Leelanau County, Michigan. It includes 7 km (4.3 mi) of Lake Michigan areas that are currently occupied by shoreline in Emmet County, Michigan. Unit MI–10: Greenes Bay, Beaver Island piping plovers. The entire designated It includes areas of suitable piping This unit encompasses approximately area is part of Sleeping Bear Dunes plover nesting habitat and areas that are 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of Lake Michigan National Lakeshore. This unit includes currently occupied by piping plovers. shoreline on Beaver Island in Dimmick’s Point and Donner’s Point on The entire designated area is under Charlevoix County, Michigan. It the southern end of North Manitou private ownership. It extends from the includes areas that have been recently Island. junction of the Lake Michigan shoreline used by piping plovers. Approximately Unit MI–15: Crystal Run to Empire and the northwest boundary of T36N 0.3 km (0.2 mi) is part of the Beaver Beach R6W section 30 to the junction of the Islands State Wildlife Research Area shoreline and the southeast corner of and the remaining 0.5 km (0.3 mi) is This unit encompasses approximately T35N R6W section 9. privately owned land. This unit 18.6 km (11.6 mi) of Lake Michigan shoreline in Leelanau County, Unit MI–6: Petoskey State Park encompasses Greenes Bay on the western side of Beaver Island. Michigan. It includes areas of suitable This unit encompasses approximately piping plover nesting habitat. 2 km (1.2 mi) of Lake Michigan Unit MI–11: High Island Approximately 4.8 km (3.0 mi) are shoreline in Emmet County, Michigan. This unit encompasses approximately municipal beach in Glen Arbor It includes areas of historical piping 1.8 km (1.1 mi) of Lake Michigan Township, and the remaining 13.8 km plover habitat. Approximately 0.7 km shoreline on High Island in Charlevoix (8.6 mi) are part of Sleeping Bear Dunes (0.4 mi) is privately owned land and 1.3 County, Michigan. It includes areas that National Lakeshore. This unit extends km (0.8 mi) are part of Petoskey State are currently occupied by piping from Crystal Run to the southern
VerDate 11
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore State Forest. This unit extends from the plover nesting has not been documented property boundary. Lake Superior State Forest boundary to on this island, it contains viable piping the mouth of Joe Straw Creek. plover habitat. A portion of the 0.6 km Unit MI–16: Esch Road to Sutter Road (0.4 mi) of island shoreline on Interstate and Point Betsie Unit MI–20: Lighthouse Point to Island is in Minnesota, and a portion is Cordwood Point This unit encompasses approximately in Wisconsin. Approximately 0.2 km 18.6 km (11.6 mi) of Lake Michigan This unit encompasses approximately (0.1 mi) of Interstate Island shoreline is shoreline in Benzie County, Michigan. It 5.2 km (3.3 mi) of Lake Huron shoreline owned by the State of Minnesota and is includes areas that are currently in Cheboygan County, Michigan. It a State Wildlife Management Area and occupied by piping plovers, areas that includes areas that were historically bird sanctuary. The remaining 0.4 km were historically occupied, and areas of occupied by piping plovers and (0.2 mi) of Interstate Island shoreline is suitable piping plover nesting habitat. currently serve as foraging areas. in Wisconsin and is private land owned The majority of the unit (13.8 km (8.6 Approximately 3 km (1.9 mi) are part of by C. Rice Coal and Burlington Northern mi)) is part of Sleeping Bear Dunes Cheboygan State Park, and Railroad. This unit is comprised of National Lakeshore, 3.8 km (2.4 mi) are approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) are Nature Interstate Island. private land, and the remaining 1.0 km Conservancy property. The remaining Wisconsin (0.6 mi) is U.S. Coast Guard land that is 0.6 km (0.4 mi) is privately owned land. managed by The Nature Conservancy, a This unit extends from the junction of Unit WI–1: Wisconsin Point the Lake Huron shoreline and the private conservation organization. This This unit encompasses approximately western boundary of T38N R1W section unit extends from Esch Road to the 4.0 km (2.5 mi) of Lake Superior 22 near Lighthouse Point to just west of Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore shoreline in Douglas County, Cordwood Point. property boundary at Sutter Road. The Wisconsin. It includes areas that were unit then continues from the Point Unit MI–21: P.H. Hoeft State Park historically occupied by piping plovers. Betsie Natural Area northern property This unit encompasses approximately Approximately 0.4 km (0.2 mi) of the boundary south to include all shoreline unit is Army Corps of Engineers land. within T26N R16W section 4. 3.7 km (2.3 mi) of Lake Huron shoreline in Presque Isle County, Michigan. It The rest of the designated area is Unit MI–17: Nordhouse Dunes and includes areas of suitable piping plover municipal land belonging to the city of Ludington State Park nesting habitat. The entire designated Superior. This unit extends from the area is part of P.H. Hoeft State Park. mouth of Dutchman Creek to the This unit encompasses approximately Douglas and St. Louis County line. 13.4 km (8.3 mi) of Lake Michigan This unit includes Lake Huron shoreline shoreline in Mason County, Michigan. It within T35N R5E section 6 Unit WI–2: Long Island/Chequamegon includes areas that were historically northwestward to the junction of Nagel Point Road and Forty Mile Road. occupied by piping plovers. At least one This unit encompasses approximately pair of piping plovers were sighted in Unit MI–22: Thompson’s Harbor State 25.3 km (15.7 mi) of Lake Superior the area in 1999, but no nests were Park shoreline in Ashland County, found. Approximately 7.4 km (4.6 mi) This unit encompasses approximately Wisconsin. It includes areas currently are part of the Manistee National Forest/ 2.8 km (1.7 mi) of Lake Huron shoreline occupied by piping plovers. Nesting Nordhouse Dunes Wilderness Area, and in Presque Isle County, Michigan. It occurred in this unit in 1998 and 1999. the remaining 6.0 km (3.7 mi) are part includes areas of suitable piping plover Approximately 11.2 km (6.9 mi) are part of Ludington State Park. This unit nesting habitat. Most of this designated of the Apostle Islands National extends from the mouth of Cooper Creek area is within Thompson’s Harbor State Lakeshore, approximately 9.0 km (5.6 to the mouth of the Big Sable River. Park with a small portion of privately mi) are private land, and the remaining Unit MI–18: Muskegon State Park owned land. This unit extends along the 5.1 km (3.2 mi) are Tribal lands belonging to the Bad River Band of Lake This unit encompasses approximately Lake Huron shoreline from Black Point to Grand Lake Outlet. Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians. 2.5 km (1.6 mi) of Lake Michigan This unit extends from the base of shoreline in Muskegon County, Unit MI–23: Tawas Point State Park Chequamegon Point (where it meets the Michigan. It includes areas that were This unit encompasses approximately mainland) to Chequamegon Point Light. historically occupied by piping plovers. 2.0 km (1.2 mi) of Lake Huron shoreline In the early 1950s, several pairs of Unit WI–3: Western Michigan Island in Iosco County, Michigan. It includes piping plovers were reported nesting in Beach and Dunes areas used for foraging by transient this unit, but the last known nesting was This unit encompasses approximately piping plovers and suitable nesting in 1953. The entire designated area is 6.5 km (4 mi) of Lake Superior shoreline habitat. The entire designated area is part of Muskegon State Park. This unit on Michigan Island in Ashland County, part of Tawas Point State Park. This unit extends from the north breakwall of the Wisconsin. It includes areas of suitable extends from the Tawas Sate Park canal joining Muskegon Lake and Lake piping plover nesting habitat. The entire boundary on the east side of Tawas Michigan to the northern Muskegon designated area is part of the Apostle Point including all shoreline within State Park property boundary at the Island National Lakeshore. This unit T22N R8E section 34 and offshore sand shoreline. includes all Lake Superior shoreline on spits. Michigan Island within T51N R1W Unit MI–19: Lake Superior State Forest- Minnesota/Wisconsin sections 28, 20, and 21. St. Vital Point This unit encompasses approximately Unit MN/WI–1: Interstate Island Unit WI–4: Seagull Bar 3.0 km (1.9 mi) of Lake Huron shoreline This unit encompasses approximately This unit encompasses approximately in Chippewa County, Michigan. It 0.6 km (0.4 mi) of Lake Superior 1.5 km (0.9 mi) of Lake Michigan includes areas that were historically shoreline on Interstate Island in St. shoreline in Marinette County, occupied by piping plovers. The entire Louis County, Minnesota and Douglas Wisconsin. It includes areas of suitable designated area is within Lake Superior County, Wisconsin. Although piping piping plover nesting habitat. About one
VerDate 11
half of the unit is State owned and the foraging areas for transient piping authorize, or carry out do not destroy or other half is municipal property owned plovers and suitable nesting habitat. adversely modify critical habitat to the by the city of Marinette. This unit Approximately 1.2 km (0.7 mi) are part extent that the action appreciably extends from the end of Leonard Street of Sheldon Marsh State Nature Preserve, diminishes the value of the critical at Red Arrow Park to the south end of and the remaining 2.0 km (1.2 mi) are habitat for the survival and recovery of Seagull Bar including nearshore sand privately owned land. This unit extends the species. Individuals, organizations, bars. from the mouth of Sawmill Creek to the States, Tribes, local governments, and western property boundary of Sheldon other non-Federal entities are affected Unit WI–5: Point Beach State Forest Marsh State Natural Area. by the designation of critical habitat This unit encompasses approximately only if their actions occur on Federal Unit OH–2: Headland Dunes 8 km (5 mi) of Lake Michigan shoreline lands, require a Federal permit, license, in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. It This unit encompasses approximately or other authorization, or involve includes areas of suitable piping plover 0.8 km (0.5 mi) of Lake Erie shoreline Federal funding. nesting habitat. The entire designated in Lake County, Ohio. It includes Section 7(a) of the Act requires all area is part of the Point Beach State historical nesting habitat and areas of Federal agencies to evaluate their Forest. This unit extends from the suitable piping plover nesting habitat. actions with respect to any species that southwest property boundary of Point The entire designated area is part of is proposed or listed as endangered or Beach State Forest to Rawley Point. Headland Dunes State Nature Preserve. threatened and with respect to its This unit extends from the eastern Illinois proposed or designated critical habitat. boundary line of Headland Dunes Regulations implementing this Unit IL–1: Illinois Beach State Park and Nature Preserve to the western interagency cooperation provision of the Nature Preserve to Waukegan Beach boundary of the Nature Preserve and Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. This unit encompasses approximately Headland Dunes State Park. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires 10.2 km (6.3 mi) of Lake Michigan Pennsylvania Federal agencies to confer with us on shoreline in Lake County, Illinois. It any action that is likely to jeopardize includes areas that were historically Unit PA–1: Gull Point Natural Area, the continued existence of a proposed occupied by piping plovers. Presque Isle State Park species or result in destruction or Approximately 4.7 km (2.9 mi) are part This unit encompasses approximately adverse modification of proposed of the Illinois Beach State Park and 6.0 km (3.7 mi) of Lake Erie shoreline critical habitat. Conference reports Nature Preserve, approximately 1.3 km in Erie County, Pennsylvania. It provide conservation recommendations (0.8 mi) are municipal property (Zion includes foraging areas for transient to assist the agency in eliminating municipal park and Waukegan piping plovers and areas that were conflicts that may be caused by the municipal beach), and the remaining 4.2 historically used for nesting. The entire proposed action. The conservation km (2.6 mi) are privately owned. This unit is part of the Presque Isle State recommendations in a conference report unit extends from 17th Street and the Park. This unit extends from the are advisory. If a species is listed or Lake Michigan shoreline in Illinois lighthouse north of Peninsula Drive on critical habitat is designated, section Beach State Park southward to the the north side of Presque Isle to the 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to northernWaukegan Beach breakwall at southern terminus of the hiking trail on ensure that activities they authorize, North Beach Park, excluding the public the southeast side of Gull Point. It fund, or carry out are not likely to beach and campground to just south of includes any new beach habitat that jeopardize the continued existence of the Illinois Beach State Park Lodge and may accrete along the present shoreline the species or to destroy or adversely Conference Center. portion of the unit. modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its Indiana New York critical habitat, the responsible Federal Unit IN–1: Indiana Dunes National Unit NY–1: Salmon River to Stony Point agency (action agency) must consult with us. Through this consultation we Lakeshore and Indiana Dunes State This unit encompasses approximately Park Beaches would ensure that the permitted actions 27.4 km (17 mi) of Lake Ontario do not destroy or adversely modify This unit encompasses approximately shoreline in Jefferson and Oswego critical habitat. 7.9 km (4.9 mi) of Lake Michigan Counties, New York. It includes areas When we issue a biological opinion shoreline in Porter County, Indiana. It that were historically occupied by concluding that a Federal action is includes areas that were historically piping plovers. Approximately 12.4 km likely to result in the destruction or occupied by piping plovers. 5 km (3.1 (7.7 mi) are State land (New York State adverse modification of critical habitat, mi) are part of Indiana Dunes State Park Department of Environmental we also provide reasonable and prudent and the remaining 2.9 km (1.8 mi) are Conservation (DEC) Wildlife alternatives to the project, if any are part of Indiana Dunes National Management Area/ New York DEC identifiable. Reasonable and prudent Lakeshore. This unit extends from the Unique Area and New York State Park), alternatives are defined at 50 CFR western boundary of the Cowels Bog/ approximately 14.6 km (9.1 mi) are 402.02 as alternative actions identified Dune Acres Unit, east of the Port of privately owned, and the remaining 0.4 during consultation that can be Indiana and the NIPSCO Baily km (0.2 mi) belong to The Nature implemented in a manner consistent Generating Station and along the Conservancy. This unit extends from the with the intended purpose of the action, Indiana Dunes State Park to Kemil Road mouth of the Salmon River to the that are consistent with the scope of the at Beverly Shores. Eldorado Road. Federal agency’s legal authority and Ohio Effects of Critical Habitat Designation jurisdiction, that are economically and technologically feasible, and that we Unit OH–1: Sheldon Marsh Section 7 Consultation believe would avoid destruction or This unit encompasses approximately Section 7(a) of the Act requires all adverse modification of critical habitat. 3.2 km (2.0 mi) of Lake Erie shoreline Federal agencies, including the Service, Reasonable and prudent alternatives can in Erie County, Ohio. It includes to ensure that actions they fund, vary from slight project modifications to
VerDate 11
extensive redesign or relocation of the actions that may affect a listed species. may be voluntary by governmental and project. Costs associated with Section 7 prohibits actions funded, private land managers. Most closures implementing a reasonable and prudent authorized, or carried out by Federal would end prior to the time the public alternative are similarly variable. agencies from jeopardizing the would frequent these beaches. Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require continued existence of a listed species This section serves in part as a general Federal agencies to reinitiate or destroying or adversely modifying the guide to clarify activities that may affect consultation on previously reviewed listed species’ critical habitat. Actions or destroy or adversely modify critical actions in instances where critical likely to ‘‘jeopardize the continued habitat. However, specific Federal habitat is subsequently designated and existence’’ of a species are those that actions should be reviewed by the the Federal agency has retained would appreciably reduce the action agency. If the agency determines discretionary involvement or control likelihood of the species’ survival and the activity may affect critical habitat, over the action or such discretionary recovery. Actions likely to ‘‘destroy or they will consult with us under section involvement or control is authorized by adversely modify’’ critical habitat are 7 of the Act. We will work with the law. Consequently, some Federal those that would appreciably reduce the agencies and affected public early in the agencies may request reinitiation of value of critical habitat for the survival consultation process to avoid or consultation with us on actions for and recovery of the listed species. minimize potential conflicts and, which formal consultation has been Common to both definitions is an whenever possible, find a solution that completed, if those actions may affect appreciable detrimental effect on both protects listed species and their habitat designated critical habitat. Further, survival and recovery of a listed species. while allowing the action to go forward some Federal agencies may have Given the similarity of these definitions, in a manner consistent with its intended conferenced with us on proposed actions likely to destroy or adversely purpose. critical habitat. We may adopt the modify critical habitat would almost Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) formal conference report as the always result in jeopardy to the species biological opinion when critical habitat concerned when the area of the Subsection 4(b)(2) of the Act allows is designated, if no significant new proposed action is occupied by the us to exclude areas from critical habitat information or changes in the action species. In those cases, it is highly designation where the benefits of alter the content of the opinion (see 50 unlikely that additional modifications to exclusion outweigh the benefits of CFR 402.10(d)). the action would be required as a result designation, provided the exclusion will Activities on Federal lands that may of designating critical habitat. However, not result in the extinction of the affect the piping plover or its critical critical habitat may provide benefits species. For the following reasons, we habitat will require section 7 toward recovery when designated in believe that in most instances the consultation. Activities on private, State areas unoccupied by the species. benefits of excluding areas covered by or Tribal lands requiring a permit from Designation of critical habitat could approved Habitat Conservation Plans the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army affect Federal agency activities. Federal (HCPs) from critical habitat designations Corps) under section 404 of the Clean agencies already consult with us on will outweigh the benefits of including Water Act, or some other Federal action, activities that may affect the species to them. including funding (e.g from the Federal ensure that their actions do not (1) Benefits of Inclusion Highway Administration, jeopardize the continued existence of Environmental Protection Agency, or the species. These actions include, but The benefits of including HCP lands Federal Emergency Management are not limited to: (1) Marina and boat in critical habitat are normally small. Agency) will also continue to be subject launch construction and maintenance; The principal benefit of any designated to the section 7 consultation process. (2) harbor dredging and dredge spoil critical habitat is that Federal activities Federal actions not affecting listed placement and disposal; (3) fill of in such habitat that may affect it require species or critical habitat and actions on interdunal wetlands for residence, consultation under section 7 of the Act. non-Federal lands that are not federally driveway, or other construction; (4) Such consultation would ensure that funded or permitted do not require waste-water discharge from adequate protection is provided to avoid section 7 consultation. communities; (5) all-terrain vehicular adverse modification of critical habitat. Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us activity on beaches or the construction Where HCPs are in place, our to evaluate briefly in any proposed or of facilities that increase such activity; experience indicates that this benefit is final regulation that designates critical (6) beach stabilization activities that small or non-existent. Currently habitat those activities involving a impede natural overwash processes approved and permitted HCPs are Federal action that may adversely including beach nourishment, planting already designed to ensure the long- modify such habitat or may be affected of vegetation, and construction and term survival of covered species within by such designation. Activities that may maintenance of seawalls, breakwaters, the plan area. Where we have an destroy or adversely modify critical and other off-shore stabilizing devices; approved HCP, lands that we ordinarily habitat include those that alter the (7) sale, exchange, or lease of Federal would define as critical habitat for the primary constituent elements to the land that contains suitable habitat that covered species will normally be extent that the value of critical habitat is likely to result in the habitat being protected in reserves and other for both the survival and recovery of the destroyed or appreciably degraded; (8) conservation lands by the terms of the Great Lakes breeding population of the oil and other hazardous material spills HCP and its implementation piping plover is appreciably and cleanup; and (9) stormwater and agreements. The HCP and diminished. We note that such activities wastewater discharge from implementation agreements include may also jeopardize the continued communities. Additionally, public management measures and protections existence of the species. access may be temporarily or seasonally for conservation lands that are crafted to To properly portray the effects of restricted on beaches under Federal protect, restore, and enhance their value critical habitat designation, we must ownership or jurisdiction to reduce as habitat for covered species. first compare the section 7 requirements disturbance so that piping plovers in In addition, a 10(a)(1)(B) permit for actions that may affect critical search of suitable nesting sites could issued by us as a result of an HCP habitat with the requirements for utilize them. Some of these closures application must itself undergo
VerDate 11
consultation. While this consultation innovative solutions to conserve species the stage for more effective conservation may not look specifically at the issue of while allowing for development. The actions in the future. adverse modification of critical habitat, educational benefits of critical habitat, In general, we believe the benefits of it will look at the very similar concept including informing the public of areas critical habitat designation to be small of jeopardy to the listed species in the that are important for the long-term in areas covered by approved HCPs. We plan area. Since HCPs, particularly large survival and conservation of the species, also believe that the benefits of regional HCPs, address land use within are essentially the same as those that excluding HCPs from designation are the plan boundaries, habitat issues would occur from the public notice and significant. Weighing the small benefits within the plan boundaries will have comment procedures required to of inclusion against the benefits of been thoroughly addressed in the HCP establish an HCP, as well as the public exclusion, including the benefits of and the consultation on the HCP. Our participation that occurs in the relieving property owners of an experience is also that, under most development of many regional HCPs. additional layer of approvals and circumstances, consultations under the For these reasons, then, we believe that regulation, together with the jeopardy standard will reach the same designation of critical habitat has little encouragement of conservation result as consultations under the benefit in areas covered by HCPs. partnerships, would generally result in adverse modification standard. HCPs being excluded from critical (2) Benefits of Exclusion Implementing regulations (50 CFR Part habitat designation under Section 402) define ‘‘jeopardize the continued The benefits of excluding HCPs from 4(b)(2) of the Act. existence of’’ and ‘‘destruction or being designated as critical habitat may Not all HCPs are alike with regard to adverse modification of’’ in virtually be more significant. During two public species coverage and design. Within this identical terms. Jeopardize the comment periods on our critical habitat general analytical framework, we need continued existence of means to engage policy, we received several comments to individually evaluate completed and in an action ‘‘that reasonably would be about the additional regulatory and legally operative HCPs in the range of expected to reduce appreciably the economic burden of designating critical the Great Lakes breeding population of likelihood of both the survival and habitat. These include the need for the piping plover to determine whether recovery of a listed species.’’ additional consultation with the Service the benefits of excluding these Destruction or adverse modification and the need for additional surveys and particular areas outweigh the benefits of means an ‘‘alteration that appreciably information gathering to complete these including them. diminishes the value of critical habitat consultations. HCP applicants have also Presently, one approved HCP exists for both the survival and recovery of a stated that they are concerned that third for the piping plover in the Great Lakes listed species.’’ Common to both parties may challenge HCPs on the basis region. The Magic Carpet Woods definitions is an appreciable detrimental that they result in adverse modification Association HCP covers approximately effect on both survival and recovery of or destruction of critical habitat, should 792 meters (2,600 feet) of shoreline a listed species, in the case of critical critical habitat be designated within the within the proposed Cathead Bay habitat by reducing the value of the HCP boundaries. critical habitat unit in Leelanau County, habitat so designated. Thus, actions The benefits of excluding HCPs Michigan. This plan addresses the satisfying the standard for adverse include relieving landowners, piping plover as a covered species and modification are nearly always found to communities and counties of any provides conservation management and also jeopardize the species concerned, additional minor regulatory review that protection for the species. We evaluated and the existence of a critical habitat might be imposed by critical habitat. this plan and determined that the designation does not materially affect Many HCPs, particularly large regional conservation management measures and the outcome of consultation. Additional HCPs, take many years to develop and, protection afforded the piping plover measures to protect the habitat from upon completion, become regional are sufficient to assure its conservation adverse modification are not likely to be conservation plans that are consistent on the involved lands. Consequently, required. with the recovery of covered species. we have determined that the benefits of Further, HCPs typically provide for Many of these regional plans benefit excluding this area outweigh the greater conservation benefits to a many species, both listed and unlisted. benefits of inclusion, and have excluded covered species than section 7 Imposing an additional regulatory the area covered by the HCP from the consultations because HCPs assure the review after HCP completion may fixed critical habitat designation. long term protection and management of jeopardize conservation efforts and In the event that future HCPs covering a covered species and its habitat, and partnerships in many areas and could be the Great Lakes breeding population of funding for such management through viewed as a disincentive to those the piping plover are developed within the standards found in the 5-Point developing HCPs. Excluding HCPs the boundaries of designated critical Policy for HCPs (64 FR 35242) and the provides us with an opportunity to habitat, we will work with applicants to HCP No Surprises regulation (63 FR streamline regulatory compliance and ensure that the HCPs provide for 8859). Such assurances are typically not confirms regulatory assurances for HCP protection and management of habitat provided by section 7 consultations participants. areas essential for the conservation of which, in contrast to HCPs, often do not A related benefit of excluding HCPs is the piping plover by either directing commit the project proponent to long that it would encourage the continued development and habitat modification term special management or protections. development of partnerships with HCP to nonessential areas or appropriately Thus, a consultation typically does not participants, including States, local modifying activities within essential accord the lands it covers the extensive governments, conservation habitat areas so that such activities will benefits an HCP provides. organizations, and private landowners, not adversely modify the primary The development and implementation that together can implement constituent elements. The HCP of HCPs provide other important conservation actions we would be development process provides an conservation benefits, including the unable to accomplish alone. By opportunity for more intensive data development of biological information excluding areas covered by HCPs from collection and analysis regarding the to guide conservation efforts and assist critical habitat designation, we preserve use of particular habitat areas by the in species recovery and the creation of these partnerships, and, we believe, set piping plover. The process also enables
VerDate 11
us to conduct detailed evaluations of the closing date of the reopened comment ‘‘Summary of Changes from Proposed importance of such lands to the long period to November 20, 2000. Rule’’ section of this document. term survival of the species. Comments received from July 6 to Issue 1: Biological Justification and We will provide technical assistance November 20, 2000, were entered into Methodology and work closely with applicants the administrative record. throughout the development of future We contacted all appropriate State The following comments and HCPs to identify lands essential for the and Federal agencies, Tribes, County responses involve issues related to the long-term conservation of the piping governments, elected officials, and other biological basis for the designation. plover and appropriate management for interested parties and invited them to (1A) Comment: The broad scale of the those lands. The take minimization and comment. In addition, we invited public proposed critical habitat includes areas mitigation measures provided under comments through the publication of that do not contain the primary these HCPs are expected to protect the notices in newspapers in Minnesota, constituent elements for the Great Lakes essential habitat lands designated as Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, piping plover. critical habitat in this rule. If an HCP Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. In Response: We recognize that not all that addresses the piping plover as a these notices and the proposed rule, we parcels of land within designated covered species is ultimately approved, announced the dates and times of seven critical habitat units will contain the the Service will reassess the critical public hearings to be held on the habitat components essential to piping habitat boundaries in light of the HCP. proposed rule. Their dates and locations plover conservation. We are required to The Service will seek to undertake this are specified above in the section designate critical habitat based on the review when the HCP is approved, but ‘‘Previous Federal Actions’’. Transcripts best available information and to funding constraints may influence the of these hearings are available for describe critical habitat (50 CFR timing of such a review. inspection (see addresses section). We 424.12(c)) with specific limits using Should additional information posted copies of the proposed rule and reference points and specific definable become available that changes our draft economic analysis on our internet boundaries. In preparation of the final analysis of the benefits of excluding any site (http://midwest.fws.gov/). determination, we used information of these (or other) areas compared to the We requested three ornithologists and gathered during the public comment benefits of including them in the critical conservation biologists, who have period to more accurately define the habitat designation, we may revise this familiarity with the piping plover and written critical habitat boundaries. final designation accordingly. its habitat requirements, to peer review Despite our efforts to exclude areas that Similarly, if new information the proposed critical habitat do not contain the primary constituent indicates any of these areas should not designation. All three responded by the elements for the piping plover from be included in the critical habitat close of the comment period. They critical habitat unit boundaries, it is not designation because they no longer meet provided valuable information about the practicable to develop unit boundaries the definition of critical habitat, we may biology, status, and historical range of revise this final critical habitat the species, and suggested removing and provide maps and legal descriptions designation. If, consistent with available some areas from the critical habitat that exclude all developed areas such as funding and program priorities, we elect designation that no longer meet the towns, housing developments, or other to revise this designation, we will do so criteria of piping plover critical habitat developed lands unlikely to provide for through a subsequent rulemaking. and provided data on other areas that the piping plover. Because of the time If you have questions regarding may deserve critical habitat designation constraints imposed by the Court, and whether specific activities will at a later date. These comments are the absence of detailed Geographic constitute adverse modification of addressed in this section, and relevant Information System (GIS) coverage we critical habitat, or requests for copies of data provided by the reviewers have defined the critical habitat unit the regulations on listed wildlife and been incorporated throughout the rule. boundaries as specifically as practicable inquiries about prohibitions and permits We received a total of 140 written and but, due to the mapping scale, some contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 36 oral comments during the 2 public areas not essential to the conservation of Service (see addresses section). comment periods. Several people the piping plover were included within submitted comments more than once. In the boundaries of proposed critical Summary of Comments and total, oral and written comments were habitat. However, developed areas such Recommendations received from 7 Federal agencies, 14 as buildings, marinas, paved areas, boat In the July 6, 2000, proposed rule (65 State agencies, 5 Tribal representatives, ramps, piers, bridges, lighthouses, and FR 41812), we requested all interested 3 elected officials, 10 local governments, similar human-made structures are not parties to submit comments on the 31 private organizations, and 97 private being designated as critical habitat. specifics of the proposal including individuals. Comments were received (1B) Comment: Designating critical information, policy, treatments of HCPs, from residents in 13 States, with habitat for the piping plover will result and proposed critical habitat boundaries Michigan sources submitting the most of in such high public animosity that the as provided in the proposed rule. The any one State. All comments received designation will cause more harm to the first comment period closed on were reviewed for substantive issues species than benefit. September 5, 2000. The comment period and new data regarding critical habitat Response: Public support is a vital was reopened for 30 days, from and the biology and status of the Great asset in the protection of endangered September 19 to October 20, 2000 (65 Lakes breeding population of the piping species and their habitat, but, by law we FR 56530), to allow for additional plover, and economic information. We must designate essential areas as critical comments on the proposed rule and address all relevant comments received habitat even if it will cause public comments on the draft economic during the comment periods and public backlash due to misconceptions about analysis of the proposed critical habitat. hearing testimonies in the following its impacts. In an effort to clear up Since our intention was to reopen the summary of issues. Comments of a misunderstandings about critical habitat comment period for 60 days, we similar nature are grouped into a single and to increase public support for published a correction on September 28, issue. Comments that we incorporated piping plovers, we are increasing our 2000 (65 FR 58258), correcting the into this final rule are discussed in the education and outreach programs.
VerDate 11
(1C) Comment: One person provides that areas outside the designation, provided the exclusion will commented that there is a lack of data geographic area currently occupied by not result in the extinction of the to support the proposed measures and the species may meet the definition of species. We believe that in most no data to support that designating critical habitat upon a determination instances the benefits of excluding HCPs critical habitat will result in an that they are essential for the from critical habitat designations will increased piping plover population. conservation of the species. Our outweigh the benefits of including them. Response: In accordance with section regulations also provide for the For this designation, we find that the 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at designation of areas outside the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which geographical area currently occupied if benefits of designation for the one areas to designate as critical habitat, we we find that a designation limited to its legally operative HCP issued for the are basing this critical habitat present range would be inadequate to piping plover in the Great Lakes. determination on the best scientific and ensure the conservation of the species We anticipate that future HCPs in the commercial data available at the time of (50 CFR 424.12(e)). range of the Great Lakes breeding designation. The designation indicates In 2000, there were about 30 breeding population of piping plovers will the areas that we believe are essential to pairs of piping plovers in the Great include it as a covered species and the conservation of the species. Lakes area, all of which occur in provide for its long term conservation. Designation of critical habitat is only Michigan (Stucker et al. 2000). The We expect that HCPs undertaken by one tool to use towards the recovery of Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains local jurisdictions (e.g. counties, cities) the piping plover, and we will continue Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS and other parties will identify, protect, to work with other Federal agencies, 1988b) establishes a recovery goal of 150 and provide appropriate management State and local agencies, Tribes, the breeding pairs in the Great Lakes for those specific lands within the scientific community, local landowners, watershed. This number is considered a boundaries of the plans that are and the public to eliminate and reduce minimum for the recovery of the species essential for the long term conservation the range of threats that endanger this and eventual removal from the of the species. Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the species. protections of Act. Of these 150 Act sates that HCPs must meet issuance (1D) Comment: Inland lakes are breeding pairs, at least 100 are to be in criteria, including minimizing and mentioned in the 1988 Recovery Plan as Michigan and at least 50 in other Great mitigating any take of the listed species potential breeding habitat around the Lakes States. In order to achieve this covered by the permit to the extent Great Lakes. Were smaller, inland lakes recovery goal, additional habitat areas practicable, and that the taking must not considered for designation? are needed beyond those currently appreciably reduce the likelihood of the Response: Inland lake records of occupied by the species. We have survival and recovery of the species in piping plovers in the Great Lakes are designated currently unoccupied areas the wild. We fully expect that our future very few and from long ago. Cottrille as critical habitat on the basis of analyses of HCPs and section 10(a)(1)(B) (1957) cites four records of piping historical piping plover occurrences and permits under section 7 will show that plovers at three inland locations in the existence of most or all of the covered activities carried out in Michigan between 1938 and 1954, but primary constituent elements at other accordance with the provisions of the no such sightings have been made in sites lacking historical occurrences. HCP and section 10(a)(1)(B) permits will recent years. Additionally, there are no Additionally, all of the currently not result in the destruction or adverse inland lakes in the Great Lakes area that unoccupied areas designated as critical modification of critical habitat are presently known to contain the habitat are included as essential habitat designated for the piping plover. primary constituent elements for this in the draft revised Recovery Plan In the event that future HCPs covering population of piping plovers. (USFWS 1994). the Great Lakes breeding population of (1E) Comment: There is no mention of the piping plover are developed within migratory sites or habitat needs during Issue 2: Policy and Regulations the boundaries of designated critical migration. The following comments and habitat, we will work with applicants to Response: Areas used by piping responses involve issues related to ensure that the HCPs provide for plovers on migratory routes are likely public involvement in the designation protection and management of habitat very important for survival to the next process and compliance with the Act areas essential for the conservation of breeding season. Extraordinarily little is and other laws, regulations, and the piping plover by either directing known, however, about important stop- policies. development and habitat modification over sites and habitat needs of the (2A) Comment: Several commenters to nonessential areas or appropriately piping plover during migration. Because were supportive of the policy that lands modifying activities within essential so little is known about where essential covered by approved HCPs that provide habitat areas so that such activities will migratory stop-over sites are located, we incidental take authorization for the not adversely modify the primary did not designate migratory habitat in piping plover should be excluded from constituent elements. The HCP this rule. Important migratory sites may critical habitat. Other commenters development process provides an be added to the critical habitat believe that critical habitat designation opportunity for more intensive data designation (by following the complete should occur within the boundaries of collection and analysis regarding the proposal process and soliciting public such HCPs. use of particular habitat areas by the comments) when we have a better Response: We recognize that critical piping plover. We will provide understanding of migratory habitat habitat is only one of many conservation technical assistance and work closely requirements. tools for federally listed species. HCPs with applicants throughout the (1F) Comment: Why is unoccupied are one of the most important tools for development of future HCPs to identify habitat being designated as critical reconciling land use with the lands essential for the long term habitat? conservation of listed species on non- conservation of the species and Response: The inclusion of Federal lands. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act appropriate management of those lands. unoccupied areas in this critical habitat allows us to exclude areas from critical If the piping plover is a covered species designation is in accordance with habitat designation where the benefits of under future HCPs, the plans should section 3(5)(A) of the Act, which exclusion outweigh the benefits of provide for the long term conservation
VerDate 11
of the species. The take minimization news releases mailed to affected elected and 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101, East and mitigation measures provided officials, local jurisdictions, and interest Lansing, Michigan 48823. Call our under these HCPs are expected to groups, and publication of the proposed Ecological Services office in Fort adequately protect the essential habitat determination and associated materials Snelling at 612–713–5350 for more lands designated as critical habitat in on our internet site. We published a information on how to view the this rule, such that the value of these document in the Federal Register on transcripts and comments. lands for the survival and recovery of September 19, 2000, announcing the (2F) Comment: Alternatives to the Great Lakes breeding population of availability of the draft economic designating critical habitat were not the piping plover is not appreciably analysis and reopening the comment considered. diminished through direct or indirect period until October 19, 2000. On Response: By law, according to alterations. If an HCP that addresses the September 28, 2000, in order to fulfill section 4(a)(3) of the Act, we are piping plover as a covered species is our intention that the comment period required to designate critical habitat ‘‘to ultimately approved, the Service will be reopened for 60 days, we published the maximum extent prudent’’ for all reassess the relevant critical habitat a document correcting the closing date listed species. Furthermore, in the case boundaries in light of the protection and of the comment period, to November 20, of the piping plover, we were ordered management provided by the HCP. The 2000. Because of the court-ordered ten by the United States District Court for Service will seek to undertake this month time frame for completing the the District of Columbia to designate review when the HCP is approved, but designation, we were not able to extend critical habitat for the Great Lakes funding constraints may influence the or open an additional public comment breeding population of this species. timing of such a review. However, an period beyond the four and one-half Other conservation actions are HCP can proceed without a concurrent months we provided. important to the recovery of the piping amendment to the critical habitat (2D) Comment: We received two plover and will be carried out as part of designation should all involved parties requests to hold additional public the recovery process, but they are not agree. hearings on the proposed designation. legal alternatives to designating critical (2B) Comment: Specific lands should Our Response: We are required to habitat. be excluded using the exemption hold one public hearing on a proposed (2G) Comment: A few commenters afforded pursuant to 4(b)(2) of the Act. action, if it is requested. Due to the short recommended that we postpone issuing The biological benefits of critical habitat time between proposal and the court- a final determination until a more are outweighed by the benefits of ordered deadline for publication of the specific and defensible critical habitat exclusion. final rule, we chose to announce public proposal can be written and an accurate Response: Section 4(b)(2) of the Act hearings at the time the proposal was and quantitative economic analysis be and 50 CFR 424.19 require us to published. We published notification of conducted. consider the economic impact, and any the hearings in the Federal Register as Response: We are required to use the other relevant impact, of specifying any part of the proposal, published legal best available information in particular area as critical habitat. We notices in regional newspapers, posted designating critical habitat. We are may exclude any area from critical information on our internet site, and under a court order to complete the habitat if we determine that the benefits issued news releases about the hearings. designation of critical habitat for the of exclusion outweigh the benefits of During the month of July, 2000, we held Great Lakes breeding population of the designating the area as critical habitat, seven public hearings throughout the piping plover by April 30, 2001. We did unless that exclusion will lead to Great Lakes States affected by the solicit new biological data and public extinction of the species. As discussed proposed critical habitat designation. participation during the comment in this final rule, we have determined Additional public hearings were periods on the proposed rule and draft that no significant adverse economic requested in locations near one of the economic analysis. These comments effects will result from this critical seven hearings. Because of the court- have been taken into consideration in habitat designation. Consequently, none ordered deadline and the broad the development of the final economic of the proposed lands have been coverage of the original public hearings, analysis and this final determination. excluded from the designation based on we chose not to hold additional public Furthermore, we will continue to economic impacts. As discussed in the hearings. monitor and collect new information response to the comment above, we (2E) Comment: One commenter and may revise the critical habitat have excluded the one legally operative suggested that we post the hearing designation in the future if new HCP from the designation pursuant to transcripts and all of the comments information indicates a change is section 4(b)(2) of the Act based on other received during the public comment needed, given our available funding and relevant impacts. period on the internet. priorities. (2C) Comment: We received three Response: We have not posted copies (2H) Comment: The maps presented written requests to extend the comment of hearing transcripts and the comments in the proposed rule are difficult to period for the proposed designation and received on a proposed action on the interpret and therefore will be difficult draft economic analysis. internet in the past. The volume of to use in planning efforts. Our Response: Following the public comments received on some Response: The maps published in the publication of the proposed critical proposals is very large, thus it is not Federal Register are provided for habitat designation on July 6, 2000, we practicable to post them on the internet reference purposes to guide Federal opened a 60 day public comment period at this time. The hearing transcripts and agencies and other interested parties in which closed on September 5, 2000, comments on the proposal to designate identifying the general boundaries held seven public hearings during July, critical habitat for the Great Lakes within which the critical habitat is and conducted outreach notifying breeding population of the piping located. While the verbal descriptions of elected officials, local jurisdictions, plover are available during normal each critical habitat unit are meant to interest groups, and property owners. business hours at the U.S. Fish and provide a more precise reference for We conducted much of this outreach Wildlife Service offices at: Bishop actual boundaries, we recognize the through legal notices in regional Henry Whipple Building, 1 Federal value to the public and resource newspapers, telephone calls, letters and Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111; managers of more detailed maps. Due to
VerDate 11
the time constraints of the court ordered Response: We did not feel it was necessary work can proceed in concert deadline and our limited Geographic necessary to contact every potential with the requirements of the Act to Information System (GIS) capabilities, stakeholder in order for us to develop a conserve the piping plover and its we have not been able to produce more draft economic analysis. Especially in habitat. In cases where critical habitat detailed maps to match our verbal light of the limited resources and time has been designated for areas occupied descriptions. We have made it a priority available to us, we believe that we were by the piping plover, consultations to complete more detailed GIS maps of adequately able to understand the issues would likely have been required, the designated areas and make these of concern to local communities based regardless of the designation of critical maps available for public use. on public comments submitted on the habitat. proposed rule, on transcripts from (3E) Comment: A number of Issue 3: Economic and Other Relevant public hearings, and from detailed commenters expressed concern about Impacts discussions among our staff and with the impact on recreational activities, (3A) Comment: Designation of critical representatives from other Federal, tourism, and the possibility of restricted habitat will cause private property State, Tribal, and local government beach access within designated critical values to decline and will negatively agencies, as well as some landowners. habitat. affect businesses. When the draft economic analysis was Response: Most recreational activities Response: The economic analysis completed, we reopened the comment on the majority of beaches within indicates that designation of critical period to request public comment, in critical habitat will not be impacted by habitat for the Great Lakes breeding particular on the adequacy of the critical habitat designation. Since non- population on the piping plover will not economic analysis. Federal activities are not affected by have a significant economic impact. The (3D) Comment: Several commenters critical habitat designation, beach use economic analysis does acknowledge expressed concern about the impact would only be affected if a Federal that the designation of critical habitat critical habitat will have on future agency funds, authorizes, or carries out may have some effect on private development projects and the an action that will result in a level of property values. We believe that this maintenance of existing structures. human use that precludes successful short-term effect would occur from Response: The designation of critical piping plover breeding. In those cases, market uncertainty and public habitat does not necessarily restrict we will work with the Federal agency misperception of the impacts of the further development. Within critical involved to protect potential breeding critical habitat designation on private habitat boundaries, Federal agencies habitat while having as minimal an must make special efforts to protect the land use. We also believe that this short- effect as possible on people’s enjoyment important characteristics of these areas, term effect on property values would of the areas. On non-Federal lands, therefore, if a proposed development diminish over time as the uncertainty recreational beach activities such as project with a Federal nexus were to and misperceptions are dispelled. We walking, jogging, sunning, swimming, affect critical habitat of the piping did not find supporting evidence during and picnicking will not be affected by plover, consultation under section 7 of the preparation of the economic analysis the critical habitat designation. the Act would be required. Because the to estimate or document this potential The recovery of piping plovers in the Great Lakes population of the piping short-term effect on property values. Great Lakes area can be consistent with plover is listed as an endangered species The economic analysis determined that recreational and other economic under the Act, section 7 consultations there will be an insignificant impact to activities. According to the 1996 would be required for development National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, businesses. projects in areas with piping plovers, (3B) Comment: Several commenters and Wildlife Associated Recreation, even if these areas are not designated wildlife observation is one of the fastest expressed concern about a quick critical habitat. response to emergency maintenance growing outdoor activities. The Existing human-made structures, such presence of piping plovers on activities, specifically emergency as buildings, parking lots, and boat erosion control and environmental Michigan’s beaches should continue to ramps are not critical habitat, therefore, attract bird watchers who are excited to clean-up, and questioned whether many maintenance projects on such emergency activities are exempt from view this rare species in its natural structures will not affect critical habitat. habitat. consultation under section 7 of the Act. Only those projects with a Federal Response: Emergency activities are nexus that modify the primary Issue 4: Site Specific Issues not exempt from consultation under constituent elements to such a degree as The following comments and section 7 of the Act. However, the to cause the habitat to be unsuitable for responses involve issues related to the regulations at 50 CFR 402.05 allow for breeding piping plovers will be affected. inclusion or exclusion of specific areas, informal consultation where emergency We understand the importance of or our methods for selecting appropriate circumstances mandate the need to beach nourishment and dredging for areas for designation as critical habitat. consult in an expedited manner. Formal maintaining beach areas and harbors in (4A) Comment: Several comments consultation must be initiated as soon as the Great Lakes. Additionally, these pointed out errors in mileages, possible after the emergency is under activities, if conducted in an locations, or descriptions of critical control. In addition, programmatic appropriate manner, may be beneficial habitat units in the proposed rule. consultations can be conducted prior to to nesting piping plovers. These Response: Corrections have been an emergency to address response activities, however, do alter the habitat, made in the final rule to reflect these activities which can be reasonably and thus will likely require comments, where appropriate. anticipated. consultation. For these types of ongoing (4B) Comment: A number of (3C) Comment: Some commenters activities, programmatic consultations commenters identified specific areas voiced concern that they were not can be conducted to reduce the time that they thought should not be directly contacted for their opinions on necessary for annual consultations. designated as critical habitat. the economic impacts of critical habitat In those cases where consultation is Response: Where site specific designations or why their specific land required, we will work cooperatively documentation was submitted to us parcels were not addressed. with Federal agencies to see that providing a rationale as to why an area
VerDate 11
should not be designated as critical the proposed rule indicates that some of be considered in the proposal to habitat, we evaluated that information the requested lands contain suitable designate critical habitat for the Great in accordance with the definition of nesting habitat and may be essential to Plains piping plover, to be published on critical habitat pursuant to section 3 of the conservation of the species. For or before May 31, 2001. the Act and made a determination as to example, we received a comment from (5C) Comment: Many commenters whether modifications to the proposal the National Park Service requesting suggested additional protection for were appropriate. Based on the that a portion of Sleeping Bear Dunes piping plovers, beyond the designation comments we received, we excluded National Lakeshore on South Manitou of critical habitat. lands from the final designation that we Island, Michigan be included in the determined to be nonessential to the designation because it is an important Response: Other conservation actions, conservation of the piping plover (i.e., piping plover foraging area. We will besides the designation of critical areas that did not contain the primary continue to investigate potential piping habitat, are crucial to the recovery and constituent elements) or that were plover critical habitat and may revise survival of the piping plover. These located within an approved HCP for the the critical habitat designation in the other actions, including public piping plover (refer to the ‘‘Summary of future if new information supports a education, predator control, law Changes from Proposed Rule’’ section change, and as available funding and enforcement, and monitoring are for specific areas that were excluded). other priorities allow. The data on addressed in the 1988 and 1994 None of the proposed lands have been additional sites that were provided to us Recovery Plans for Piping Plovers excluded from the final designation during the comment period will be Breeding in the Great Lakes and based on economic impacts. We important in any future revisions to Northern Great Plains. We are currently included in the final designation those designated critical habitat. revising these recovery plans and the lands that we still consider essential to public will be provided the opportunity Issue 5: Other Relevant Issues the recovery of the Great Lakes breeding to comment on the draft revised plan. (5A) Comment: Two people population of piping plovers. (5D) Comment: One commenter stated (4C) Comment: Multiple commenters commented that we should also that the effect of critical habitat should recommended adding specific lands to designate critical habitat for piping include situations that are not funded, critical habitat or further investigating plovers that breed along the north authorized, or carried out by a Federal additional areas for suitable habitat. Atlantic coast. Response: During the Federal rule- Response: We are currently required agency. making process for designating critical to complete a significant number of Response: Once designated, critical habitat, we may, based upon listing-related actions, pursuant to court habitat has only one regulatory impact: information received during the public orders and judicially approved under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, Federal comment period, remove proposed settlement agreements. Complying with agencies must, in consultation with the critical habitat lands from a final these court orders and settlement Service, ensure that any action they designation and refine proposed agreements will require the Service to authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely boundaries. However, according to spend nearly all of its listing and critical to result in the destruction or adverse section 4(b)(4) of the Act, we may not habitat funding for fiscal year 2001, and modification of critical habitat. By law, add new critical habitat units without a substantial amount in fiscal year 2002. the effect of critical habitat does not first proposing these lands in the We are currently working to prioritize extend to situations that do not involve Federal Register and providing a public our critical habitat workload within the a Federal nexus. comment period. Therefore, potential ESA listing budget allocated by critical habitat units that were not Congress. The priority for designating Summary of Changes From Proposed included in the proposal for the Great critical habitat for the Atlantic Coast Rule Lakes population of the piping plover breeding population of piping plovers Based on a review of public are not designated as critical habitat in relative to other species and pending comments received on the proposed this final determination. litigation has not yet been determined. Some of the lands recommended for (5B) Comment: Piping plovers that determination of critical habitat for the addition to critical habitat were not nest at Lake of the Woods, Minnesota Great Lakes breeding population of the included in the proposal because we represent an important genetic link piping plover, we re-evaluated our earlier concluded that these lands were between the Great Lakes and Great proposed designation of critical habitat not essential for the conservation of the Plains populations. Piping plovers at for the piping plover. This re-evaluation species or did not meet the definition of Lake of the Woods should be considered resulted in the following changes that piping plover critical habitat. After part of the endangered Great Lakes are reflected in this final determination. reassessing the requested additional breeding population instead of part of Removal of Proposed Units lands on South Fox Island in Michigan, the threatened Great Plains breeding we continue to believe that these lands, population. Based on comments received on the at this time, do not meet the definition Response: We agree that the piping proposal and site visits following the of critical habitat because they do not plovers that nest at Lake of the Woods, publication of the proposal, we removed contain the primary constituent Minnesota represent an important link three sites—Pensaukee Harbor and elements required by piping plovers. between the Great Lakes and Great Peshtigo Point, Wisconsin and Erie Pier/ Several of the other requested sites Plains populations. Piping plovers that Hearding Island, Minnesota— from this were excluded from the proposed nest at Lake of the Woods are final critical habitat designation. We designation because information on considered part of the Great Plains determined that these sites do not have, current habitat suitability was not population because current data and are unlikely to develop, the features available. These sites will require suggested that they are more closely and habitat characteristics that are further investigation to determine associated with plovers in nearby necessary to sustain the species and whether they are essential to the Manitoba, Canada (Haig and Oring, thus we no longer consider these areas conservation of the species. Data 1988). Proposed critical habitat for to be essential for the conservation of gathered following the publication of piping plovers at Lake of the Woods will the species.
VerDate 11
Change in Extent of Inland Boundary determination includes the entire plover is described in detail in the The proposed 1 km (0.6 mi.) inland perimeter of the peninsula, and preamble. Presently, one approved HCP exists boundary was intended to incorporate therefore appears to be larger, when in for the piping plover in the Great Lakes dune blow-out areas and extensive actuality it has been reduced by region. The Magic Carpet Woods dune-wetland systems. These inland approximately 5 km (3.1 mi). The Association HCP covers approximately areas provide important foraging proposal states that the unit was 18 km 792 m (2,600 ft) of shoreline within the habitat, as well as cobble pans between (11.2 mi) long when, consistent with the verbal description and calculating both proposed Cathead Bay critical habitat the dunes where plovers occasionally unit in Leelanau County, Michigan. This nest. Data gathered during the public sides of the peninsula, it was actually 30.3 km (18.8 mi) long. Therefore, this plan addresses the piping plover as a comment period indicate that the covered species and provides majority of the dune systems within unit is being reduced from 30.3 km (18.8 mi) to 25.3 km (15.7 mi) in this final conservation management and designated critical habitat do not extend protection for the species. We evaluated further than 500 m (1,640 ft) inland determination. The western boundary of the Indiana this plan and determined that the from the normal high water line. conservation management measures and Therefore, in this final determination, Dunes (IN–1) unit was moved approximately 549 meters (1,800 feet) protection afforded to the piping plover the inland boundary for all critical are sufficient to assure its conservation habitat units was changed from the eastward to the western boundary of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. This on the involved lands. Among other proposed 1 km (0.6 mi) to 500 m (1,640 features, the plan requires residences be ft) inland from normal high water line. revised boundary excludes lands owned by the Northern Indiana Public Service set back from the beach, biological Errors in Unit Descriptions Company (NIPSCO) that do not have the monitoring, the presence of a piping plover steward, containing garbage, and Several comments pointed out required habitat features for nesting piping plovers and, therefore, are not restraining pets. Therefore, we have corrections or clarifications to unit excluded the lands covered by the descriptions. We applied this corrected essential to the conservation of the species. Magic Carpet Woods Association HCP information to the final rule and from the final determination of critical The southeastern boundary of the adjusted the verbal descriptions of 10 habitat for the Great Lakes breeding Pennsylvania unit (PA–1) at Gull Point units; White Fish Point to Grand Marais population of the piping plover. (MI–1), Seven Mile Point to Thornswift Natural Area/Presque Isle State Park Nature Preserve (MI–5), Petoskey Sate was moved approximately 2.3 km (1.4 Economic Analysis Park (MI–6), Greenes Bay-Beaver Island mi) north. The refined boundary Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us (MI–10), High Island (MI–11), South Fox excludes the public beach area that does to designate critical habitat on the basis Island (MI–13), Esch Road to Sutter not have the required habitat features of the best scientific and commercial Road and Point Betsie (MI–16), for nesting piping plovers and, data available and to consider the Lighthouse Point to Cordwood Point therefore, is not essential to the economic and other relevant impacts of (MI–20), Thompson’s Harbor (MI–22), conservation of the species. designating a particular area as critical and Illinois Beach State Park/Waukegan Additionally, the length of this unit was habitat. We may exclude areas from Beach (IL–1). None of the changes miscalculated in the proposed rule. The critical habitat upon a determination resulted in any significant alteration of proposal states that the unit was 1.5 km that the benefits of such exclusions the units. (0.9 mi) long when, consistent with the outweigh the benefits of specifying such verbal description, it was actually 8.3 Refined Unit Boundaries areas as critical habitat. We cannot km (5.1 mi) long. Therefore, this unit is exclude such areas from critical habitat The boundaries of several of the units being reduced from 8.3 km (5.1 mi) to when such exclusion will result in the were refined to better reflect the areas 6.0 km (3.7 mi) in this final extinction of the species. that are essential to the conservation of determination. The economic analysis must examine the Great Lakes breeding population of the incremental economic effects of the Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the the piping plover. The southeastern critical habitat designation above those Act boundary of the unit at Long Island- effects of the listing. Economic effects Chequamegon Point, Wisconsin (WI–2) In our proposed determination of are measured as changes in national was moved northwestward critical habitat for the Great Lakes income, regional jobs, and household approximately 5 km (3.1 mi) to the base population of the piping plover, we income. A draft analysis of the of Chequamegon Point at the southern asked for public comment on the economic effects of the critical habitat boundary of T48N R3W, section 1. This appropriate relationship between designation for the Great Lakes breeding change was the result of discussions approved HCPs and designated critical population of the piping plover was with the Bad River Band of Lake habitat. After considering the comments prepared (Industrial Economics, Superior Chippewa Indians and the we received, we have chosen to evaluate Incorporated, 2000) and made available Wisconsin Department of Natural areas covered by an approved HCP for for public review (September 19 to Resources. The revised boundary the piping plover for exclusion under November 20, 2000; 65 FR 56530 and 65 excludes areas that do not have the the benefits-balancing test found in FR 58258). We also completed a final required habitat features for nesting section 4(b)(2) of the Act. This section economic analysis that incorporated piping plovers and, therefore, are not allows us to exclude areas upon public comments, information gathered essential to the conservation of the determination that the benefits of since the draft analysis, and changes to species. Additionally, the description of excluding the area outweigh the benefits the critical habitat designation. The this unit given in the proposal, although of including the are in the critical analysis found that there would be an inclusive of the entire peninsula, only habitat designation, provided the economic impact from the designation calculated the length of the peninsula, exclusion would not result in the that would vary on a situational level, not the perimeter shoreline of the extinction of the species. Our and that most of the impact would come peninsula. The calculation of the length application of this balancing test to in the form of new section 7 of this unit as presented in this final lands covered by HCPs for the piping consultations in unoccupied habitat
VerDate 11
units. In the economic analysis, we and may be obtained by contacting our in the Great Lakes watershed. We have estimate that, over the next ten years, office (see ADDRESSES section). also issued one section 10(a)(1)(B) the total costs by landowners associated Required Determinations incidental take permit for an entity that with consultation and technical has prepared an HCP involving piping assistance attributable to this Regulatory Planning and Review plover habitat. rulemaking will range between $314,200 This document has been designated as Approximately 236 km (146 mi) of the and $592,000. Our economic analysis significant and reviewed by the Office of areas encompassing proposed critical also recognizes that there may be costs Management and Budget (OMB), in habitat for the Great Lakes breeding from delays associated with reinitiating accordance with Executive Order 12866. population of piping plovers are previously completed consultations OMB makes the final determination of currently unoccupied by piping plovers. significance under Executive Order after the critical habitat designation is The remaining 89 km (55 mi) of the total 12866. made final. There may also be economic designated critical habitat are currently effects due to the reaction of the real (a) This rule will not have an annual economic effect of $100 million or more occupied by piping plovers. Under the estate market to critical habitat Act, critical habitat may not be designation, as real estate values may be or adversely affect an economic sector, productivity, jobs, the environment, or adversely modified or destroyed by a lowered due to a perceived increase in other units of government. The Great Federal agency action; it does not the regulatory burden. However, we Lakes breeding population of piping impose any restrictions on non-Federal believe this impact will be minor and plover was listed as an endangered entities unless they are conducting short-term. We have determined that species in 1985. In fiscal years 1992 activities funded or otherwise these economic impacts do not warrant through 2000, we conducted only one sponsored or permitted by a Federal excluding any areas from the formal section 7 consultation with other agency (see Table 3 below). Section 7 designation. Federal agencies to ensure that their requires Federal agencies to ensure that A copy of the final economic analysis actions would not jeopardize the they do not jeopardize the continued is included in our administrative record continued existence of the piping plover existence of the species.
TABLE 3.—ACTIVITIES POTENTIALLY IMPACTED BY PIPING PLOVER LISTING AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION
Additional activities potentially Categories of activities Activities potentially affected by species listing only 1 affected by critical habitat designation 2
Federal Activities Potentially Direct take and activities such as removing or destroying piping plov- Activities by Federal agencies in Affected.3 ...... er breeding habitat, whether by mechanical, chemical, or other any unoccupied critical habitat means (e.g., construction, road building, boat launch and marina areas. construction or maintenance, beach nourishment); recreational ac- tivities that significantly deter the use of suitable habitat areas by piping plovers or alter habitat through associated maintenance ac- tivities (e.g., off-road vehicle parks, paved walking paths); sale, ex- change, or lease of Federal land that contains suitable habitat that may result in the habitat being destroyed or appreciably degraded (e.g., shoreline development, building of recreational facilities such as off-road vehicle parks, road building); activities that may result in increased human activity and disturbance. Private and other non-Federal Direct take and activities such as removing or destroying piping plov- Funding, authorization, or permit- Activities Potentially Affected.4 ...... er habitat, whether by mechanical, chemical, or other means (e.g., ting actions by Federal Agen- construction, road building, boat launch and marina construction or cies in any unoccupied critical maintenance, beach nourishment) and appreciably decreasing habitat areas. habitat value or quality (e.g., increased predation, invasion of ex- otic species, increased human presence or disturbance) that re- quire a Federal action (permit, authorization, or funding). 1 This column represents the activities potentially affected by listing the piping plover as an endangered species (December 11, 1985; 50 FR 50726) under the Endangered Species Act. 2 This column represents the activities potentially affected by the critical habitat designation in addition to those activities potentially affected by listing the species. 3 Activities initiated by a Federal agency. 4 Activities initiated by a private or other non-Federal entity that may need Federal authorization or funding.
Based upon our experience with the Federal agencies or non-Federal persons have a Federal ‘‘sponsorship’’ of their species and its needs, we conclude that that receive Federal authorization or actions are not restricted by the any Federal action or authorized action funding. The designation of areas designation of critical habitat, although that could potentially cause adverse outside the geographic range already they continue to be bound by the modification of designated occupied occupied by the species may have provisions of the Act concerning ‘‘take’’ critical habitat would currently be incremental impacts on what activities of the species. considered ‘‘jeopardy’’ under the Act. may or may not be conducted by (b) This rule will not create Accordingly, the designation of areas Federal agencies or non-Federal persons inconsistencies with other agencies’ within the geographic range occupied that receive Federal authorization or actions. As discussed above, Federal by the piping plover will not likely have funding. However, our analysis did not agencies have been required to ensure any incremental impacts on what identify any significant incremental that their actions do not jeopardize the actions may or may not be conducted by effects. Non-Federal persons that do not continued existence of piping plovers
VerDate 11
since the listing in 1985. The (6) Hazard mitigation and post- (a) This rule will not ‘‘significantly or prohibition against adverse modification disaster repairs funded by the Federal uniquely’’ affect small governments. A of critical habitat is not expected to Emergency Management Agency; Small Government Agency Plan is not impose any substantial additional (7) Promulgation of air and water required. Small governments will be restrictions to those that currently exist. quality standards under the Clean Air affected only to the extent that any of Because of the potential for impacts on Act and the Clean Water Act and the their actions involving Federal funding other Federal agency activities, we will cleanup of toxic waste and superfund or authorization must not destroy or continue to review this action for any sites under the Resource Conservation adversely modify the critical habitat in inconsistencies with other Federal and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the areas where they have not previously agency actions. Comprehensive Environmental undergone consultation to avoid (c) This rule will not materially affect Response, Compensation, and Liability jeopardizing the species. entitlements, grants, user fees, loan Act by the U.S. Environmental (b) This rule will not produce a programs, or the rights and obligations Protection Agency; Federal mandate of $100 million or of their recipients. Federal agencies are (8) Issuance of Endangered Species greater in any year, that is, it is not a currently required to ensure that their Act section 10(a)(1)(B) permits by the ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under activities do not jeopardize the Fish and Wildlife Service; and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. continued existence of the species, and, (9) Activities funded, carried out, or The designation of critical habitat as discussed above, we do not anticipate authorized by any Federal agency. imposes no obligations on State or local that the adverse modification Some of these activities sponsored by governments. Federal agencies within the critical prohibition (resulting from critical Takings habitat designation) will have any habitat areas are carried out by small significant incremental effects in areas entities (as defined by the Regulatory In accordance with Executive Order of occupied habitat. The critical habitat Flexibility Act) through contract, grant, 12630, this rule does not have designation may have some additional permit, or other Federal authorization. significant takings implications, and a effects on the unoccupied areas of As discussed above, these actions are takings implication assessment is not proposed critical habitat, but we expect largely required to comply with the required. This determination will not these to be minor. listing protections of the Act, and the ‘‘take’’ private property and will not (d) OMB has determined that this rule designation of critical habitat is not alter the long-term value of private may raise novel legal or policy issues anticipated to have significant property. As discussed above, the and, as a result, this rule has undergone additional effects on these activities in designation of critical habitat affects OMB review. areas of critical habitat occupied by the only Federal agency actions. The rule species. Designation of critical habitat in will not increase or decrease the current Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 areas that are unoccupied by this restrictions on private property et seq.) species will not likely result in concerning take of the piping plover. In the economic analysis, we significant additional effects because Due to current public knowledge of the determined that designation of critical only actions involving a Federal nexus species protection, the prohibition habitat will not have a significant effect will be affected. against take of the species both within on a substantial number of small For actions on non-Federal property and outside of the designated areas, and entities. As discussed under Regulatory that do not have a Federal connection the fact that critical habitat provides no Planning and Review above, this (such as funding or authorization), the incremental restrictions, we do not designation of critical habitat for the current restrictions concerning take of anticipate that property values will be Great Lakes breeding population of the the species remain in effect, and this affected by the critical habitat piping plover is not expected to have a final determination will have no designation. While real estate market significant economic impact. As additional restrictions. values may temporarily decline indicated on Table 1 (see Critical following designation, due to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement perception that critical habitat Habitat Designation section), we Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)) designated property owned by Federal, designation may impose additional State, Tribal, and local governments and In the economic analysis, we regulatory burdens on land use, we private property. determined that designation of critical expect any such impacts to be short Within these areas, the types of habitat will not cause (a) any effect on term. Additionally, critical habitat Federal actions or authorized activities the economy of $100 million or more, designation does not preclude that we have identified as potential (b) any increases in costs or prices for development of HCPs and issuance of concerns are: consumers, individual industries, incidental take permits. Landowners in (1) Regulation of activities affecting Federal, State, or local government areas that are included in the designated waters of the United States by the U.S. agencies, or geographic regions, or (c) critical habitat will continue to have the Army Corps of Engineers under section any significant adverse effects on opportunity to utilize their property in 404 of the Clean Water Act; competition, employment, investment, ways consistent with the conservation (2) Regulation of water flows, water productivity, innovation, or the ability of the piping plover. delivery, and diversion by Federal of U.S.-based enterprises to compete Federalism agencies; with foreign-based enterprises. Refer to (3) Sale, exchange, or lease of lands the final economic analysis for a In accordance with Executive Order owned by a Federal agency; discussion of the effects of this 13132, the rule does not have significant (4) Road construction and determination. Federalism effects. A Federalism maintenance and right-of-way assessment is not required. In keeping designation; Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 with Department of the Interior and (5) Funding of low-interest loans to U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) Department of Commerce policy, the facilitate the construction of low-income In accordance with the Unfunded Service requested information from and housing by the Department of Housing Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et coordinated development of this critical and Urban Development; seq.): habitat proposal with appropriate State
VerDate 11
resource agencies in Minnesota, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 coordinated with the Bad River Band of Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Lake Superior Chippewa Indians in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York, as determining which Tribal lands This rule does not contain any well as during the listing process. We constitute critical habitat, and have information collection requirements for will continue to coordinate any future included that area in the critical habitat which Office of Management and designation of critical habitat for the designation. Great Lakes piping plover with the Budget approval under the Paperwork appropriate State agencies. The Reduction Act is required. References Cited designation of critical habitat for the National Environmental Policy Act A complete list of all references cited piping plover imposes few additional in this proposed rule is available upon restrictions to those currently in place We have determined that an request from the Fort Snelling Regional and, therefore, has little incremental Environmental Assessment and/or an Office (see ADDRESSES section). impact on State and local governments Environmental Impact Statement as and their activities. The designation defined by the National Environmental Author may have some benefit to these Policy Act of 1969 need not be prepared The primary author of this notice is governments in that the areas essential in connection with regulations adopted Laura J. Ragan (see ADDRESSES section). to the conservation of the species are pursuant to section 4(a) of the List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 more clearly defined, and the primary Endangered Species Act as amended. A constituent elements of the habitat notice outlining our reason for this Endangered and threatened species, necessary for the conservation of the determination was published in the Exports, Imports, Reporting and record species are specifically identified. This Federal Register on October 25, 1983 keeping requirements, Transportation. definition and identification may assist (48 FR 49244). This final determination Regulations Promulgation these local governments in long-range does not constitute a major Federal planning (rather than waiting for case- action significantly affecting the quality For the reasons given in the preamble, by-case section 7 consultations to of the human environment. we amend part 17, subchapter B of occur). Government-to-Government chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Civil Justice Reform Relationship With Tribes Regulations as set forth below: In accordance with Executive Order In accordance with the President’s PART 17—[AMENDED] 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has memorandum of April 29, 1994, determined that the rule does not ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 1. The authority citation for part 17 unduly burden the judicial system and with Native American Tribal continues to read as follows: meets the requirements of sections 3(a) Government’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We designate Order 13175, and the Department of the 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– critical habitat in accordance with the Interior’s requirement at 512 DM 2, we 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. provisions of the Act. The readily acknowledge our responsibility 2. In § 17.11(h) revise the first entry determination uses standard property to communicate meaningfully with for ‘‘Plover, piping’’ under ‘‘BIRDS’’ to descriptions and identifies the primary recognized Federal Tribes on a read as follows: constituent elements within the Government-to-Government basis. We designated areas to assist the public in believe that certain Tribal lands are § 17.11 Endangered and threatened understanding the habitat needs of the essential for the conservation of the wildlife. Great Lakes breeding population of piping plover because they support * * * * * piping plover. essential populations and habitat. We (h) * * *
Species Vertebrate population Historic Range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules
******* BIRDS
******* Plover, piping ..... Charadrius U.S.A. Great Lakes Great Lakes watershed E 211 17.95(b) NA melodus. northern Great Plains, in States of IL, IN, MI, Atlantic and Gulf MN, NY, OH, PA, and coasts, PR, VI), Can- WI and Canada ada, Mexico, Baha- (Ont.).. mas, West Indies.
*******
3. Amend § 17.95(b) by adding critical § 17.95 Critical habitat-fish and wildlife. 1. Critical habitat units are depicted habitat for the Great Lakes piping plover * * * * * for St. Louis County, Minnesota; (Charadrius melodus) under paragraph (b) Birds. Douglas, Ashland, Marinette, and (b) in the same alphabetical order as this * * * * * Manitowoc Counties, Wisconsin; Lake species occurs in § 17.11 (h) to read as PIPING PLOVER (Charadrius County, Illinois; Porter County, Indiana; follows: melodus)—Great Lakes Breeding Erie and Lake Counties, Ohio; Erie Population County, Pennsylvania; Oswego and
VerDate 11
Jefferson Counties, New York; and egg laying, and incubation. Beach diameter), gravel (stones smaller than 1 Alger, Schoolcraft, Luce, Mackinac, activities that may be associated with a cm (0.4 in) diameter), or debris such as Chippewa, Iosco, Presque Isle, high level of disturbance include, but driftwood, wrack, root masses, or dead Cheboygan, Emmet, Charlevoix, are not limited to, walking pets off shrubs. Leelanau, Benzie, Mason, and leash, loud noise, driving ATVs, or iii. The dynamic ecological processes Muskegon Counties, Michigan, on the significantly increased human presence. that create and maintain piping plover maps below. The level of disturbance is relative to habitat are also important primary 2. i. The primary constituent elements the proximity to the nest, intensity, and constituent elements. These geologically required to sustain the Great Lakes frequency of these and other similar dynamic lakeside regions are controlled breeding population of the piping activities. plover are found on Great Lakes islands ii. Appropriately sized sites must also by processes of erosion, accretion, plant and mainland shorelines that support have areas of at least 50 meters (m) (164 succession, and lake-level fluctuations. open, sparsely vegetated sandy habitats, feet (ft)) in length where the beach The integrity of the habitat components such as sand spits or sand beaches, that width is more than 7 m (23 ft), there is depends upon regular sediment are associated with wide, unforested protective cover for nests and chicks, transport processes, as well as episodic, systems of dunes and inter-dune and the distance to the treeline (from high-magnitude storm events. By their wetlands. In order for habitat to be the normal high water line to where the nature, Great Lakes shorelines are in a physically and biologically suitable for forest begins) is more than 50 m (164 ft). constant state of change; habitat features piping plovers, it must have a total Beach width is defined as the distance may disappear, or be created nearby. shoreline length of at least 0.2 km (0.12 from the normal high water line to the The critical habitat boundaries reflect mi) of gently sloping, sparsely vegetated foredune (a low barrier dune ridge these natural processes and the dynamic (less than 50 percent herbaceous and immediately inland from the beach) character of Great Lakes shorelines. low woody cover) sand beach with a edge, or to the sand/vegetation 3. Critical habitat does not include total beach area of at least 2 hectares boundary in areas where the foredune is existing features and structures, such as (ha) (5 acres (ac)) and a low level of absent. The beach width may be buildings, marinas, paved areas, boat disturbance from human activities and narrower than 7 m (23 ft) if appropriate ramps, piers, bridges, lighthouses, and from domestic animals. As the nesting sand and cobble areas of at least 7 m (23 similar structures not containing one or season progresses, the level of ft) exist between the dune and the more of the primary constituent disturbance tolerated by piping plovers treeline. Protective cover for nests and elements. increases. A lower level of disturbance chicks consists of small patches of Note: Maps follows: is required at the beginning of the herbaceous vegetation, cobble (stones nesting period during nest site selection, larger than 1 cm (0.4 inches (in)) BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
Map of Units MN/WI–1, WI–1, WI–2, 1983). Lands 500 meters (1640 feet) inland feet) inland from normal high water line from and WI–3 from normal high water line from the mouth the southern boundary of T48N R3W, section of Dutchman Creek west-northwestward 1 northwestward along the Lake Superior MN/WI–1: St Louis County, Minnesota. along the Lake Superior shoreline to the shoreline to Chequamegon Point Light. From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map West breakwall forming the Superior Front WI–3: Ashland County, Wisconsin. From Duluth, Minnesota (1953, photorevised Channel opening to Lake Superior at the 1969). Lands 500 m (1640 feet) inland from Douglas and St. Louis County line. USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Michigan normal high water line on Interstate Island in WI–2: Ashland County, Wisconsin. From Island, Wisconsin (1963). Lands 500 meters T49N R14W S10 USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Cedar, (1640 feet) inland from normal high water WI–1: Douglas County, Wisconsin. From Wisconsin (1964, photorevised 1975); line on Michigan Island within T51N R1W USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Parkland, Chequamegon Point, Wisconsin (1964, sections 28, 20, and 21. Wisconsin (1954, photorevised 1975) and photorevised 1975); and Long Island, Superior, Wisconsin (1954, photorevised Wisconsin (1964). Lands 500 meters (1640 Note: Map follows:
VerDate 11
Map of Units WI–4 and WI–5 section 9 south-southeastward to the south the southwest property boundary of Point end of Seagull Bar including nearshore sand Beach State Forest near Neshotah Park in the WI–4: Marinette County, Wisconsin. From city of Twin Rivers (T20N R25E section 31) USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Marinette bars. northwestward along the Lake Michigan East, Wisconsin (1963, photorevised 1969). WI–5: Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. shoreline to the south boundary of section 9, Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Two T20N R25E, at Rawley Point. high water line from the end of Leonard Rivers, Wisconsin (1978). Lands 500 m (1640 Street at Red Arrow Park in T30N R24E ft) inland from normal high water line from Note: Map follows:
VerDate 11
Map of Units IL–1 and IN–1 (excluding the portion of Lake Michigan Indiana (1991) and Dune Acres, Indiana shoreline from dividing line of T46N R12E (1991). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from IL–1: Lake County, Illinois. From USGS sections 23 and 26 to 500 m (1,640 ft) south normal high water line from the western 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Zion, Illinois boundary of the Cowels Bog/Dune Acres (1993) and Waukegan, Illinois (1993). Lands of the Illinois Beach State Park Lodge and Unit, (located east of the Port of Indiana and 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal high Conference Center) to the Waukegan Beach the NIPSCO Baily Generating Station) east- water line from 17th Street and the Lake breakwall at North Beach Park T45N R12E northeastward along the Indiana Dunes State Michigan shoreline in Illinois Beach State section 22 (Waukegan quad). Park to Kemil Road at Beverly Shores. Park T46N R12E section 14 (Zion, Ill. quad) IN–1: Porter County, Indiana. From USGS southward along the Lake Michigan shoreline 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Ogden Dunes, Note: Map follows:
Map of Units MI–1 through MI–23 58, Morris Road, and Veteran Road. The unit Bay, Michigan (1964, photoinspected 1975); then continues from the breakwall north of Waugoshance Island, Michigan (provisonal MI–1: Chippewa, Luce, and Alger the harbor, along the Lake Superior shoreline 1982); Bliss, Michigan (1982); Cross Village, Counties, Michigan. From USGS 1:24,000 of Grand Marais near the former Coast Guard Michigan (1982). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) quadrangle maps Whitefish Point, Michigan station (Grand Marais quad) westward along inland from normal high water line from the (1951); Vermilion, Michigan (1951); Betsy the Lake Superior shoreline to the Pictured junction of the northeast corner of T39N R5W Lake North, Michigan (1968); Muskallonge Rocks National Lakeshore property boundary section 28 (Big Stone Bay quad) and Lake Lake East, Michigan (1968); Muskallonge in T49N R14W section 1. Lake West, Michigan (1968); and Grand Michigan shoreline westward along the MI–2: Mackinac County, Michigan. From shoreline around and including Temperance Marais, Michigan (1968). Lands 500 m (1640 USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Pointe Aux ft) inland from normal high water line within and Waugoshance islands and any nearshore Chenes, Michigan (1964, photorevised 1975). sandbars (Waugoshance Island quad), along the junction of the southern boundary of Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal the southern side of Waugoshance Point T50N R5W section 6 (Whitefish Point quad) high water line from the mouth of the Pointe following the shoreline southeastward to Big and including the shore of Lake Superior Aux Chenes river following the Lake following the shoreline northeast to Michigan shoreline northwestward to the Sucker Creek, continuing southward and Whitefish Point, then following the Lake Hiawatha National Forest property boundary southwestward along Sturgeon Bay Point Superior shoreline westward around the at the junction of T41N R5W sections 23 and (Bliss quad) and continuing southward along point(Vermilion SE, Vermilion quads), 26. the Lake Michigan shoreline to the southwest crossing the Luce County line and continuing MI–3: Schoolcraft and Mackinac Counties, boundary of T37N R6W section 5. westward (Betsy Lake North, Betsy Lake Michigan. From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle MI–5: Emmet County, Michigan. From Northwest) across the Alger County line map Hughes Point, Michigan (1972). Lands USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Forest Beach, (Grand Marais East) to Lonesome Point and 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal high Michigan. Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from the East Bay of the Sucker River (Grand water line from the westernmost breakwall at normal high water line from the junction of Marais quad) and following the shoreline the Port Inland Gaging Station following the Lake Michigan shoreline and the northwest along the inner bay of Grand Marais Harbor Lake Michigan shoreline eastward along boundary of T36N R6W section 30 south- past Carpenter Creek and ending at the Hughes Point to the mouth of Swan Creek. southeastward along Lake Michigan shoreline north of the east end of the private MI–4: Emmet County, Michigan. From shoreline to the junction of the shoreline and road originating at the junction of Highway USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Big Stone the southeast corner of T35N R6W section 9.
VerDate 11
MI–6: Emmet County, Michigan. From Magic Carpet Woods Association HCP, shoreline along Big Sable Point (Hamlin Lake USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Harbor approximately 2,600 feet of frontage on quad) to the mouth of the Big Sable River Springs, Michigan. Lands 500 m (1640 ft) Cathead Bay within the east half of the T19N R18W section 19. inland from normal high water line from the southwest quarter and the west half of the MI–18: Muskegon County, Michigan. From mouth of Tannery Creek north along Lake southeast quarter of Section 14, T32N, R11W USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Muskegon Michigan shoreline of Little Traverse Bay in Leelanau Township—then following the West (1972, photoinspected 1980) and Dalton crossing the northern property boundary of shoreline southwestward and past Cathead (1983). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from Petoskey State Park to include the shoreline Point in T32N R11W section 15 (Northport normal high water line from the north of Mononaqua Beach within T35N R5W quad) southwestward along the Lake breakwall of the canal joining Muskegon sections 22 and 21. Michigan shoreline to the intersection of the Lake and Lake Michigan (Muskegon West MI–7: Charlevoix County, Michigan. From shoreline with the southern boundary of quad) north along the Lake Michigan USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Ironton, T32N R11W section 16 north of Christmas shoreline to the northern Muskegon State Michigan (1983) and Charlevoix, Michigan Cove (Northport NW quad). Park property boundary at the shoreline (1983). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from MI–13: Leelanau County, Michigan. From (Dalton quad). normal high water line within T34N R8W USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map South Fox MI–19: Chippewa County, Michigan. From section 14. Island (provisional 1986). Lands 500 m (1640 USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Albany MI–8: Charlevoix County, Michigan. From ft) inland from normal high water line within Island, Michigan (1964, photoinspected USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Charlevoix, T34N R13W sections 15, 16, and 21 and 1976) and DeTour Village, Michigan (1964). Michigan (1983). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) T35R13W section 30. Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal inland from normal high water line from the MI–14: Leelanau County, Michigan. From high water line from the State Forest junction of the line separating T34N R8W USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map North boundary in T41N R3E section 11 (Albany section 31 and T33N R8W section 6 with the Manitou Island (provisional 1983). Lands 500 Island quad) and follows the Lake Huron Lake Michigan shore then extends m (1640 ft) inland from normal high water shoreline east south eastward around and southwestward along the shoreline and line within T31N R14W sections 22, 23, 27 including St. Vital Point and then north to including Fisherman’s Island to the and 28 on North Manitou Island. the mouth of Joe Straw Creek in T41N R3E Fisherman’s Island State Park property MI–15: Leelanau County, Michigan. From section 12(De Tour Village quad). boundary at the end of Lakeshore Drive USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Glen Arbor, MI–20: Cheboygan County, Michigan. where it meets the line between T33N R9W Michigan (1983); Glen Haven, Michigan From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps sections 12 and 1. (1983); and Empire, Michigan (1983). Lands Cheboygan, Michigan (1982) and Cordwood MI–9: Charlevoix County, Michigan. From 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal high Point, Michigan (1982). Lands 500 m (1640 USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Garden water line from Crystal Run in T29N R14W ft) inland from normal high water line from Island West, Michigan (1980) and Beaver section 14 (Glen Arbor quad) south- the junction of the Lake Huron shoreline and Island North (1986). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) southwestward and westward along the Lake the western boundary of T38N R1W section inland from normal high water line from Michigan shoreline, then west- Indian Point (Garden Island West quad) northwestward to Sleeping Bear Point (Glen 22 (Cheboygan quad) eastward along the Lake T39N R10W section 20 southward along the Haven quad) and southwestward and south Huron shoreline of Grass Bay, continuing to west Lake Michigan shoreline of Beaver to the southern Sleeping Bear Dunes National the western boundary of T38N R1E section Island including Donegal Bay and McCauley Lakeshore property boundary in T28N R15W 20 (Cordwood Point quad). Point and ending at the junction of the section 13 (Empire quad). MI–21: Presque Isle County, Michigan. dividing line of T39 N R10W and T38N MI–16: Benzie County, Michigan. From From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps R10W and the Lake Michigan shoreline USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Empire, Roger’s City, Michigan (1971) and Moltke, (Beaver Island North quad). Michigan (1983); Beulah, Michigan Michigan (1971). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) MI–10: Charlevoix County, Michigan. From (provisional 1983); and Frankfort, Michigan inland from normal high water line within USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Beaver (1983). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from T35N R5E section 6 and T36N R5E section Island North (1986). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) normal high water line from Esch Road in 31 (Roger’s City quad) continuing inland from normal high water line from the T27N R15W section 1 (Empire quad) south- northwestward to the junction of Nagel Rd junction of Lake Michigan and the northwest southwestward along the shoreline of Lake and Forty Mile Road at the junction of T36N corner of T38N R11W section 25 southward Michigan at Platte Bay (Beulah quad), then R4E section 25 and T36N R5E section 30 along the Lake Michigan shoreline to the westward along the shoreline of Lake (Moltke quad). junction of the Lake Michigan shoreline and Michigan to Platte River Point (Frankfort MI–22: Presque Isle County, Michigan. the dividing line between T39N and T38N quad) continuing west-southwestward to the From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map R11W. Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore Thompson’s Harbor, Michigan (1971). Lands MI–11: Charlevoix County, Michigan. From property boundary at Sutter Road in T27N 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal high USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map High R16Wsection 26. Continuing from the water line from Black Point to Grand Lake Island(1986). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland junction of Lake Michigan shoreline and Outlet including shoreline within T34N R7E from normal high water line within T39N Point Betsie Natural Area property boundary sections 10, 11, 14, and 15. R11W sections 27 and 32 and T38N R11W in T27N R16W section 33 southward along MI–23: Iosco County, Michigan. From section 5. the Lake Michigan shoreline to include all USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map East Tawas, MI–12: Leelanau County, Michigan. From shoreline within T26N16W section 4. Michigan (1989). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Northport, MI–17: Mason County, Michigan. From inland from normal high water line from the Michigan (provisional 1983)and Northport USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Manistee Tawas Sate Park boundary at the U.S. Coast NW, Michigan (provisional 1983). Lands 500 NW, Michigan (provisional 1923) and Guard Station on the east side of Tawas Point m (1640 ft) inland from normal high water Hamlin Lake, Michigan (1982). Lands 500 m southward along the Lake Huron shoreline line from the intersection of the Lake (1640 ft) inland from normal high water line including offshore sand spits and along the Michigan shoreline and the line between from the mouth of Cooper Creek T20N R18W tip of the point and northeastward including T32N R11W section 12 and T32N R10W section 13 (Manistee NW quad) south- all shoreline in T22N R8E section 34. section 7—excluding lands covered by the southwestward following the Lake Michigan Note: Map follows:
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
Map of Units OH–1 and OH–2 to the western property boundary of Sheldon inland from normal high water line from the Marsh State Natural Area in T6N R23W eastern boundary line Headland Dunes OH–1: Erie County, Ohio. From USGS (Sandusky quad) at the point where the Nature Preserve westward along the Lake 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Huron, Ohio (1969) and Sandusky, Ohio (1969, Cedar Point causeway turns west and south Erie shoreline to the western boundary of the photorevised 1975). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) toward Sandusky. Nature Preserve and Headland Dunes State inland from normal high water line from the OH–2: Lake County, Ohio. From USGS Park. 1:24,000 quadrangle map Mentor, Ohio mouth of Sawmill Creek (Huron quad) Note: Map follows: northwestward along the Lake Erie shoreline (1963, revised 1992). Lands 500 m (1640 ft)
VerDate 11
Map of Unit PA–1 lighthouse north of Peninsula Drive on the Point (located at approximately 042 degrees north side of Presque Isle (located at 10′ 3.13″ N and 080 degrees 04″ 29.56″ W). PA–1: Erie County, Pennsylvania. From ′ ″ approximately 042 degrees 09 57.41 N and It includes any new beach habitat that may USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle map Erie North, ′ ″ 080 degrees 06 57.57 W) eastward along the accrete along the present shoreline portion of Pennsylvania (1957, revised 1969 and 1975, Lake Erie shoreline around the tip of Presque the unit. photoinspected 1977). Lands 500 m (1640 ft) Isle peninsula to the southern terminus of the inland from normal high water line from the hiking trail on the southeast side of Gull Note: Map follows:
VerDate 11
Map of Unit NY–1 (1958), and Henderson, New York (1959). County-Jefferson County line (Ellisburg quad) Lands 500 m (1640 ft) inland from normal and northward to the Eldorado Road NY–1: Oswego County, New York. From high water line from the mouth of the (Henderson quad). USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle maps Pulaski, Salmon River (Pulaski quad) northward along New York (1956), Ellisburg, New York the Lake Ontario shoreline to the Oswego Note: Map follows:
* * * * * Dated: April 30, 2001. Joseph E. Doddridge, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 01–11205 Filed 5–2–01; 12:41 pm] BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate 11
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 88
Monday, May 7, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER on this action. Any parties interested in Environmental Control (DHEC) on contains notices to the public of the proposed commenting on this action should do so September 19, 2000, for implementing issuance of rules and regulations. The at this time. and enforcing the Emissions Guidelines purpose of these notices is to give interested DATES: Comments must be received in applicable to existing Hospital/Medical/ persons an opportunity to participate in the Infectious Waste Incinerators. The Plan rule making prior to the adoption of the final writing by June 6, 2001. rules. ADDRESSES: Written comments should was submitted by the South Carolina be addressed to David L. Arnold, Chief, DHEC to satisfy certain Federal Clean Air Quality Planning and Information Air Act requirements. In the Final Rules ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Services Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Section of this Federal Register, EPA is AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency, approving the South Carolina State Plan Region III, 1650 Arch Street, submittal as a direct final rule without 40 CFR Part 52 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial [MD 064/109/111/113–3065b; FRL–6973–2] Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for public submittal and anticipates that it will not Approval and Promulgation of Air inspection during normal business receive any significant, material, and Quality Implementation Plans; State of hours at the Air Protection Division, adverse comments. A detailed rationale Maryland; Approval of Revisions to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for the approval is set forth in the direct Volatile Organic Compounds Region III, 1650 Arch Street, final rule and incorporated by reference Regulations and Miscellaneous Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; and herein. If no significant, material, and Revisions the Maryland Department of the adverse comments are received in Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, response to this proposed rule, no AGENCY: Environmental Protection Baltimore, Maryland, 21224. further activity is contemplated in Agency (EPA). relation to this proposed rule. If EPA FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose ACTION: Proposed rule. receives adverse comments, the direct Quinto at (215) 814–2182, or by e-mail final rule will be withdrawn and all SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve at [email protected] for information public comments received will be State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the EPO regulation or Kelly addressed in a subsequent final rule revisions submitted by the State of L. Bunker at (215) 814–2177, or by e- based on this proposed rule. EPA will Maryland. The revisions replace the mail at [email protected] for the not institute a second comment period existing regulation and adopt a new remaining regulation revisions. on this action. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulation for control of volatile organic For DATE: Comments on this proposed rule compounds (VOC) from expandable further information, please see the must be received in writing by June 6, polystyrene operations (EPO), establish information provided in the direct final 2001. VOC reasonably available control action, with the same title, that is located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ ADDRESSES: Written comments should technology (RACT) standards for be addressed to Gregory Crawford at the facilities that recycle bakery and section of this Federal Register publication. EPA Regional Office listed below. confectionary waste, adopt by reference Copies of the documents relevant to this the EPA definition of VOC and include Dated: April 24, 2001. proposed rule are available for public other miscellaneous revisions. In the William C. Early, inspection during normal business ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Acting Regional Administrator,Region III. hours at the following locations. The Federal Register, EPA is approving the [FR Doc. 01–11280 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] interested persons wanting to examine State’s SIP submittal as a direct final BILLING CODE 6560–50–P these documents should make an rule without prior proposal because the appointment with the appropriate office Agency views this as a noncontroversial at least 24 hours before the day of the submittal and anticipates no adverse ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION visit. comments. A more detailed description AGENCY of the state submittal and EPA’s Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61 evaluation are included in a Technical 40 CFR Part 62 Support Document (TSD) prepared in Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia support of this rulemaking action. A [SC–38–200102(b); FRL–6973–8] 30303–3014. Gregory Crawford, (404) 562–9046. copy of the TSD is available, upon Approval and Promulgation of State request, from the EPA Regional Office South Carolina Department of Health Plans for Designated Facilities and and Environmental Control, Bureau of listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Pollutants: South Carolina document. If EPA receives no adverse Air Quality Control, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201. comments, EPA will not take further AGENCY: Environmental Protection Telephone (803) 898–4123. action. If EPA receives adverse Agency (EPA). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments, EPA will withdraw the ACTION: Proposed rule. direct final rule and it will not take Gregory Crawford at (404) 562–9046 or effect. EPA will address all public SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the Scott Davis at (404) 562–9127. comments in a subsequent final rule Section 111(d)/129 Plan for the State of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the based on this proposed rule. EPA will South Carolina submitted by the South information provided in the Direct Final not institute a second comment period Carolina Department of Health and action which is located in the Rules
VerDate 11
Section of this Federal Register and Number EPA/816–R–99–014, dated The record for this rulemaking has incorporated by reference herein. September 1999) and other information been established under docket number Dated: April 12, 2001. that has been placed in the public W–98–05 and includes supporting A. Stanley Meiburg, docket for comment. documentation as well as printed, paper versions of electronic comments. The Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. DATES: EPA will accept public comment, in writing, on the proposed record is available for inspection from 9 [FR Doc. 01–10989 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P determination and the 1999 Class V Study until July 6, 2001. The Class V excluding legal holidays at the Water Study can also be found on EPA’s Web Docket, EB 57, USEPA Headquarters, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION site at www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/ 401 M., Washington, DC. For access to AGENCY cl5study.html. docket materials, please call 202/260– 3027 to schedule an appointment. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 40 CFR Parts 144 and 146 the UIC Class V, W–98–05 Comment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For [FRL–6975–3] Clerk, Water Docket (MC–4101); U.S. technical inquiries, contact Joan Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Harrigan-Farrelly, Office of Ground Underground Injection Control Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, Water and Drinking Water (mailcode Program—Notice of Proposed DC 20460. Comments may be hand- 4606), EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, Determination for Class V Wells delivered to the Water Docket, U.S. NW, Washington, DC 20460. Phone: Environmental Protection Agency, 401 202–260–7077. For general information, AGENCY: Environmental Protection contact the Safe Drinking Water Hotline, Agency (EPA). M Street, SW, East Tower Basement, Room 57, Washington, DC 20460. phone 800–426–4791. The Safe ACTION: Notice of Proposed Drinking Water Hotline is open Monday Determination. Comments: Send one original and three copies of your comments and through Friday, excluding Federal SUMMARY: Today, the Environmental enclosures (including any references). holidays, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a Please submit all references cited in Eastern Standard Time. determination for all categories of Class your comments. Facsimiles (faxes) can SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Affected V injection wells not included in the not be accepted. Commenters who Entities: Although no new regulations final rulemaking on Class V motor would like EPA to acknowledge receipt are being proposed, this notice applies vehicle waste disposal wells and large- of their comments should include a self- to owners or operators of any type of capacity cesspools (64 FR 68546, addressed, stamped envelope. To ensure Class V well that is not a large-capacity December 7, 1999). These include that EPA can read, understand and cesspool or motor vehicle waste shallow non-hazardous industrial waste therefore properly respond to disposal well, as described in 40 CFR injection wells, large-capacity septic comments, the Agency would prefer 144.81(2) and (16), respectively. The systems, agricultural and storm water that commenters cite, where possible, following table lists categories and drainage wells, and other wells. The the paragraph(s) or sections in the examples of entities that may have such Agency proposes that additional Federal notice or supporting documents to wells. This table is not intended to be underground injection control (UIC) which each comment refers. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide regulations are not needed at this time Commenters should use a separate for readers regarding entities likely to be to prevent Class V wells from paragraph for each issue discussed. affected by or interested in this action. endangering underground sources of Comments may also be submitted Other types of entities not listed in the drinking water (USDWs). The Agency electronically to [email protected]. table could also be interested in it. To will, instead, implement its continuing Electronic comments must be submitted determine whether your injection well statutory obligations and use existing as an ASCII, WP5.1, WP6.1 or WP8 file is affected by this action, you should authorities under the Safe Drinking avoiding the use of special characters carefully examine the applicability Water Act to protect USDWs from any and form of encryption. Electronic criteria in 40 CFR 144.1(g). If you have threatening underground injection comments must be identified by the questions regarding the applicability of activities. This proposed determination docket number W–98–05. Comments this action to a particular entity, consult is based on The Class V Underground and data will also be accepted on disks the person listed in the preceding FOR Injection Control Study (EPA Document in WP 5.1, 6.1, 8 or ASCII file format. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Category Examples of entities potentially affected by this action
Industry and Commerce ..... Farms, animal feeding operations, and other agricultural sites that drain excess surface or subsurface water into wells; sites that have storm water drainage wells, facilities operating large-capacity septic systems, or nonhaz- ardous waste disposal wells; facilities that extract minerals from brine and then inject the spent brine under- ground; mines that backfill materials into mine shafts, pipelines, or other holes that are deeper than they are wide; aquaculture facilities that dispose of wastewater in underground wells; solution mines that use injection wells in the recovery of minerals from ore bodies that have already been conventionally mined; sites that use in- jection wells as part of aquifer remediation activities; geothermal power plants that reinject fluids into the ground; facilities that extract direct heat from geothermal fluids and then return those fluids underground; and sites that use ‘‘open-loop’’ heat pump/air conditioning systems. State and Local Govern- Municipalities that use storm water drainage wells; publicly owned treatment works that inject sewage treatment ef- ment. fluent underground; State and local government entities that inject water underground for the purpose of aquifer recharge or aquifer storage and recovery. Federal Government ...... Any Federal Agency that owns or operates one of the above entities.
VerDate 11
Table of Contents water in the United States, and Part C recovery and storage of liquid I. Background specifically mandates the regulation of hydrocarbons. Class III wells are used in A. Statutory and Regulatory Framework underground injection of fluids through connection with the solution mining of B. Requirements Applicable to Class V wells. The Agency has promulgated a minerals from ore bodies that have not Wells series of underground injection control been conventionally mined. Class IV C. History of this Rulemaking (UIC) regulations under this authority. wells are used to inject hazardous or 1. 1987 Report to Congress Section 1421 of the Act requires EPA radioactive wastes into or above a 2. 1994 Consent Decree With the Sierra to propose and promulgate regulations formation that is within one-quarter Club specifying minimum requirements for mile of a USDW. (Class IV wells are 3. 1995 Proposed Determination effective State programs to prevent 4. 1997 Modified Consent Decree generally prohibited by 40 CFR 144.13.) 5. 1998 Proposal and 1999 Final Rule underground injection that endangers Class V wells are defined in the 6. 1999 Class V Study drinking water sources. EPA regulations as any well not included in D. Scope of Today’s Proposed promulgated administrative and Classes I through IV. Determination permitting regulations, now codified in Class V wells, other than motor II. Factors Considered in Making the 40 CFR parts 144 and 146, on May 19, vehicle waste disposal wells and large- Proposed Determination 1980 (45 FR 33290), and technical capacity cesspools, are currently A. Criteria Proposed in 1995 requirements in 40 CFR part 146 on authorized by rule (§§ 144.24(a) and B. Public Comments on the 1995 Proposed June 24, 1980 (45 FR 42472). The 144.84(a)). Rule authorization expires Approach regulations were subsequently amended upon the effective date of a permit C. Proposed Criteria for Today’s Notice on August 27, 1981 (46 FR 43156), issued pursuant to §§ 144.25, 144.31, III. Class V Wells Found to Have a Low Potential to Endanger in the 1995 February 3, 1982 (47 FR 4992), January 144.33, or 144.34; upon meeting one of Proposal 21, 1983 (48 FR 2938), April 1, 1983 (48 the conditions specified in § 144.84(b); A. 1995 Proposed Finding FR 14146), July 26, 1988 (53 FR 28118), or upon proper closure of the well as B. Public Comments on Well Types December 3, 1993 (58 FR 63890), June described in § 144.82(b). Existing Class C. 1999 Class V Study 10, 1994 (59 FR 29958), December 14, V motor vehicle waste disposal wells in IV. Other Class V Wells 1994 (59 FR 64339), June 29, 1995 (60 ‘‘ground water protection areas’’ and A. Sewage Treatment Effluent Wells FR 33926), and December 7, 1999 (64 FR ‘‘other sensitive ground water areas’’ 1 1. 1995 Proposed Finding 68546). are banned with a provision that allows 2. Public Comments Section 1422 of the Act provides that owners and operators of such wells to 3. 1999 Class V Study States may apply to EPA for primary seek a waiver from the ban and obtain 4. Proposed Determination enforcement responsibility to B. Mine Backfill Wells a permit (§ 144.88(b)). New Class V 1. 1995 Proposed Finding administer the UIC program; those motor vehicle waste disposal wells and 2. Public Comments States receiving such authority are new and existing large-capacity 3. 1999 Class V Study referred to as ‘‘primacy States.’’ Where cesspools were banned nationwide 4. Fossil Fuel Combustion Waste Report to States do not seek this responsibility or (§§ 144.88(a) and (b)). These new Congress fail to demonstrate that they meet EPA’s requirements affecting motor vehicle 5. Proposed Determination minimum requirements, EPA is required waste disposal wells and large-capacity C. Storm Water Drainage Wells to prescribe a UIC program for such cesspools are minimum Federal 1. 1995 Proposed Finding and 1998 States by regulation. These direct standards—primacy States may impose Proposal implementation (DI) program more stringent requirements. 2. Public Comments regulations were issued in two phases, In addition to these provisions, Class 3. 1999 Class V Study 4. Proposed Determination on May 11, 1984 (49 FR 20138) and V UIC Program Directors have many D. Large-Capacity Septic Systems November 15, 1984 (49 FR 45308). For obligations and authorities under the 1. 1995 Proposed Finding the remainder of this preamble, SDWA to ensure the protection of 2. Public Comments references to the UIC Program USDWs. Specifically, the current 3. 1999 Class V Study ‘‘Director’’ mean either the Director of regulations subject Class V wells to the 4. Guidelines for Management of Onsite the EPA program (where the program is general statutory and regulatory Wastewater Systems implemented directly by EPA) or the 5. Proposed Determination Director of the primacy State program 1 A ground water protection area is defined in E. Agricultural Drainage Wells (where the State is responsible for § 144.86(c) as a geographic area near and/or 1. 1995 Proposed Finding surrounding community and non-transient non- 2. Public Comments implementing the program). Also, community water systems that use ground water as 3. 1999 Class V Study currently all UIC Programs in Indian a source of drinking water These areas receive 4. Concentrated Animal Feeding Country are directly implemented by priority for the protection of drinking water EPA. Therefore, for the remainder of supplies and States are required to delineate and Operations Proposal assess these areas under section 1453 of the SDWA. 5. Proposed Determination this preamble, references to DI programs Other sensitive ground water areas are defined in F. Industrial Wells include UIC programs in Indian § 144.85(g) as additional State-defined areas that are 1. 1995 Proposed Finding Country. critical to protecting USDWs from contamination. 2. Public Comments The other sensitive ground water areas may include 3. Subsequent Actions B. Requirements Applicable To Class V areas overlying sole-source aquifers; highly 4. Proposed Determination Wells productive aquifers supplying private wells; V. Comment Solicitation continuous and highly productive aquifers at points The UIC regulations establish five distant from public water supply wells; areas where I. Background classes of injection wells. Class I wells water supply aquifers are recharged; karst aquifers are used to inject hazardous and non- that discharge to surface reservoirs serving as public A. Statutory and Regulatory Framework water supplies; vulnerable or sensitive hazardous waste beneath the lowermost hydrogeologic settings, such as glacial outwash Class V wells are regulated under the formation containing an underground deposits, eolian sands, and fractured volcanic rock; authority of Part C of the Safe Drinking source of drinking water (USDW) within and areas of special concern selected based on a combination of factors, such as hydrogeologic Water Act (SDWA or the Act) (42 U.S.C. one-quarter mile of the well bore. Class sensitivity, depth to ground water, significance as 300h et seq.). The SDWA authorizes II wells are used to inject fluids a drinking water source, and prevailing land use EPA to protect the quality of drinking associated with oil and natural gas practices.
VerDate 11
prohibitions against endangerment of recommendations for septic systems 4. 1997 Modified Consent Decree USDWs, as well as some specific range from further studies (3 States) to Based on public comments received requirements. Under § 144.12(a) and statewide ground water monitoring (1 on the 1995 proposal, EPA decided to § 144.82(a), owners or operators of all State). For industrial waste water wells, reconsider its proposed approach. injection wells, including Class V some States recommended immediate Because this reconsideration would injection wells, are prohibited from action and closure while others extend the time necessary to complete engaging in any injection activity that recommended monitoring and ground the rulemaking for Class V wells, EPA allows the movement of fluid containing water evaluation studies. and the Sierra Club entered into a any contaminant into USDWs, if the 2. 1994 Consent Decree With the Sierra modified consent decree on January 28, presence of that contaminant may cause Club 1997 (D.D.C. No. 93–2644) that a violation of any primary drinking On December 30, 1993, the Sierra extended the dates for rulemaking that water regulation under 40 CFR part 141 had been in the 1994 decree. The or may otherwise adversely affect Club filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of modified decree requires three actions. human health. Sections 144.12(c), (d), First, by no later than June 18, 1998, and (e) prescribe mandatory and Columbia alleging that EPA failed to comply with section 1421 of the SDWA the EPA Administrator was required to discretionary actions to be taken by the sign a notice to be published in the Director if a well is not in compliance regarding publication of proposed and final regulations for Class V injection Federal Register proposing regulatory with § 144.12(a). These actions may action that fully discharged the include requiring the well operator to wells. The complaint alleged that EPA’s then current regulations regarding Class Administrator’s rulemaking obligation apply for an individual permit, ordering under section 1421 of the SDWA with such action as closure of the well to V wells did not meet the SDWA’s statutory requirements to ‘‘prevent respect to those types of Class V prevent endangerment, taking an injection wells determined to be high enforcement action, and/or taking an underground injection which endangers drinking water sources.’’ (Complaint, risk for which EPA did not need emergency action. additional information. The Owners or operators of Class V Paragraph 15) To resolve the issue, EPA entered into Administrator was required to sign a injection wells must also submit basic final determination for these inventory and assessment information a consent decree with the Sierra Club on August 31, 1994. This consent decree endangering Class V wells by no later under § 144.26 and § 144.83. In than October 29, 1999. Thirty-day addition, Class V wells are subject to the required that, no later than August 15, 1995, the Administrator sign a notice to extensions were subsequently granted general program requirements of be published in the Federal Register for both of these deadlines. § 144.25 and § 144.84 under which the proposing regulatory action that fully Second, by no later than September Director may require a permit, if discharges the Administrator’s 30, 1999, EPA was required to complete necessary, to protect USDWs. Moreover, rulemaking obligation under section a study of all Class V wells not included under § 144.27 and § 144.83, EPA may 1421 of the SDWA, 42 U.S.C. 300h, with in the first rulemaking on endangering require owners or operators of any Class respect to Class V injection wells. A Class V injection wells. Based on this V well, in EPA-administered programs, final rulemaking on the matter was study, EPA may find that some of these to submit additional information required to be signed by no later than other types of Class V wells also deemed necessary to protect USDWs. November 15, 1996. endanger USDWs. Owners or operators who fail to submit Third, by no later than April 30, 2001, the information required under 3. 1995 Proposed Determination the EPA Administrator was required to §§ 144.26, 144.27, or 144.83 are On August 15, 1995, the sign a notice to be published in the prohibited from using their injection Administrator signed a notice of Federal Register proposing to discharge wells. proposed rulemaking that proposed a the Administrator’s rulemaking C. History of This Rulemaking regulatory determination on Class V obligations under section 1421 of the injection wells intended to fulfill EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) with 1. 1987 Report to Congress obligation under the 1994 consent respect to all Class V injection wells not In accordance with the 1986 decree with the Sierra Club (60 FR included in the first rulemaking for Amendments to the SDWA, EPA 44652, August 28, 1995). In this notice, Class V injection wells. The Consent summarized information on 32 EPA proposed not to adopt additional Decree requires that the Administrator categories of Class V wells in a Report Federal regulations for any types of either (1) propose regulations fully to Congress entitled Class V Injection Class V wells. Instead, the Agency implementing section 1421 with respect Wells—Current Inventory; Effects on proposed to address the risks posed by to all such Class V injection wells, (2) Ground Water; and Technical certain wells using existing authorities propose a decision that no further Recommendations, September 1987 and a Class V management strategy rulemaking is necessary in order to fully (EPA Document Number 570/9–87– designed to: (1) Speed up the closure of discharge the Administrator’s 006). This report presents a national potentially endangering wells, and (2) rulemaking obligations under section overview of Class V injection practices promote the use of best management 1421 with respect to all such Class V and State recommendations for Class V practices to ensure that other Class V injection wells, or (3) propose design, construction, installation, and wells of concern do not endanger regulations fully implementing section siting requirements. These State USDWs. Several factors led EPA to 1421 with respect to some of these recommendations, however, did not propose this approach, including: (1) remaining Class V injection wells and give EPA a clear mandate on what, if The wide diversity in the types of fluids propose a decision that no further any, additional measures were needed being injected, ranging from high risk to rulemaking is necessary in order to fully to control Class V wells on the national not likely to endanger; (2) the large discharge the Administrator’s level. For any given type of well, the number of facilities to be regulated; and rulemaking obligations under section recommendations varied broadly and (3) the nature of the regulated 1421 with respect to all other Class V were rarely made by more than two or community, which consists of a large injection wells not already covered. The three States. For example, the proportion of small businesses. Administrator must sign a final
VerDate 11
determination for these remaining Class point of injection. Many commenters drainage wells were found in 22 of the V wells by no later than May 31, 2002. questioned why the Agency chose to 99 census tracts visited and large- regulate a wide range of industries with capacity septic systems were found in 5. 1998 Proposal and 1999 Final Rule different disposal practices with one 88 of the 99 census tracts visited. EPA On July 29, 1998 (63 FR 40586), in approach. Some commenters thought used the data collected from the visits response to the first action required the industrial category was too diverse to develop mathematical models for under the modified consent decree with and types of industrial waste streams predicting the numbers of these wells the Sierra Club, EPA proposed revisions should be regulated based on their nationwide. to the Class V UIC regulations that specific characteristics and risks. After D. Scope of Today’s Proposed would add new requirements for three considering these comments, EPA Determination categories of Class V wells that were agreed that the industrial category is believed to endanger underground diverse and represents a variety of waste Today’s proposed regulatory sources of drinking water. According to streams that required additional review determination addresses all of the Class this proposal, Class V motor vehicle before deciding on the need for V well types not covered by the 1999 waste disposal wells in ground water additional Federal regulations. final rule, in response to the third action protection areas (as defined in footnote required under the modified consent 1 above) would either be banned, or 6. 1999 Class V Study decree with the Sierra Club. For the would have to get a permit that requires On September 30, 1999, in response purpose of this notice, these other well fluids released in those wells to meet to the second action required under the types are discussed in the following the drinking water maximum modified consent decree with the Sierra categories that track with the earlier contaminant levels (MCLs) and other Club, EPA published a study of all Class proposals described above as well as the health-based standards at the point of V wells not included in the 1998 categories addressed in the Class V injection. Class V industrial waste proposal (EPA Document Number EPA/ Study: Agricultural drainage wells, disposal wells in ground water 816–R–99–014). The study consisted of storm water drainage wells, large- protection areas also would be required two major components: (1) An capacity septic systems, sewage to meet the MCLs and other health- information collection effort for the treatment effluent wells, spent brine based standards at the point of injection, remaining universe of Class V wells, return flow wells, mine backfill wells, and large-capacity cesspools in such which was divided into 23 different aquaculture waste disposal wells, areas would be banned. categories for the purpose of analysis; solution mining wells, in-situ fossil fuel EPA received substantial public input and (2) an ‘‘inventory modeling’’ recovery wells, special drainage wells, on the 1998 proposal. The input exercise to estimate the number of storm experimental wells, aquifer remediation included 97 letters from public water drainage wells and large-capacity wells, geothermal electric power wells, commenters as well as septic systems, two types of wells that geothermal direct heat wells, heat recommendations from the National were believed to be quite prevalent, but pump/air conditioning return flow Drinking Water Advisory Council for which adequate inventory wells, saltwater intrusion barrier wells, (NDWAC), which formed a Federal information was particularly lacking. aquifer recharge and aquifer storage and Advisory Committee Act (FACA) As described in detail in Volume 1 of recovery wells, subsidence control working group to address Class V UIC the final Study report, the information wells, and industrial wells (including, and Source Water Protection Program collection effort consisted of a but not limited to, carwash wells, food integration issues. This FACA comprehensive literature search, State processing waste disposal wells, workgroup met twice in 1999 to discuss and EPA Regional data collection, laundromat wells, and non-contact the proposed Class V regulation. In requests to the public for data, and peer cooling water wells). These categories addition, on May 21, 1999 (64 FR review. As part of the State and EPA are the same as the ones defined in the 27741), the Agency published a notice Regional data collection, the Agency existing regulations in 40 CFR § 144.81. of data availability (NODA) and further distributed nearly 700 questionnaires to However, in some cases the categories request for comment related to the 1998 EPA Regional, State, and local program have been combined or separated to proposal. A total of 14 public comment staff in all 50 States and U.S. territories, facilitate the discussion of the data and letters were received in response to this including staff responsible for Class V rationale used to support this request. well control on Indian Lands in EPA determination. This determination, Taking all the public input into Regions 5, 8, 9, and 10. The Agency however, does not propose to change account, EPA issued final revisions to supplemented the information from the the Class V well categories currently the Class V UIC regulations on questionnaires with follow-up defined in the UIC regulations to the December 7, 1999 (64 FR 68546). The telephone interviews and on-site file ones discussed here. final rule added new requirements for searches in 11 primacy States, 3 DI It is also important to clarify that this (1) existing motor vehicle waste States, and 2 Regional Offices with DI notice satisfies the Agency’s obligations disposal wells located in ground water States. The Agency also supplemented under the modified consent decree with protection areas delineated for the survey results with visits to a the Sierra Club, but it does not end community water systems and non- number of injection well sites, including EPA’s obligations, requirements, and transient non-community water systems geothermal electric power well sites in actions to prevent Class V wells from that use ground water as a source and California and food processing waste endangering USDWs. As described in in other sensitive ground water areas disposal well sites in Tennessee and Section I.B above, UIC Program delineated by the States; and (2) new Maine. Directors have many obligations and and existing large-capacity cesspools For the inventory modeling, EPA authorities under the SDWA to ensure and new motor vehicle waste disposal selected and visited a sample of 99 the protection of USDWs from the risks wells nationwide. The final rule, census tracts across the nation to collect posed by Class V wells. The Agency will however, did not adopt the proposed data on the numbers of storm water continue to fulfill these obligations and additional requirements for industrial drainage wells and large-capacity septic using existing authorities for all Class V waste disposal wells to meet the MCLs systems that exist and factors that wells (Section IV.F.3 below summarizes and other health based standards at the influence their prevalence. Storm water some of the actions UIC Program
VerDate 11
Directors take for Class V industrial and the related rationale proposed for may be an important factor in wells using these existing authorities). some well types. The opposing determining the extent of In addition, nothing in this notice comments are best represented by nine ‘‘endangerment’’ from Class V wells and precludes a State or local government main points made by the Sierra Club, the ‘‘effectiveness’’ of additional Federal from promulgating requirements more which are addressed in turn below. requirements. For example, as discussed stringent than the minimum Federal First, the Sierra Club asserted that below, in determining the extent of requirements. Also, today’s proposed blanket authorization of Class V wells ‘‘endangerment’’ posed by various Class determination does not affect EPA’s by rule, based on any criteria, violates V well types, EPA relied heavily upon authority to impose any necessary the SDWA. The basis for this comment actual contamination incidents; regulations in the future on any of the was the Sierra Club’s interpretation that however, the adequacy of State and well types addressed in today’s notice. SDWA requires EPA to prescribe local requirements was also a factor that regulatory standards for State programs. helped EPA determine the likelihood of II. Factors Considered in Making the EPA disagrees that the Class V future contamination from such wells. Proposed Determination regulations violate the SDWA. SDWA Similarly, EPA believes that A. Criteria Proposed in 1995 section 1421(b) requires EPA to issue comprehensive State and local regulations for effective State programs regulation of a Class V well type, such The Agency proposed two criteria in to prevent endangerment of drinking as septic systems discussed below, may 1995 for evaluating the different water sources by underground injection. make additional Federal regulation categories of Class V wells to determine The statute specifically States that the entirely duplicative, if not disruptive. whether any category warranted regulations ‘‘may permit a State to Where such regulation exists, further additional regulation: the potential to authorize underground injection by Federal regulation may be futile in endanger USDWs and the anticipated rule.’’ Section 1421(b)(1)(A). EPA has terms of ensuring ‘‘effective’’ State effectiveness of additional Federal provided such authority to States for programs; rather, Federal efforts may be regulation under the UIC program in Class V regulations; the authorization by better focused on implementation of and preventing endangerment to USDWs. rule requirements for such wells include education regarding existing regulations For wells with a low or no potential requirements for reporting and avoiding and programs than merely adding yet to contaminate USDWs, the Agency endangerment of drinking water another layer of redundant or proposed that the then existing sources. As discussed in more detail duplicative requirements. Thus, EPA regulations provided sufficient below, EPA has found that these continues to believe that the extent of authorities to handle the few cases requirements are generally effective in State and local regulation remains a where mismanagement of one of these preventing endangerment from the Class highly relevant consideration in meeting wells could create an endangering V wells discussed in today’s proposed the section 1421(b) mandate. At its core, situation. To assess the need for determination. Thus, EPA has met the the statute clearly envisions that the UIC additional UIC regulation for the other statutory mandate of prescribing program be a State-run program and the wells, the 1995 proposal was guided by regulations for ‘‘effective’’ State Federal role is to ensure that existing the following principles: programs ‘‘to prevent * * * State UIC programs become or remain (1) Additional Federal UIC regulations endangerment’’ from Class V UIC wells. effective in addressing any are not necessary where adequate State Second, the Sierra Club stated that endangerments from underground or local regulations are already in place, continued reliance on the non- injection wells. (2) Additional Federal UIC regulations endangerment provision in 40 CFR Fourth, the Sierra Club claimed that a are not necessary where the Class V 144.12 and the authority in 40 CFR decision not to impose additional wells are not the principal source of 144.25 to require a permit does not regulations cannot be justified on the endangerment from a widespread fulfill EPA’s statutory duty to specify grounds that Class V wells are not the environmental problem, minimum requirements for State UIC principal source of endangerment from (3) Additional Federal UIC regulations programs. EPA disagrees with this a widespread environmental problem, are not necessary where endangerments analysis. The minimum requirements because partial or incremental solutions are localized problems, e.g., wells that for State UIC Class V programs are are better than none at all. In order for are found only in one or two counties specified in EPA’s regulations; these this criterion to be valid, the Sierra Club or in one or two States. For these wells, include reporting and non- asserted that EPA would have to show EPA will work with the States, if endangerment requirements. While that additional Federal regulations yield necessary, to bring about better controls, these may not be as specific and a gain of trivial or no value. As noted (4) Additional Federal UIC regulations detailed as the requirements for the below, EPA has dropped this criterion are not necessary where other Federal other UIC well classes, they are as a basis for deciding not to establish programs address the endangerment nonetheless ‘‘minimum requirements further regulations for Class V wells. caused by certain Class V wells. for * * * (State) programs’’ as required However, EPA continues to believe that by SDWA section 1421(b). Because B. Public Comments on the 1995 the extent of contamination from Class these requirements, general as they are, Proposed Approach V wells, based on actual incidents of have been effective in preventing contamination, remains a critical factor EPA received 57 public comment endangerment from these wells, no in determining whether sufficient letters on the 1995 proposal, several of more is required under the statute. ‘‘endangerment’’ is posed by Class V which addressed the proposed decision- Third, the Sierra Club argued that the wells to warrant additional Federal making criteria summarized above. existence of State or local regulations requirements. Many comments supported the does not justify a decision not to impose Fifth, the Sierra Club argued that EPA Agency’s proposal to not impose more more Federal regulations. While EPA cannot decide against additional Class V regulations for Class V wells based on agrees that the mere presence of State or regulations based on a finding that these criteria. However, EPA also local regulations governing UIC wells endangerments are localized problems. received a number of comments that does not justify a decision not to impose According to the comment, nothing in raised concerns about the overall Federal requirements under section SDWA exempts from regulation approach, including the above criteria 1421(b), such State or local regulations endangerments that occur in one or a
VerDate 11
few places, and nothing prevents these establishing targeted regulations for operating features, the vulnerability of localized problems from emerging in more narrowly defined subcategories of the wells to spills or illicit discharges, other areas in the future. While EPA wells. While EPA agrees that such and the adequacy of existing State and agrees that ‘‘endangerments’’ that are diversity in conditions is not in itself a Federal UIC programs for addressing ‘‘localized’’ may still warrant Federal reason for EPA to determine that any potentially endangering situations, regulation since, as a factual matter, Federal regulations are unnecessary, EPA believes that the absence of most well contamination will endanger EPA believes that such diversity may be frequent, widespread, or significant only a localized area, EPA strongly a factor in determining whether cases of actual contamination is believes that additional Federal additional Federal regulation would compelling evidence of a low potential regulation is not necessary where the promote more ‘‘effective’’ State to endanger that does not warrant endangerment posed by a particular programs to address the well type in additional Federal regulation at this well type appears to be isolated and question. time. Eighth, the Sierra Club commented rare. No amount of Federal regulation EPA considered the anticipated that the existence of large numbers of (or any other regulation) can prevent all effectiveness of additional Federal UIC regulated entities and an alleged lack of contamination; the fact that an isolated regulation for only a few well categories facility-specific data do not justify a incident of contamination from a UIC for which a sound determination could well occurs does not mean that the State decision not to regulate further. In not be based on the potential to program for that well is ineffective in support of this comment, the Sierra endanger alone. In evaluating the preventing endangerment. Rather, EPA Club said that the size of a regulated anticipated effectiveness of additional believes that under Section 1421(b) community is always workable, and that regulation, EPA considered such factors Federal regulations for UIC wells are EPA has an obligation to collect the data as the degree to which additional reserved for situations, such as with necessary to perform its rulemaking Federal UIC regulations would simply motor vehicle waste disposal wells duties. EPA has not used either of the duplicate existing State programs (addressed in the December 7, 1999, factors Sierra Club mentions as a basis without increasing the ‘‘effectiveness’’ final revised Class V UIC regulations (64 for today’s proposed determination. of these programs. While the Agency FR 68546)), where existing State Ninth, the Sierra Club argued that programs are not generally ‘‘effective’’ EPA cannot decide against additional also considered the possibility of the in preventing endangerment from regulations for some well types based on UIC program joining forces with other certain well types. With respect to the criterion that a large proportion of existing or emerging programs to assurance that wells may not the regulated community is comprised achieve greater results in an integrated contaminate in the future, EPA believes of small businesses. Among other points fashion, it did not use the existence of that it has a continuing obligation under made in support of this argument, the other Federal programs that also address 1421(b) to determine whether additional Sierra Club stated that SDWA creates no Class V wells as a basis for deciding Federal regulation is necessary for any exemption for small businesses and that against additional UIC regulation. In UIC well types. Today’s proposed EPA did not show that the burden on addition, EPA did not use the diversity determination does not affect EPA’s small businesses would be severe. EPA in conditions, the existence of large authority to impose any necessary has not used the type of regulated numbers of regulated entities, the lack regulation in the future on any of the community as a basis for today’s of facility-specific data, or the existence well types addressed in today’s notice. proposed determination. of a large proportion of small businesses as decision making criteria. Sixth, the Sierra Club asserted that C. Proposed Criteria for Today’s Notice EPA’s duty to regulate under SDWA is III. Class V Wells Found To Have a Low EPA is proposing today to use the two not removed by other Federal programs Potential To Endanger in the 1995 main criteria proposed in 1995— that also address Class V wells. Proposal Moreover, the fact that Federal programs potential to endanger USDWs and the overlap in subject matter is no obstacle anticipated effectiveness of additional A. 1995 Proposed Finding to regulation, and in many cases, other Federal UIC regulation—to determine Based on the data available at the Federal programs do not address the whether other categories of Class V time, the Agency proposed in 1995 (see endangerment fully. As discussed wells warrant additional regulation. The 60 FR 44652, August 28, 1995) that below, EPA has not used other Federal Agency is now better able to apply these programs as a criterion for determining criteria using additional information several types of Class V injection wells whether to impose additional UIC gathered from the 1999 Class V Study. generally had a low potential to requirements in today’s notice. Based on the above comments and endanger USDWs, including: (1) Salt However, EPA does believe that the responses, however, the Agency is water intrusion barrier wells, (2) existence of other Federal programs that dropping from consideration some of subsidence control wells, (3) heat address Class V wells may be highly the principles used in 1995. pump/air conditioning return flow relevant in determining whether an The potential to endanger USDWs is wells, (4) spent brine wells, (5) ‘‘endangerment’’ exists and whether by far the more important of the two swimming pool and landslide control additional SDWA regulation would be criteria, given the SDWA mandate to wells (i.e., ‘‘special drainage’’ wells), ‘‘effective’’ in addressing that ensure non-endangerment. EPA and (6) solution mining wells. This endangerment. evaluated this potential based in large finding was based on such factors as Seventh, the Sierra Club objected to part on the record of documented good injection quality (e.g., comparable the proposal that additional regulations incidents of ground water and other to or better than the fluids in the could not be developed for some Class environmental contamination caused by injection zone), appropriate well V well types because of diversity in the operation of the different well types. construction and maintenance, injection local hydrogeologic conditions or in While the Agency also evaluated the zone characteristics, and existing types of fluids injected. According to potential for such contamination based regulatory oversight. In addition, EPA the Sierra Club, such variability is not on such factors as the quality of fluids found that the following well types grounds for a regulatory exemption injected, the characteristics of the generally had a low-to-moderate or under SDWA and could be addressed by injection zone, well design and moderate potential to endanger: (1)
VerDate 11
Aquifer recharge 2 and aquifer storage C. 1999 Class V Study confirmed that these wells are and recovery wells, (2) aquifer The Class V Underground Injection controlled as part of Resource remediation, (3) geothermal direct heat Control Study (EPA/816–R–99–014, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), wells, (4) geothermal electric power September 1999) presents additional Comprehensive Environmental wells, (5) aquaculture wells, (6) information about each of these 13 well Response, Compensation, and Liability experimental technology wells, and (7) types that was collected following the Act (CERCLA), and State remediation in-situ fossil fuel recovery wells. In 1995 proposal. The Agency believes that programs in addition to the UIC general, EPA found that the fluids this information confirms the findings program. For electric power geothermal injected into these wells were of lower proposed in 1995, although some of the injection wells, the Class V Study did quality than those injected into the six supporting details are new or different. not identify any reported incidents of For example, in 1995, EPA found that types of wells first discussed above, but USDW contamination, but the Class V there is little chance that fluids injected well construction, operation, and Study did find that injected fluids at into spent brine return flow wells (in maintenance in combination with some plants may include a mixture of seven States) would reach USDWs locational factors and existing Federal surface water, treated wastewater because the wells were adequately and State programs safeguard against effluent, and/or storm water in addition constructed with multiple layers of endangerment. In the case of in-situ to geothermal fluids. Thus, there is the protection and inject into deep confined fossil fuel recovery wells, the Agency potential for the injected fluids to formations. The Class V Study found also noted that no wells of this type contain contaminants not present in the that spent brine return flow wells were known to be operating. geothermal fluids, as indicated by one regulated under Class V now only occur commenter. The Class V Study B. Public Comments on Well Types in two States and that in all cases the confirmed, however, that geothermal wells have individual permits and inject In response to the 1995 proposal, EPA fluids used for power production are not below the lowermost USDW. Similarly, typically of potable quality, and that received no comments on five of these in 1995 EPA found that salt water 13 well types: (1) Salt water intrusion typical well construction, operation, intrusion barrier wells have a low and maintenance are not expected to barrier wells, (2) subsidence control potential to contaminate USDWs allow fluid injection into unintended wells, (3) special drainage wells, (4) because they generally inject fluids of ground water zones. geothermal direct heat wells, and (5) equivalent or better quality than the Based on the information available at aquaculture wells. EPA received limited injection zone fluids. The Class V Study this time, including the Class V Study, comments that did not disagree with the found that waters of varying quality are EPA concludes that the 13 wells types Agency’s characterization of the injected into these wells, but typically discussed in this section have a low potential of the wells to endanger the injected water meets primary and potential to endanger USDWs. As a USDWs for another five of these 13 well secondary drinking water standards. In result, EPA concludes that no additional types: (1) Spent brine return flow wells, addition, ground water monitoring and Federal regulations applicable to these (2) solution mining wells, (3) aquifer associated studies have shown no wells are needed at this time. Where recharge and aquifer storage and measurable adverse effects on either isolated incidences of endangerment recovery wells, (4) aquifer remediation ground water quality or the health of the occur or are threatened, EPA will use its wells, and (5) experimental technology population ingesting the water when the existing authorities to require wells. Of the remaining wells, one injectate was treated wastewater permitting, closure or corrective action commenter disagreed with the Agency’s effluent. to address the endangerment. Of the 13 well types in this group, the characterization of heat pump/air Class V Study identified reported IV. Other Class V Wells conditioning return flow wells and contamination incidents associated with A. Sewage Treatment Effluent Wells geothermal electric power wells as the operation of only three types. For in- having a low potential to endanger situ fossil fuel recovery wells, the Class 1. 1995 Proposed Finding USDWs. The commenter indicated that V Study confirmed the information EPA found that the overall potential heat pump/air conditioning return flow submitted by a commenter that ground for sewage treatment effluent wells to wells could allow the introduction of water contamination had occurred in contaminate USDWs was moderate. The contaminants (e.g., refrigerants, lead, the vicinity of in-situ fossil fuel Agency also found that the potential to copper) into ground water and possible recovery operations. The Class V Study endanger USDWs ranged from low to cross-contamination between aquifers. also confirmed, however, that no wells high, in large part due to the range in In addition, the commenter indicated of this type are known to be in the type of treatment provided prior to that electric power geothermal injection operation. For heat pump/air injection. Specifically, the Agency wells are ‘‘not innocuous’’ because high conditioning return flow wells, the found that some wells inject clarified temperatures and contaminants picked Class V Study identified a few sites effluent that has undergone secondary up in the power plant may degrade where ground water contamination has or tertiary treatment and have a low ground water. Another commenter been reported. Thus, EPA agrees with potential to endanger USDWs, but indicated that ground water in the the commenter who indicated that effluent that has undergone only vicinity of five in-situ fossil fuel recover operation of these wells could result in primary treatment creates a higher projects has been contaminated. ground water contamination. The potential to contaminate USDWs. available information indicates, Further, EPA found that the majority of 2 EPA found that some aquifer recharge wells however, that such occurrences are very the wells of concern were located in pose a moderate to high threat of USDW rare in light of the estimated 35,000 Florida and Hawaii and were being contamination when they are operated as dual wells of this type in over 40 States. For addressed at the State level. Based on purpose wells that alternately withdraw water for aquifer remediation wells, the Class V this information, the Agency proposed irrigation and inject irrigation drainage water. These wells are more similar to other agricultural drainage Study identified a single reported that no additional Federal regulations wells and are included below in the discussion of contamination incident that resulted were needed at the time for sewage agricultural drainage wells. from an equipment failure, but treatment effluent wells.
VerDate 11
2. Public Comments primary drinking water standards at the 2. Public Comments EPA received only one comment on point of injection. In addition, owners Several comments on the 1995 its 1995 proposal for these wells. This or operators of sewage treatment proposal were supportive of EPA’s commenter asserted that additional effluent wells in Monroe County, which determination that no additional UIC Federal regulations were needed encompasses the Keys, are required as regulations were needed and because only a ‘‘majority’’ (and not all) part of the Class V operating permit specifically discussed the adequacy of of the wells with a high potential to application to provide reasonable current requirements for backfilling of contaminate USDWs were being assurance that operation of their wells hard rock mines. No commenters addressed at the State level. will not cause or contribute to a directly opposed the proposed violation of surface water quality determination, although one commenter 3. 1999 Class V Study standards. indicated that they favored the addition The Class V Study shows that more 4. Proposed Determination of a general permit authority. than 95 percent of documented sewage 3. 1999 Class V Study treatment effluent wells are located in Based on the information available at five States: Arizona, California, Florida, this time, including the Class V Study, The Study documented that mine Hawaii, and Massachusetts. Individual EPA concludes that sewage treatment backfill wells are used in many mining permits are required for the wells in all effluent wells have a low potential to regions of the country to inject a five of these States and the wells are endanger USDWs due to a combination mixture of water, sand, mill tailings, or prohibited in some situations (e.g., in of factors. These factors, which may other materials such as coal combustion ground water protection zones in vary from well to well, include good ash and flue gas desulfurization sludge Hawaii). Requirements in other States injection quality, well construction and into underground mines. Information with sewage treatment effluent wells maintenance, and existing regulatory collected and compiled in the Study is include minimum treatment oversight. The most pressing consistent with the information requirements prior to injection (e.g., documented problem—injectate available in 1995 that showed that secondary treatment, compliance with migration and contamination of offshore ground water quality within a mine is MCLs), compliance with MCLs outside water and coral reefs in the Florida often poor (e.g., due to acid mine the ground water discharge zone (at a drainage) and that backfill wells are just Keys—is already being studied by many designated compliance point), one of many possible sources (including researchers and addressed at both the individual permits, and/or compliance natural sources) of ground water Federal and State levels. The incidence with specified well construction and contamination. No incidents of of contamination from these wells has operating requirements. contamination directly attributable to also been rare. Thus, EPA proposes that The Study identified approximately these wells were reported, and in some 1,700 wells, but only two incidents in no additional Federal regulations cases information shows that backfill which ground water contamination was applicable to these wells are needed at wells have negligible or positive effects attributed to the injection of treated this time. The Agency will use its on ground water quality. In other cases, sewage effluent through a Class V well. existing permitting and enforcement however, backfill material has been One of these incidents occurred more authorities as necessary to prevent any shown to leach contaminants more than 25 years ago. Nutrient enrichment sewage treatment effluent wells from readily than predicted by standard tests of surface waters, with resulting algal endangering USDWs. and increase contaminant blooms, has also been reported in off- B. Mine Backfill Wells concentrations in ground water. The shore waters near some sites where chance that backfill injection will effluent injection occurs in some coastal 1. 1995 Proposed Finding contribute to ground water areas in Florida and Hawaii. This issue contamination is highly dependent on is receiving considerable research and In 1995, EPA found that mine backfill site conditions, such as site regulatory attention. For example, EPA, wells, in general, had a moderate hydrogeology, mine mineralogy, backfill the U.S. Geological Survey, the National potential to contaminate USDWs. This characteristics and injection practices. Oceanic and Atmospheric finding was in part based on the fact More than 90 percent of the Administration, the Florida Department that injected slurries had the potential documented mine backfill wells of Environmental Protection, the to react with acid mine water to reported in the Study are located in four University of South Florida, the mobilize potential ground water States that have primacy for the Class V University of Miami, the Florida Keys contaminants. However, USDWs portion of the UIC wells. Two of these National Marine Sanctuary, and several interconnected with, and therefore States require individual permits for the other organizations have conducted potentially affected by the mine backfill wells while the other two States issue studies to evaluate the impacts of activities, were generally of moderate to permits by rule as long as USDW sewage disposal, including the injection poor quality. In addition, mine backfill endangerment does not result. Other of sewage treatment effluent in Class V injection had been shown to improve States regulate mine backfill wells by wells, on offshore water quality. These overall ground water quality in some rule authorizing them and studies suggest that the operation of situations, even when contaminants implementing existing UIC authorities, sewage treatment effluent wells and were released from the injected slurry. or by issuing general (or area) permits or other disposal practices in the Florida The 1995 proposed finding also individual permits. Keys can lead to rapid nutrient recognized that most backfill wells were enrichment and fecal contamination of regulated under State water quality or 4. Fossil Fuel Combustion Waste Report marine waters in the Keys, although the mining programs in addition to the UIC to Congress concentrations eventually reaching program. Based on these considerations, Also in 1999, EPA issued a Report to surface waters are greatly diluted. To EPA proposed that additional Federal Congress on Wastes from the combat this problem, Florida currently regulations for these wells were not Combustion of Fossil Fuels (EPA 530–S– requires sewage treatment effluent wells needed at the time to ensure the 99–010). Based on the findings of this to be individually permitted and to meet protection of USDWs. report, comments and additional data
VerDate 11
received, and additional analysis of the potential to endanger USDWs because were to be addressed with additional available information, the Agency made no incidents of contamination directly guidance as well as outreach and a regulatory determination in May 2000 attributable to these wells were education to make sure they did not (65 FR 32214) that additional reported, and in some cases information endanger USDWs. regulations under Subtitle D of RCRA shows that backfill wells have negligible The Agency extended this proposal and/or possibly modifications to or positive effects on ground water for storm water drainage wells at existing regulations established under quality. As discussed above, however, industrial sites as part of the 1998 Surface Mining Control and injection of coal combustion wastes may proposal. Specifically, the Agency Reclamation Act (SMCRA) authority are threaten ground water under some proposed that industrial drainage wells warranted when coal combustion wastes circumstances. The Agency has recently would be subject to the proposed new are used to fill surface or underground initiated efforts to improve its requirement to meet MCLs at the point mines (i.e., minefilled). In making this understanding of this potential threat to of injection, just like other kinds of determination, the Agency explained ground water and address it for both Class V industrial wells. This new that although placement of coal surface and underground minefilling proposal, however, was predicated on combustion waste in a mine has not (including underground injection) using EPA’s ability to establish a clear and been documented to cause increased the regulatory authorities of RCRA and/ enforceable definition of an industrial damage to ground water, minefilling is or SMCRA. As a result, EPA proposes drainage well that would be subject to an increasingly common practice that not to develop any additional Federal the new requirement, versus a storm could present a danger to human health UIC regulations applicable to mine water drainage well at an industrial site and the environment under certain backfill wells at this time. Rather, the that would not be subject to the new circumstances (e.g., placement directly Agency will continue to assess any requirement because it had a low into the ground water). EPA found that potential endangerment of USDWs by potential to receive chemical spills or available information indicates that if individual mine backfill wells and highly contaminated drainage. The 1998 the chemistry of the mine relative to the address any such potential proposal specifically requested public chemistry of the coal combustion wastes endangerment with existing permitting comment on the practicality of making is not properly taken into account, the and enforcement authorities and any this distinction (see 63 FR 40598, July addition of coal combustion wastes to new requirements to be developed 29, 1998 for more detail). certain environmental settings can lead under RCRA and/or SMCRA. 2. Public Comments to an increase in hazardous metals (e.g., arsenic) released into the environment. C. Storm Water Drainage Wells No comments were received that opposed EPA’s 1995 proposed The Agency also noted that management 1. 1995 Proposed Finding and 1998 determination that additional Federal of coal combustion wastes in the Proposal presence of acid-generating pyritic UIC regulations were not needed for wastes has caused metals to leach from EPA found that storm water drainage storm water drainage wells. However, the combustion wastes at much higher wells had a moderate potential to some commenters opposed EPA’s levels than are predicted by leach test endanger USDWs. This proposed approach to considering wells located in data for coal combustion wastes when finding considered the fact that storm industrial settings to be industrial wells. strongly acidic conditions are not water can acquire contaminant loads In particular, some commenters asserted present. Further, the Agency noted that from streets, roofs, landscaped areas, that industrial settings and acceptable a recent study of cement kiln dust industrial areas, and constructions sites. barriers were not sufficiently well showed that placement directly in The most significant concern identified defined. Other commenters indicated contact with ground water led to was wells located in industrial settings that the barrier requirement was substantially greater release of (e.g., near loading docks, process areas) impractical, that sound management hazardous metal constituents than EPA where chemical spills may occur and practices are at least as effective as predicted would occur when not placed enter the well unless a physical barrier physical barriers in preventing in ground water. (e.g., berm) is present to contain a spill. contaminants from reaching a well, and In addition, EPA explained that there In other settings, EPA found that storm that storm water wells at service stations are few States that operate water would normally not contain should not be regulated as industrial comprehensive programs that contaminants in concentrations that wells. specifically address the unique exceed drinking water standards. In response to the 1998 proposal, circumstances of minefilling, making it Moreover, available contamination some commenters supported EPA’s more likely that damage to human studies did not show that area-wide revised proposal that wells receiving health or the environment could go degradation of ground water quality had storm water in industrial settings be unnoticed. In particular, the Agency resulted from storm water drainage considered storm water wells (rather found that government oversight has not wells. than industrial wells) even if they had ‘‘caught up’’ with recent and rapidly Based on this information, EPA the potential to receive waste due to expanding minefilling of coal proposed not to develop any additional leaks, drips, and spills as long as the combustion wastes and that serious gaps Federal UIC regulations applicable to amounts of waste would be exist in State programs, such as a lack storm water drainage wells at that time. insignificant. Other commenters of adequate controls and restrictions on However, recognizing the potential maintained that wells with the potential unsound practices, e.g., no requirement concern associated with such wells at to receive any leaks, drips, or spills for ground water monitoring and no industrial sites, EPA proposed to should be considered industrial wells. control or prohibitions on waste categorize storm water drainage wells Many commenters expressed concern placement in the aquifer. located in industrial settings as about EPA’s proposed distinction industrial wells unless an adequate between storm water drainage wells and 5. Proposed Determination barrier is in place to prevent spilled industrial drainage wells at industrial Based on the information available at materials from entering the well. facilities and requested that EPA make this time, EPA concludes that mine According to the 1995 proposal, these the distinction between the two types of backfill wells generally have a low so-called ‘‘industrial drainage’’ wells wells more clear and definitive. Still
VerDate 11
other commenters requested that all Therefore, any attempt to target a new 3. 1999 Class V Study storm water wells be subject to stringent regulation to the few isolated cases that The Study identified three requirements, with some commenters might pose an endangerment would also documented cases of ground water specifically suggesting a ban of storm capture and impose needless burdens contamination incidents attributable to water drainage wells in source water on many wells that are not a concern. LCSSs and 24 documented cases of protection areas, in part due to their EPA believes the situation would be system failures where the extent of vulnerability to spills and misuse. better addressed by continuing to use resulting ground water contamination, if 3. 1999 Class V Study existing authorities to close or otherwise any, is not known. Thus, the prevalence address problem wells on an individual The Study identified approximately of contamination cases appears to be basis to prevent these wells from low relative to the number of systems in 71,000 documented storm water endangering USDWs. In doing so, the drainage wells and estimated that use (approximately 350,000), even if Agency will coordinate the efforts of the there are additional LCSS failures approximately 248,000 may actually UIC program with those of the National exist in the United States. Despite this (which seems likely) that were not Pollutant Discharge Elimination System identified during the Study. The Study large number of wells operating (NPDES) storm water program. throughout the country, the Study also found that LCSSs are used reports only 12 documented incidents of D. Large-Capacity Septic Systems nationwide and that although all States contamination of ground water by storm have applicable regulations, the water drainage wells; eight of these 1. 1995 Proposed Finding regulations vary from stringent siting, incidents were associated with storm construction, and operating EPA found that large-capacity septic requirements to general construction water drainage from industrial/ systems (LCSSs) do not pose a commercial activities. In addition, the permitting. State regulations also vary significant national problem. This with respect to the size standard Study identified storm water drainage assessment is different from that wells as potentially vulnerable to spills definitions that determine which contained in the 1987 Report to or illicit discharges if they are located systems are considered ‘‘large’’ (and Congress on Class V Injection Wells near roadways, parking lots, and areas thus subject to UIC regulation) rather (EPA 570/9–87–006) because that report of commercial/industrial activities. than small. considered systems that receive However, these problems are more industrial and commercial wastes 4. Guidelines for Management of Onsite hypothetical than actual. About half of whereas LCSSs as now defined receive Wastewater Systems the States with storm water drainage 3 wells permit these wells by rule while only sanitary waste. In addition, the On October 6, 2000, EPA published the other half have individual permit/ Report to Congress considered single- for review and comment a draft of its registration systems. Four States ban the family systems, which are not within Guidelines for Management of Onsite/ wells entirely or under certain the scope of the UIC program. EPA also Decentralized Wastewater Systems and circumstances. In addition, when found in 1995 that insufficient spacing an outline for a guidance manual that industrial stormwater drainage wells are between systems was the major cause of will supplement the guidelines found, EPA Regions or States require ground water contamination from addressing all sizes of septic systems. them to either close or get a permit. LCSSs. The Agency concluded that land EPA’s development of these guidelines use planning and siting requirements was described in the Clean Water 4. Proposed Determination tailored to local conditions by State and Action Plan released by the Agency in Based on the information available at local authorities, coupled with 1998 and is in response to State agency this time, including the Class V Study, additional UIC program implementation reports that septic systems, which are EPA concludes that additional Federal and technical guidance, was the most predominantly single family septic regulations under the UIC program are effective approach to protecting USDWs. systems, constitute the third most not required at this time. The available common source of ground water 2. Public Comments information indicates that contamination because systems have endangerment of USDWs by storm water Some commenters supported EPA’s failed due to inappropriate siting or drainage wells occurs only rarely, proposed finding that no additional UIC design or inadequate long-term considering the relatively small number regulations were required as well as the maintenance. Thus, the purpose of the of contamination incidents relative to Agency’s plan to issue guidance, while guidelines is to raise the quality of the number of wells known or estimated some other commenters argued that management programs, establish to exist. Although there is a concern that LCSSs should be excluded from UIC minimum levels of activity, and storm water drainage wells may be regulation altogether. Other commenters institutionalize the concept of vulnerable to spills and illicit supported additional Federal management for all sizes of septic discharges, there is little evidence that regulations, including suggestions that systems. The guidelines apply to both this is a problem other than at industrial EPA require ground water elevation existing and new septic systems and to facilities. Even at industrial facilities, monitoring, establish monitoring systems of any size for residential and endangerment of USDWs by storm water provisions and management strategies to commercial wastewater treatment and drainage wells does not appear to be a address loss of system integrity, require disposal. The guidelines contain a set of widespread problem but instead is individual permits, or ban septic model programs that rely on limited to isolated, relatively infrequent systems in sensitive ground water areas. coordinating responsibilities and incidents. To a much lesser extent, this One commenter argued that State and actions among the State, tribal or local proposal is also based on the local programs with tailored standards regulatory agency, the management impracticality (as supported by public to prevent ground water endangerment entity or service provider, and the comments on the 1998 proposal) of by LCSSs were not in place. system owner. distinguishing between industrial 5. Proposed Determination drainage wells that might be subject to 3 The Agency considers systems that do not additional regulations and other storm receive solely sanitary waste to be industrial wells Based on the information available at water drainage wells that would not. rather than LCSSs. this time and the actions the Agency is
VerDate 11
currently undertaking to improve the wells have a high potential to contamination involving spills or leaks performance of septic systems through contaminate USDWs because they may from manure lagoons migrating through the development of management inject sediment, nutrients, pesticides, agricultural drainage wells are known to guidance, EPA concludes that metals, and pathogens. The Agency also have occurred. In addition, the Study additional Federal regulations under the found that additional Federal UIC found that more than 95 percent of the UIC program are not required at this regulations for agricultural drainage approximately 1,100 documented wells time. This conclusion is reached wells were not likely to be effective in in the country are concentrated in just because (1) based on the results of the protecting USDWs in agricultural areas five States (Idaho, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Class V Study, actual contamination due to the wide range of contamination and Minnesota). Four of these five from these wells is relatively isolated sources such as fertilizer and pesticide States require individual permits/ and (2) an additional layer of Federal application and land use practices. In authorizations or ban the wells under UIC requirements, placed on top of addition, EPA found that agricultural certain circumstances. For example, existing State and local LCSS drainage wells were concentrated Iowa bans agricultural drainage wells in regulations, would not be effective in primarily in three States. As a result, areas that have anaerobic lagoons or further preventing endangerments from EPA concluded that it could best earthen manure storage structures, and these wells. EPA believes that the achieve the goal of protecting USDWs Minnesota bans wells that inject into an development and implementation of from contamination by agricultural aquifer (i.e., saturated zone). drainage wells by assisting States in management guidance is a preferable 4. Concentrated Animal Feeding promoting the use of best management approach to development of additional Operations Proposal UIC requirements for preventing practices (BMPs) that are best suited to endangerment of ground water by local conditions and to addressing On December 15, 2000, the EPA LCSSs for several reasons. First, the potential ground water contamination Administrator signed proposed approach is comprehensive—it address sources in a holistic fashion. EPA revisions to the NPDES permit all types and sizes of septic systems, of proposed not to develop any additional regulations and effluent guidelines that which LCSSs regulated under the UIC Federal UIC regulations applicable to would address the water quality impacts program are just one small part. Second, agricultural drainage wells and instead of manure, wastewater, and other use of an integrated and comprehensive to rely on technical guidance, existing process waters generated by approach for all septic systems will authorities (such as requiring a permit concentrated animal feeding operations expedite implementation and avoid under 40 CFR 144.12), and other Agency (CAFOs) (66 FR 2960, January 12, 2001). potential confusion or disruption of programs targeted at improving the The proposal, which is a step in current programs that have varying quality of agricultural runoff. implementing the EPA and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Unified approaches to distinguishing ‘‘large’’ 2. Public Comments from ‘‘small’’ systems. Third, the Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations management guidance approach is One commenter opposed EPA’s developed in March 1999, would apply designed to accommodate regional finding that no new UIC regulations to as many as 39,000 CAFOs across the differences in environmental sensitivity were necessary or appropriate given country. According to alternate other EPA reports that indicated definitions that were proposed, CAFOs and the level of management activities agricultural runoff was a widespread would be defined as facilities that needed to achieve water quality and threat to drinking water quality in the maintain anywhere from 300 to more public health protection. Finally, this midwest. Another commenter indicated than 1,000 ‘‘animal units’’ in approach avoids the additional that EPA’s finding failed to meet the confinement, including cattle, swine, administrative burden on States and the requirements of the SDWA because the turkeys, chickens, horses, sheep or regulated community that would come Agency may choose not to regulate only lambs, and ducks. The rule would apply from additional Federal UIC regulations if it demonstrates that injection will not to production areas at CAFOs (animal that the Agency believes are not likely endanger USDWs. Two commenters confinement areas, manure storage to be effective in preventing indicated that the guidance document areas, raw material storage areas, and endangerments from these wells. This is that EPA proposed to develop to waste containment areas) and areas chiefly due to the fact that existing State facilitate implementation of BMPs under the control of CAFO owners or and local requirements are already more should be developed with State input operators where manure is land applied. specifically tailored to local hydrologic and public review and comment. The proposal explicitly recognizes conditions than new Federal UIC and addresses the risk of animal wastes regulations could be. Adding another 3. 1999 Class V Study from CAFOs migrating through layer of generalized Federal The Class V Study identified four agricultural drainage wells into ground requirements will not add any real safe documented cases of ground water water that has a direct hydrologic guards in protecting underground contamination clearly attributable to connection to surface waters. sources of drinking water. EPA believes agricultural drainage wells. Two of Specifically, the proposal would that any gap in environmental these cases occurred in the 1970’s. In prohibit the application of animal protection associated with these wells is addition, six other studies point to wastes within 100 feet of sinkholes and caused by a lack of effective and proper agricultural drainage wells as intake structures or agricultural well implementation, not a lack of standards; contributing to the more general heads. EPA requested comment on the thus additional standards would not problem of nitrate contamination in presence of such features in crop land address this problem. Rather, EPA’s ground water in agricultural areas. The and the extent to which the 100-foot approach is to spur better Study also found that the potential for setback around such features would implementation of existing standards. agricultural drainage wells to endanger interfere with the land application of E. Agricultural Drainage Wells USDWs is highest when the wells are manure. located near animal waste management The proposal includes several other 1. 1995 Proposed Finding areas such as manure lagoons and/or in features that would have the effect of Based on the 1987 Report to Congress, settings where manure is land applied; protecting ground water quality and EPA found that agricultural drainage however, no actual cases of reducing the endangerment associated
VerDate 11
with agricultural drainage wells at or minimum requirements. Another Therefore, instead of finalizing the near CAFOs. For example, for animal important reason was a lack of facility- 1998 proposal for other kinds of confinement and manure storage areas, specific data that EPA would need to industrial wells not addressed by the the proposal would adopt a zero develop a tailored regulatory approach 1999 rule on motor vehicle waste discharge requirement with no overflow appropriate to the different kinds of disposal wells, EPA decided to conduct allowance for swine, veal, and poultry industrial wells and their respective further review to decide whether CAFOs, would require routine degrees of endangerment. additional Federal regulations are inspections of the production area to needed. This additional review 2. Public Comments ensure that wastewater and manure consisted of the following three handling and storage are functioning While EPA received some comments components, which are summarized in properly, and would require proper supporting the 1995 proposal for turn below: (1) public notice and review closure of manure storage units. The industrial wells, such as from State of additional information on proposal also would require CAFO agencies that believed they already had contamination incidents potentially operators to land apply manure at sufficient authority and knowledge to attributable to Class V industrial wells; proper agronomic rates, which would address these wells, a number of (2) more detailed study of four specific reduce the potential for excess manure commenters opposed the 1995 types of Class V industrial wells; and (3) and associated contaminants to migrate approach. Much of the opposition came evaluation of Class V UIC program overland or underground into from the Sierra Club. As discussed in activities to address industrial wells agricultural drainage wells. Section II.B above, the Sierra Club using existing authorities. 5. Proposed Determination stated that the diversity of fluids The NODA EPA published on May 21, injected into industrial wells is not 1999 (64 FR 27741) presented additional Although there are potential concerns grounds for a decision against information on, among other topics, associated with agricultural drainage additional Federal regulations and contamination incidents potentially wells, EPA does not believe the could be addressed by establishing attributable to Class V industrial wells. available information on contamination targeted regulations for more narrowly That information was collected as part incidents and the potential for these defined subcategories of wells. The of the Class V UIC Study, which was wells to endanger USDWs suggests the Sierra Club further commented that EPA still ongoing at the time, as well as from need to develop additional Federal UIC has an obligation to collect any separate file searches conducted at the requirements at this time. The incidence additional facility-specific data deemed EPA Region II and Region VIII offices. of contamination from these wells is necessary to perform its rulemaking All of the information was placed in very low. States where the vast majority duties. EPA’s Water Docket for public review of agricultural drainage wells are known 3. Subsequent Actions when the NODA was published. As to exist are already implementing noted by several commenters on the effective programs. The CAFO proposal, Based on public comments on the NODA, and as determined upon review if promulgated, would take a significant 1995 proposal, and in accordance with by EPA, these reported incidents do not step to address the greatest remaining the 1997 modified consent decree with provide compelling evidence of threat identified for these wells: the the Sierra Club, EPA issued a revised significant problems caused by Class V potential for contamination from large proposal in 1998. This revision industrial wells. The primary limitation manure lagoons and from the land proposed to separate motor vehicle is that most of the incidents are application of manure. EPA will waste disposal wells from the other associated with illegally operating Class continue to look for situations where kinds of industrial wells considered in IV (i.e., shallow hazardous waste) these and other threats might exist and, the 1995 notice, and to either ban motor injection wells, which are generally if found, take action on a case-by-case vehicle waste disposal wells in ground prohibited under the current UIC basis to prevent endangerment using water protection areas or to require such regulations, rather than Class V wells. existing authorities. wells to be permitted. Other wells left EPA recognizes that this problem can be F. Industrial Wells in the industrial well category, when addressed by greater enforcement of the located in ground water protection existing ban of Class IV wells and does 1. 1995 Proposed Finding areas, would be required to meet MCLs not necessarily require additional In the 1995 proposal, industrial wells and other health-based standards at the Federal regulations on Class V were defined to include Class V motor point of injection, according to the 1998 industrial wells. Moreover, many of the vehicle waste disposal wells and other proposal. The 1999 final rule expanded potential contamination incidents kinds of wells used to inject industrial this approach for motor vehicle waste included in the NODA are more than 10 and commercial waste that did not fall disposal wells to include Other years old and not relevant to today’s into one of the other proposed Sensitive Ground Water Areas as practices, are based on anecdotal categories of Class V wells. Using this defined by the States. A final decision information or secondary references of broad definition, the 1995 proposal on how to address the remaining questionable credibility, involve found that some types of industrial industrial wells was delayed, mainly contamination that remained below wells may have a high potential to because of continuing public concern levels of concern, are not clearly linked endanger USDWs. The Agency, that the industrial well category was to Class V wells as opposed to other however, proposed that these wells are still too diverse and included many pollutant sources, and involve only best addressed using existing authorities kinds of wells that do not endanger possible contamination rather than and that additional Federal UIC USDWs. Some State and EPA Regional actual documented contamination. regulations to protect USDWs would be UIC programs also maintained that Altogether, information from the Class V inappropriate. One of the main reasons additional Federal regulations for Study placed in the NODA revealed for this position was the diversity in the industrial wells were unwarranted only three documented cases of types of fluids being injected into because the programs already had ample contamination that site-specific reports industrial wells, which would make it authority and were already adequately clearly attribute to the operation of Class difficult to establish one set of national addressing these wells. V industrial wells, and two of these
VerDate 11
cases were discovered in the 1970’s and relative to available resources to controlled. EPA also will explore one was discovered in 1987. This is a implement the Class V portion of their additional opportunities to very low contamination frequency UIC program. Limited resources, not communicate UIC requirements and considering the thousands of wells regulatory authorities, appears to be the obligations to certain industry sectors in estimated to be operating, and it does primary factor that would constrain a association with the effluent guideline not suggest a widespread current primacy State from taking immediate program implemented under the Clean problem that warrants new Federal action to address the risks posed by Water Act. regulations. Class V industrial waste disposal wells. The Class V Study also included a Therefore, an additional layer of Federal V. Comment Solicitation more detailed examination of four regulation would providing no real safe EPA is soliciting public comment on specific types of Class V industrial guards for protecting underground the underlying data and rationale wells: (1) Wells used to dispose of sources of drinking water. supporting this proposed determination washwater at carwashes that do not In States where EPA directly that additional Federal UIC regulations clean undercarriages or engines; (2) implements the Class V portion of the are not needed at this time to prevent wells used to dispose of food UIC program, the EPA Regional Offices Class V wells from endangering preparation-related wastewater and food always address endangering Class V underground sources of drinking water. processing equipment or facility wash wells as soon as they are identified, as This proposed determination is based down water; (3) wells used to inject a matter of routine policy under the on The Class V Underground Injection fluids from laundromats where no existing UIC regulations and authorities. Control Study (EPA Document Number onsite dry cleaning is performed or Although the exact nature and timing of EPA/816–R–99–014, dated September where no organic solvents are used for actions required vary from one Regional 1999) and other information that has laundering; and (4) wells used to inject Office to the next, the DI programs been placed in the public docket for noncontact cooling water that contains typically require endangering industrial comment. Also, EPA is soliciting any no additives and has not been wells to close or get a permit, and new data or information relevant to the chemically altered. EPA does not require site investigation and findings in this proposed determination believe the information compiled for remediation in response to any and the Class V injection well types it these well types, presented in Volumes contamination that may have occurred. addresses. 4, 6, 8, and 22, respectively, of the Class Such actions have been found to send V Study report, demonstrates a potential a strong message to owners or operators Dated: April 30, 2001. to endanger that warrants additional of uninventoried industrial wells that Diane C. Regas, regulation. For example, across all four they too should close their wells. EPA Acting Assistant Administrator for Water. well types, the Study found only one also communicates this message [FR Doc. 01–11413 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] documented contamination incident officially in outreach materials BILLING CODE 6560–50–U (involving a lobster processing/holding distributed to well owners and operators facility in Maine) and two possible in DI programs and to staff in primacy contamination incidents (involving States for them to use as part of their DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR carwashes in Hawaii). There remains programs. concern about some wells at carwashes 4. Proposed Determination Fish and Wildlife Service being vulnerable to spills or illicit discharges when an attendant is not The 1999 final rule included new 50 CFR Part 17 onsite, but the Study did not find stringent regulations targeting the evidence showing that such problems subcategory of Class V industrial wells RIN 1018–AG13 associated with carwash wells are believed to have the highest potential to actually occurring and warrant the endanger USDWs at the time of the 1995 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife development of new UIC regulations. proposal: Motor vehicle waste disposal and Plants; Notice of New Schedule for EPA also reevaluated how Class V wells. Further review of the remaining Final Determination of Critical Habitat UIC primacy States in their regions types of Class V industrial wells (1) for Wintering Piping Plovers address industrial wells using existing indicates that they have not been the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, authorities. Class V primacy States have source of frequent contamination Interior. demonstrated the ability to use existing incidents and (2) confirms that existing authorities to take some form of action UIC programs in States where most ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 60-day to ensure that Class V industrial wells industrial wells are known to exist are delay for final determination of critical do not endanger USDWs. Some States already using existing authorities to habitat. have an outright ban of industrial wells adequately address these wells and SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and while other States require permits for protect USDWs. As a result, EPA does Wildlife Service, announce a 60-day industrial wells. Some States ban the not believe there is a need to develop delay in making our final determination wells under some situations but permit additional Federal UIC regulations of critical habitat for wintering piping them under others. When a previously applicable to Class V industrial wells at plovers, subject to further court unidentified industrial well is this time. Instead, the Agency will proceedings. This additional time will discovered, the existing UIC programs continue to prevent endangerment from allow us to complete the analyses investigate the situation and decide on individual wells using existing required under section 4(b)(2) of the the best way to address it, which may authorities. This effort will include include requiring the well to close or get enforcing the existing prohibition of Endangered Species Act of 1973, as a permit, depending on site-specific Class IV wells to prevent accidental or amended (Act), for designation of conditions and threats. Such follow up illicit abuses of Class V industrial wells critical habitat. We will publish our investigation and action is usually taken and continuing to provide technical final determination in the Federal immediately after a Class V industrial assistance and support to State UIC Register. well is discovered, or as soon thereafter programs, where needed, to make sure DATES: We will make our final as possible given a State’s workload these wells are being adequately determination on the designation of
VerDate 11
critical habitat for wintering piping collectively. Further, we determined We, therefore, have delayed by 60 plovers by June 29, 2001. that the appropriate course of action days our final decision on critical ADDRESSES: Questions about this would be to propose critical habitat for habitat for wintering piping plovers. document should be directed to the all U.S.-wintering piping plovers on the Since the current court order requires Chief, Division of Conservation and same schedule required, under court this decision to have been made by Classification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife order, for the Great Lakes breeding April 30, 2001, we have requested the Service, 4401 North Fairfax, Room 420, population. We proposed critical habitat court to extend the deadline by 60 days, Arlington, Virginia 22203. for wintering piping plovers on July 6, or until June 29, 2001. We will base our FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2000 (65 FR 41782), and published final determination on material and Chris Nolin at the above address or extensions of the comment period on information already in the record for telephone (703) 358–2171. August 30, 2000 (65 FR 52691), and this critical habitat determination and October 27, 2000 (65 FR 64414), so that will publish our determination in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the comment period closed on Federal Register. Background: November 24, 2000. We later reopened Elsewhere in the Federal Register The piping plover (Charadrius the comment period from February 22, today we are publishing a final rule melodus) is a small North American 2001, through March 1, 2001 (66 FR designating critical habitat in the shorebird that breeds in the Great 11134), to accept additional breeding areas of the endangered Great Plains, Great Lakes, and upper Atlantic information. The proposal includes 146 Lakes population of piping plovers. In Coast states; its wintering areas include areas along the coasts of North Carolina, addition, by May 30, 2001, we will the lower Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, make a proposed determination of United States. On December 11, 1985, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and critical habitat for the breeding areas of we published a final rule (50 FR 50720), Texas. This includes approximately the threatened population of piping listing the piping plover as endangered 2,691 kilometers (1,672 miles) of plovers in the northern Great Plains. shoreline along the Gulf and Atlantic in the Great Lakes watershed (Illinois, Author Indiana, Michigan, northeastern coasts and along margins of interior The primary authors of this document Minnesota, New York, Ohio, bays, inlets, and lagoons. are Wendi Weber and Patrick Leonard, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ontario) Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Division of Conservation and and as threatened elsewhere within its Species Act requires that we designate Classification, Arlington, Virginia. range. All piping plovers on migratory or revise critical habitat based upon the routes outside of the Great Lakes best scientific and commercial data Authority available and after taking into watershed or on their wintering grounds The authority for this action is the are considered threatened. We did not consideration the economic impact, and any other relevant impact, of specifying Endangered Species Act (16 U.C.S. 1531 designate critical habitat for the species et seq.). at that time. any particular area as critical habitat. In December 1996, Defenders of We may exclude an area from critical Dated: April 30, 2001. Wildlife (Defenders) filed a lawsuit habitat if we determine that the benefits Marshall P. Jones, Jr., against the Department of the Interior of excluding the area outweigh the Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the Service for failing to designate benefits of including the area as critical Service. critical habitat for the Great Lakes habitat, provided such exclusion will [FR Doc. 01–11206 Filed 5–2–01; 12:41 pm] population of the piping plover. not result in the extinction of the BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Defenders filed a second similar lawsuit species. We prepared and made for the Northern Great Plains piping available a draft economic analysis plover population in 1997. These concerning the proposed critical habitat DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR lawsuits were subsequently combined designation (65 FR 52691). We received (Defenders of Wildlife et al. v. Bruce considerable public comment on our Fish and Wildlife Service Babbitt et al., Consolidated Cases Civil draft analysis of the economic effects of No. 1:96–CV–02695AER and Civil No. the proposed critical habitat 50 CFR Part 17 designation; we reopened the comment 1:97–CV00777AER). In February 2000, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the court issued an order directing us to period the last time (66 FR 11134) primarily to accept additional and Plants; 12-Month Finding for a publish a proposed critical habitat Petition To List the Washington designation for the Great Lakes information into the record on potential economic effects of the designation. Population of Western Sage Grouse population of the piping plover by June (Centrocercus urophasianus phaios) 30, 2000. Publication of a similar Given the extent and detail of the proposal for nesting areas of the comments on our draft economic AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern Great Plains population of analysis, and especially the significant Interior. piping plover by May 31, 2001, was also portion of these comments that arrived ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition ordered. A subsequent order directs us after we reopened the comment period finding. to finalize the critical habitat in late February, we were only able to designations for the Great Lakes develop a draft final economic analysis SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and population by April 30, 2001, including on April 17, 2001, and a revised draft Wildlife Service (Service), announce a its wintering habitat, and for the one week later. We are currently 12-month finding for a petition to list Northern Great Plains population by reviewing this revised draft. The final the Washington population of western March 15, 2002. economic analysis is a critically sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus Since we cannot distinguish the Great important part of the analysis required phaios) under the Endangered Species Lakes and Great Plains birds on their under section 4(b)(2) of the Act; without Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We find wintering grounds, we felt it was the economic analysis, we are unable to that the petitioned action is warranted, appropriate to propose critical habitat complete an adequate and effective but precluded by higher priority listing for all wintering piping plovers 4(b)(2) analysis. actions. We will develop a proposed
VerDate 11
rule to list this population segment remainder of the taxon, and they cycle, and are particularly tied to pursuant to our Listing Priority provided biological and ecological several species of sagebrush (Artemesia Guidance (LPG). We made this finding support for this argument. We spp.). Adult greater sage grouse rely on in accordance with a court-approved considered this request appropriate sagebrush throughout much of the year settlement in the case of Northwest because, while we do not base listing to provide roosting cover and food, and Ecosystem Alliance v. Babbitt (No. 00– decisions on political subdivisions other depend almost exclusively on sagebrush 520–EAS(D.D.C)). than international boundaries, we must for food during the winter. A wide DATES: The finding announced in this consider for listing under the Act any variety of forbs (broad-leaved document was made on April 30, 2001. population of vertebrate taxa (species or herbaceous plants) are also used by ADDRESSES: Submit information, subspecies) if it can be recognized as a greater sage grouse during the spring comments, or questions concerning this distinct population segment (DPS) (61 and summer periods. Greater sage petition finding to the Supervisor, FR 4722). The criteria under which we grouse hens require sufficient forb Upper Columbia Fish and Wildlife recognize DPSs are based upon the abundance for their pre-laying and Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, population’s discreteness from the nesting periods, and an assortment of 11103 East Montgomery Drive, Spokane, remainder of the taxon and its forb and insect species form important Washington 99206. The petition, significance to the taxon to which it nutritional components for chicks administrative finding, supporting belongs. Therefore, our status review during the early stages of development. information, and comments received are considered the population segment of Greater sage grouse may disperse up to available for public inspection, by western sage grouse in Washington as it 160 kilometers (km) (100 miles (mi)) appointment, during normal business relates to the remainder of the taxon. between seasonal use areas, however, hours at the above address. In July, 2000, the American average movements are generally less Ornithologists’ Union (AOU) recognized than 35 km (21 mi). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: sage grouse (Centrocercus During the spring breeding season, Chris Warren, Fish and Wildlife urophasianus) by the common name of male greater sage grouse gather together Biologist, at the above address, by greater sage grouse. In addition, the and perform courtship displays on phone at (509) 891–6839, facsimile at AOU recognized sage grouse inhabiting relatively open areas called leks. Leks (509) 891–6748, or electronic mail at _ southwestern Colorado and extreme are often surrounded by more dense chris [email protected]. southeastern Utah as a congeneric shrub steppe cover where males and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: species (C. minimus), referred to as females may disperse to roost or escape Background Gunnison sage grouse (AOU 2000). The predators during the breeding season. western subspecies of greater sage Males defend individual territories Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered grouse (C. u. phaios) was first described within leks and perform elaborate Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended in 1946 (Aldrich 1946) and was displays with their specialized plumage (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that, recognized by the AOU in 1957 (AOU and vocalizations to attract females for for any petition that contains substantial 1957). Compared to the eastern mating. Relatively few, dominant males information, we conduct a status review subspecies (C. u. urophasianus), account for the majority of breeding on and make a finding within 12 months of western sage grouse have reduced white a given lek. the date of receipt of the petition on markings and darker grayish-brown Females typically select nest sites whether the petitioned action is: (a) not feathering, resulting in a more dusky under sagebrush cover, although other warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) overall appearance. We adopted the vegetation is sometimes used. The warranted but precluded from above nomenclature and recognized simple nests consist of scrapes on the immediate proposal by other pending ranges of these taxa for this finding. ground, which are sometimes lined with proposals of higher priority. Upon We condensed information regarding feathers and vegetation. Clutch sizes making a 12-month finding, we must the description and natural history of range from 6 to 13 eggs, and females promptly publish such notice in the greater sage grouse from the following may renest with loss of their first clutch. Federal Register. sources—Aldrich 1963, Dalke et al. Nest success ranges from 10 to 63 On May 28, 1999, we received a 1963, Johnsgard 1973, Connelly et al. percent and is relatively low compared petition, dated May 14, 1999, from the 1988, Fischer et al. 1993, Drut 1994, to other prairie grouse species. Chicks Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, WDFW 1995, Western Sage and begin to fly at 2 to 3 weeks of age and Bellingham, Washington, and Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse broods remain together for up to 12 Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Boulder, Workshop (WSCSGW) 1996 and 1998, weeks. Shrub canopy and the cover Colorado. The petitioners requested that and Schroeder et al. 1999. provided by grasses and forbs act to the Washington population of western Grouse are gallinaceous (chicken-like, conceal nesting hens and their broods. sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus ground-nesting) birds, and greater sage The annual mortality rate for greater phaios) be listed as threatened or grouse are the largest North American sage grouse is roughly 50 to 55 percent, endangered under the Act. The petition grouse species. Males and females have which is relatively low compared to clearly identified itself as such and dark grayish-brown body plumage with other prairie grouse species. Most contained the names, addresses, and many small gray and white speckles, juvenile mortality occurs during nesting signatures of the petitioning fleshy yellow combs over the eyes, long and the chicks’ flightless stage and is organizations’ representatives. pointed tails, and dark-green toes. Males due primarily to predation or severe Accompanying the petition was also have blackish chin and throat weather conditions. Up to 50 percent of information relating to the taxonomy, feathers, specialized erectile feathers at all greater sage grouse mortality is ecology, threats, and the past and the back of the head and neck, and caused by predation, from both avian present distribution of western sage white feathers around the neck and (e.g., hawks, eagles, and ravens) and grouse. upper belly. During breeding displays, ground (e.g., coyotes, badgers, and The petitioners requested listing of males also exhibit patches of bare, olive- ground squirrels) predators. the Washington population of western green skin on their breasts. Historically, greater sage grouse sage grouse based upon threats to the Greater sage grouse depend on shrub occurred in 12 States and 3 Canadian population and its isolation from the steppe habitats throughout their life provinces (after Schroeder et al. 1999);
VerDate 11
their range extended from southeastern Columbia (after Braun 1998). There have in extreme southeastern Oregon near the Alberta and southwestern also been considerable declines in the Idaho/Nevada borders (Figure 1). Saskatchewan, Canada, south to abundance of greater sage grouse from Populations in northern California and northwestern Colorado, west to eastern historic levels (Hornaday 1916, western Nevada are thought to represent California, Oregon, and Washington, Crawford and Lutz 1985, Drut 1994, an intermediate form between the and north to southern British Columbia, WDFW 1995, Coggins and Crawford western and eastern subspecies of Canada. Range-wide, the distribution of 1996, Braun 1998, Schroeder et al. 1999, greater sage grouse (AOU 1957, Aldrich greater sage grouse has declined in a among others). 1963). Currently, western sage grouse number of areas. Currently, greater sage The historic distribution of western occupy central and southern Oregon grouse occur in 11 States and 2 sage grouse extended from south-central and two relatively small areas in central Canadian provinces; they were British Columbia southward throughout Washington. extirpated from Nebraska and British eastern Washington and Oregon, except BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate 11
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate 11
Except for Wallowa County, western indicating that a proposal to list as the Act to determine if listing it as either sage grouse were distributed throughout endangered or threatened was possibly threatened or endangered is warranted. the sagebrush-dominated habitats of appropriate, but for which conclusive Below, we assess the population eastern Oregon until the early 1900s data on biological vulnerability and segment of western sage grouse that (Gabrielson and Jewett 1940). By 1920, threats were not available to support a remains in Washington under our DPS western sage grouse populations had proposed rule. On February 28, 1996, policy. decreased and the birds were we discontinued the designation of Discreteness—A population segment considered scarce except for areas in category 2 species as candidates for of a vertebrate species may be central and southern Oregon (Gabrielson listing under the Act (61 FR 7596). considered discrete if it satisfies either and Jewett 1940, Drut 1994). Presently, In 1992, we entered into a voluntary one of the following two conditions: (1) Malheur, Harney, and Lake Counties Conservation Agreement with the Army It is markedly separated from other harbor the bulk of greater sage grouse in and the WDFW for western sage grouse populations of the same taxon as a Oregon (roughly 24,000 to 58,000 birds, occurring at the YTC. The Conservation consequence of physical, physiological, both subspecies combined), with the Agreement expired April 30, 2000. ecological, or behavioral factors. balance of Oregon’s western sage grouse Efforts to update and implement a Quantitative measures of genetic or population (roughly 3,000 to 8,000 revised Conservation Agreement for morphological discontinuity may birds) split among Baker, Crook, western sage grouse throughout provide evidence of this separation. (2) Deschutes, Grant, Klamath, Union, and Washington are ongoing. It is delimited by international Wheeler Counties (after Willis et al. We published a 90-day finding for the governmental boundaries within which 1993). subject petition on August 24, 2000 (65 differences in control of exploitation, Historically, western sage grouse in FR 51578), which concluded that management of habitat, conservation Washington ranged from Oroville in the substantial information was available to status, or regulatory mechanisms exist north, west along the Cascade foothills, indicate that the petitioned action may that are significant with regard to east to the Spokane River, and south to be warranted and that a status review conservation of the taxon. We did not the Oregon border (Yocom 1956). would commence. The original public address the international boundary Historic references indicate there were comment period ended October 23, criterion in this 12-month petition large numbers of western sage grouse in 2000, but was reopened on January 9, finding because western sage grouse Washington (in Sveum 1995 and WDFW 2001 until February 16, 2001, to provide have been extirpated from British 1995), and annual State harvests additional opportunity for input from Columbia. averaged roughly 1,800 birds from 1951 interested parties (66 FR 1632). This 12- The two subpopulations of western to 1973. Harvest rates declined from month finding is made in accordance sage grouse that remain in central 1974 (n = 900) to 1987 (n = 18), and with a court-ordered settlement in the Washington are separated by Washington closed the hunting season case of Northwest Alliance v. Babbitt approximately 55 km (34 mi). While this in 1988 (WDFW 1995). Western sage (No. 00–520–EAS(D.D.C.)), which distance is well within the species’ grouse currently occupy approximately requires us to complete a finding by maximum estimated dispersal distance, 10 percent of their historic distribution May 1, 2001. a number of recent telemetry studies have never documented their in the State. There are two Distinct Population Segment Review subpopulations of western sage grouse intermixing (Schroeder pers. comm. remaining in Washington, totaling Under the Act, we must consider for 1999; Pounds, YTC, pers. comm. 1999). approximately 1,000 birds (WSGWG listing any species, subspecies, or, for However, until recently, the two 1998). The northern subpopulation vertebrates, any DPS of these taxa if subpopulations were considered occurs primarily on private and State- there is sufficient information to relatively continuous and may now owned lands in Douglas County indicate that such action may be represent isolated components of a (roughly 650 birds); the southern warranted. To implement the measures single metapopulation (WDFW 1995, subpopulation occurs at the Yakima prescribed by the Act and its Schroeder et al. 2000). In addition, Training Center (YTC), administered by Congressional guidance, we (along with sporadic sightings outside current the U.S. Department of the Army the National Marine Fisheries Service) concentrations indicate there may be (Army), in Kittitas and Yakima Counties developed policy that addresses the some minimal interaction and, possibly, (roughly 350 birds). recognition of DPSs for potential listing genetic interchange between them Rough estimates, based on the historic actions (61 FR 4722). The policy allows (WDFW 1995). distribution of western sage grouse (after for more refined application of the Act The next closest western sage grouse WDFW 2000) and contemporary density that better reflects the biological needs to the population in Washington are projections (Johnsgard 1973; Drut et al. of the taxon being considered and located over 185 km (115 mi) to the 1994a; WDFW 1995; Schroeder, WDFW, avoids the inclusion of entities that do south, in central Oregon. Historically, pers. comm. 1999), indicate that there not require its protective measures. there was a greater level of continuity may have been between 200,000 and Under our DPS policy, we use two and interaction between the population 2,000,000 western sage grouse elements to assess whether a population segments of western sage grouse in these historically. Using best- and worst-case segment under consideration for listing two regions (Drut 1994). However, scenarios, western sage grouse may be recognized as a DPS. The bottlenecks in the distribution of abundance has declined between 66 elements are: (1) The population western sage grouse may have existed percent and 99 percent from historic segment’s discreteness from the historically across central Oregon levels, respectively. remainder of the taxon; and (2) the (Figure 1). In this area, western sage population segment’s significance to the grouse range is confined to relatively Previous Federal Action taxon to which it belongs. If we narrow corridors of lower elevation, We added the western sage grouse to determine that a population segment shrub steppe habitats that transect our candidate species list on September being considered for listing represents a higher elevation, forested habitats. In 18, 1985, as a category 2 species (50 FR DPS, then the level of threat to the addition, the shrub steppe habitats and 37958). Category 2 species were those population segment is evaluated based land forms found in central Oregon may for which we possessed information on the five listing factors established by further restrict western sage grouse
VerDate 11
distribution within this region (see one to the next, and which may be interspersed to varying degrees with below). considerably different between the forested habitats of the Southern and It is currently unclear to what extent regions occupied by the species (Miller Eastern Cascades ecosystems to the the restrictions of shrub steppe habitats and Eddleman 2000). The different west, Okanogan Highlands to the north, in central Oregon may have acted to habitats historically and currently and the Bitterroot and Blue Mountains isolate population segments of western occupied by greater sage grouse are a to the east; and steppe (grassland) sage grouse historically. Nevertheless, reflection of the different geologic, habitats of the Palouse Prairie to the with regard to western sage grouse climatic, and edaphic (soil) conditions east. seasonal movements, dispersal and disturbance regimes influencing the The population segment of western behavior, and recent census information various regions within the shrub steppe sage grouse that remains in Washington (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999; Pounds biome (Miller and Eddleman 2000). occurs entirely within the Columbia pers. comm. 1999; Ferry, Oregon Necessarily, greater sage grouse have Basin and is the only representation of Department of Fish and Wildlife, pers. adapted to the mosaic of shrub steppe the taxon within this ecosystem. The comm. 2001), the population segment habitat types found throughout their population segment of western sage remaining in Washington is now historic distribution (Schroeder et al. grouse in central and southern Oregon considered physically discrete from the 1999). shows nearly continuous occupation population segment in central and With regard to the historic range of across the High Lava Plains, Northern southern Oregon (WDFW 1995, western sage grouse, several studies Great Basin, and Owyhee Uplands. WSGWG 1998, Schroeder et al. 2000). It defined and mapped landscape-level Given the available information, it is is likely that the population segments ecosystem components of the unclear if the disjunct subpopulation of within these two regions have been northwestern United States (Franklin greater sage grouse in the vicinity of physically discrete since at least the and Dyrness 1988, Quigley et al. 1997), Gerber Reservoir in extreme south- early-1900s (Gabrielson and Jewett while others focused on the central Oregon (Modoc Plateau) 1940, Crawford and Lutz 1985, Drut management and conservation of represents western sage grouse or the 1994). natural resources within these regional northern extent of intermediate Based on the above information, we ecosystems (Wisdom et al. 1998, Miller populations in northern California. This find that the population segment of and Eddleman 2000). Although there are area is not considered further for the western sage grouse that occurs in a number of differences between these purposes of this finding. Washington is discrete from the studies and their stated objectives, the A number of significant differences remainder of the taxon. ecosystem mapping units that result are are found between the Columbia Basin Significance—Our DPS policy surprisingly consistent (Quigley et al. and the balance of historic western sage provides several examples of the types 1997). Use of this biogeographic grouse range in central and southern of information that may demonstrate the information is important in determining Oregon (Table 1). In general, the significance of a population segment to if the population segment of western Columbia Basin is lower in elevation, the remainder of its taxon, including— sage grouse that remains in Washington contains deeper soils of varying origin, (a) Persistence of the discrete occupies an unusual or unique and has been influenced by different population segment in an ecological ecological setting. In addition, it is geological processes. These structural setting unusual or unique for the taxon; important for delineating the bounds of differences, combined with regional and (b) evidence that the discrete any potential DPS in the region, as climatic conditions, significantly population segment differs markedly required by our DPS policy. influence the broad plant associations from other population segments in its Four (and potentially five) of the found within each ecosystem genetic characteristics; and (c) evidence ecosystems identified by the above (Daubenmire 1988, Franklin and that loss of the discrete population studies provide essential habitat Dyrness 1988). Historically, transitional segment would result in a significant requirements for western sage grouse. steppe habitats were much more gap in the range of the taxon. We For the purposes of this finding, we prevalent within the Columbia Basin address these significance factors below refer to the ecosystems historically than within the ecosystems of central as they relate to the population segment occupied by western sage grouse as the and southern Oregon. In contrast, of western sage grouse that remains in Columbia Basin, High Lava Plains, juniper (Juniperus spp.) woodlands and Washington. Northern Great Basin, Owyhee Uplands, salt-desert shrub habitats were much (a) Persistence in an unusual or and, potentially, the Modoc Plateau more common in central and southern unique ecological setting—The broad (after Quigley et al. 1997). The Oregon. Finally, there are significant shrub steppe biome historically Columbia Basin occurs in Washington differences in the type and distribution occupied by greater sage grouse across and northern Oregon, while the other of sagebrush taxa among the ecosystems their range consists of a number of four ecosystems occur in central and historically occupied by western sage variable habitat types that grade from southern Oregon. These ecosystems are grouse.
Table 1.—Differences in Ecosystem Elements Between Regions Occupied by the Extant Population Segments of Western Sage Grouse (After Winward 1980, Daubenmire 1988, Franklin and Dyrness 1988, McNab and Avers 1994, Dobler et al. 1996, Quigley et al. 1997, and Miller and Eddleman 2000)
ECOSYSTEM ELEMENTS—GEOLOGIC, EDAPHIC, AND TRANSITIONAL HABITATS
Population Channeled Internally- Juniper Salt-desert segment Elevations Soils scablands drained playas Steppe woodland shrub
Columbia Basin <3,000 ft ...... Deep/Loamy Prominent Rare/Absent .... Abundant Rare/Absent .... Rare/Absent. Glacial/ (north). (east). Eolian.
VerDate 11
ECOSYSTEM ELEMENTS—GEOLOGIC, EDAPHIC, AND TRANSITIONAL HABITATS—Continued
Population Channeled Internally- Juniper Salt-desert segment Elevations Soils scablands drained playas Steppe woodland shrub
Central/South- >3,500 ft ...... Thin/Rocky Rare/Absent .... Prominent Rare/Absent .... Abundant Abundant ern Oregon. Volcanic/Allu- (NGB, OU) 1. (HLP) (NGB, OU). vial. Present (NGB, OU). 1 Element primarily applies to the ecosystems noted: HLP—High Lava Plains; NGB—Northern Great Basin; OU—Owyhee Uplands.
ECOSYSTEM ELEMENTS—SAGEBRUSH (Artemesia) TAXA1
Population Basin Wyoming Mountain segment ssp ssp ssp Low Three-Tip Stiff Early Silver Black
Columbia Dominant .. Rare/Ab- Rare/Ab- Rare/Ab- Abundant Abundant .. Rare/Absent Rare/Ab- Rare/Ab- Basin. sent. sent. sent. (north). sent. sent. Central/South- Rare/Ab- Dominant .. Abundant .. Abundant .. Present (OU) Present ..... Present (HLP) Present Present ern Oregon. sent. (NGB, (NGB, OU). OU). 1 Big Sagebrush (A. tridentata) Subspecies (ssp): Basin—A.t. tridentata, Wyoming—A.t. wyomingensis, Mountain—A.t. vaseyana; Low—A. arbuscula; Three-tip—A. tripartita; Stiff—A. rigida; Early—A. longiloba; Silver—A. cana; Black—A. nova.
There are a number of broad habitat 1981, Meyer 1992) also provide different the genera Agoseris, Astragalus, Crepis, associations in common between the cover conditions for greater sage grouse, Aster, Erigeron, Eriogonum, and Columbia Basin and the ecosystems of and their winter movements are Lomatium (Sveum 1995, Miller and central and southern Oregon associated with locating appropriate Eddleman 2000). (Daubenmire 1988, Franklin and sites (WDFW 1995, Schroeder et al. From spring through fall, sagebrush Dyrness 1988). However, even within 1999). The sagebrush taxa that are canopies provide vertical cover for these common habitat associations, available as winter food and cover for greater sage grouse, while grasses and notable differences exist. In general, the western sage grouse differ between the forbs provide horizontal cover. This composition of forb species differs Columbia Basin and the ecosystems of variety of cover is very important for considerably between the Columbia central and southern Oregon (Table 1). concealing nesting hens and their Basin and the ecosystems in central and broods from potential avian and ground During the breeding season, adult southern Oregon (Daubenmire 1988 and predators, as well as providing greater sage grouse undergo a nutritional Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Even when protection from inclement weather. deficit and lose weight (WDFW 1995, the same forb species may be present, Western sage grouse in central and the two regions typically support Schroeder et al. 1999). During this southern Oregon use different sagebrush different subspecies and/or varieties of period and continuing into summer, habitat associations (e.g., mountain big these taxa (Hitchcock and Cronquist forbs and insects become increasingly sagebrush, low sagebrush) throughout 1973). important as food items for greater sage the spring and summer periods (Gregg et The differences noted above between grouse. Western sage grouse hens al. 1993, Barnett and Crawford 1994, the Columbia Basin and the ecosystems require sufficient forb abundance for Drut et al. 1994a, Hanf et al. 1994). The of central and southern Oregon affect their pre-laying and nesting periods, sagebrush habitat associations the essential habitat requirements of and an assortment of forb and insect preferentially selected by western sage western sage grouse within these species form important nutritional grouse in central and southern Oregon different regions, as described below. components for chicks during the early are not available to the population Greater sage grouse are sagebrush stages of their development (Gregg et al. segment within the Columbia Basin ‘‘obligates’’ and depend on sagebrush to 1993, Barnett and Crawford 1994, Drut (Table 1). a great degree to provide essential food et al. 1994b, Hanf et al. 1994). Juniper woodlands and salt-desert and cover requirements, especially Preferential use of food resources by shrub communities are notable during winter (Drut 1994, Barnett and greater sage grouse is believed to be primarily for their potential to exclude Crawford 1994, WDFW 1995, Schroeder associated with the foods’ nutritive western sage grouse and the et al. 1999). Greater sage grouse display values, the dietary needs of the birds, management implications that result. As preferential use of different taxa of and, ultimately, the birds’ reproductive juniper becomes more abundant and sagebrush as winter food (Remington fitness and survival (Remington and areas become increasingly closed and Braun 1985, Welch et al. 1991) and, Braun 1985, Johnson and Boyce 1990, woodlands, use by greater sage grouse is in some areas, low sagebrush may be Barnett and Crawford 1994, Drut et al. precluded. The exclusion of fire from preferred over big sagebrush (in 1994a, Drut et al. 1994b, Hanf et al. juniper woodlands allow these Schroeder et al. 1999). In addition, 1994, WDFW 1995, Schroeder et al. communities to expand. Active invasion greater sage grouse display preference 1999). Many of the native forb species of sagebrush habitat associations by for the different subspecies of big and varieties that differ between the juniper woodlands has occurred over sagebrush as food, showing the highest Columbia Basin and the ecosystems of the last 130 years (Miller and Eddleman preference for mountain big sagebrush, central and southern Oregon (Hitchcock 2000). Likewise, salt-desert shrub followed by Wyoming big sagebrush, and Cronquist 1973, Franklin and habitats are not typically used by greater then basin big sagebrush (Welch et al. Dyrness 1988) form important food sage grouse. Intense grazing pressure 1991). The different growth forms of items for greater sage grouse from spring and other local activities that can affect sagebrush taxa (Winward 1980 and through summer, including those within the hydrology of an area (e.g., irrigation,
VerDate 11
mining, impoundments) may alter the the range, and the results are drift, and/or inbreeding may have composition and distribution of salt- preliminary and have been used influenced the regional genetic profiles desert shrub communities. The historic, primarily to guide further investigation of greater sage grouse, including those present, and predicted future (Oyler-McCance, University of Denver, that remain within the Columbia Basin, occurrence of juniper woodlands and pers. comm. 1999; Quinn pers. comm. merits further investigation (Benedict et salt-desert shrub communities differ 1999). al. 2001, Oyler-McCance et al. in litt. between the Columbia Basin and the The range-wide investigations into the 2001). ecosystems of central and southern genetic profiles of greater sage grouse (c) Significant gap in the range of the Oregon (Table 1, Keane et al. 1996). have identified a number of rare and taxon—Western sage grouse represent Based on the above information, we unique haplotypes (from mitochondrial the extreme northwestern extent of conclude that the Columbia Basin DNA). In addition, haplotype greater sage grouse range. In addition, represents a unique ecological setting frequencies and the level of genetic the population segment that remains due to its geologic, climatic, edaphic, diversity vary among the local within the Columbia Basin represents and plant community components. In populations sampled (Quinn et al. 1997, an isolated portion of the northern-most addition, the unique elements of the Benedict and Quinn 1998, Benedict et extent of the historic distribution of Columbia Basin ecosystem affect the al. 2001). So far, there are several western sage grouse. The Columbia essential habitat requirements of notable results from this range-wide Basin historically encompassed roughly western sage grouse. Necessarily, the work (Benedict et al. 2001). First, the 55 percent of the entire range of western population segment of western sage population sampled from the Mono sage grouse (Figure 1). Currently, grouse occupying the Columbia Basin Lake area in California and Nevada western sage grouse occupy must differentially exploit the resources stands out for having an unusually high approximately 5 percent of their historic that are available, as compared to the proportion of novel haplotypes, sharing distribution within this ecosystem. population segment within the only a single haplotype (represented by A number of studies address the ecosystems of central and southern just one individual) with the rest of the characteristics of peripheral and/or Oregon. The different habitat use range. This population represents the isolated populations and their potential patterns of western sage grouse within extreme southwestern extent of historic influences on, and importance to, the the Columbia Basin have bearing on greater sage grouse range. Second, there remainder of the taxon. Peripheral and their food and cover preferences, is no apparent genetic distinction isolated populations may experience distribution, movements, reproductive between the recognized eastern and increased directional selection due to fitness, and, ultimately, their survival. western subspecies. Third, the marginal or varied habitats or species The unique elements of the Columbia population segment that remains within compositions at range peripheries, Basin also hold different management the Columbia Basin stands out for exhibit adaptations specific to these implications for western sage grouse having very low genetic diversity, with differing selective pressures, within this ecosystem (see below). just three haplotypes represented among demonstrate genetic consequences of (b) Markedly different genetic the two subpopulations. Thirteen reduced gene flow dependent on characteristics—To date, most genetic individuals sampled from the northern varying levels of isolation, and/or have research on greater sage grouse has subpopulation (n = 18) and all of the different responses to anthropogenic concentrated on clarifying issues individuals sampled from the southern influences (Levin 1970, MacArthur surrounding the taxonomic separation subpopulation (n = 18) represent a 1972, Morain 1984, Lacy 1987, of Gunnison sage grouse in Colorado. single, widespread haplotype that is Hengeveld 1990, Saunders et al. 1991, Results of this research show Gunnison shared with most of the other sampled Hoffmann and Blows 1994, Furlow and sage grouse to have a dissimilar genetic locales. The remaining five individuals Armijo-Prewitt 1995, Garcia-Ramos and profile and less genetic diversity than from the northern subpopulation are Kirkpatrick 1997, among others). greater sage grouse populations in represented by a novel (n = 3) or rare (n Recent discussions addressed the Colorado (Quinn et al. 1997, Oyler- = 2) haplotype (Benedict et al. 2001). attributes of isolated and peripheral McCance et al. 1999). The comparatively low genetic populations and their potential This information supports the new diversity of the population segment of importance to conservation efforts. species designation for these birds western sage grouse that remains within Some investigations would emphasize (AOU 2000). The genetic information the Columbia Basin is consistent with a genetic distinctiveness (Lesica and concerning Gunnison sage grouse recent and severe bottleneck in its Allendorf 1995, Waples 1998), while demonstrates that the genus may effective population size (i.e., the others suggest a spectrum of influences differentiate significantly within a number of individuals contributing to may demonstrate the value of discrete relatively small geographic region. In reproduction), reduced or no gene flow populations (Pennock and Dimmick addition, this information is important to this population segment from other 1997, Ruggiero et al. 1999). The for helping to determine the extent of regions, or both (Benedict et al. 2001, purposes of the Act are to conserve genetic differentiation between Oyler-McCance et al. in litt. 2001). The species ‘‘* * * of esthetic, ecological, population segments of greater sage results from the range-wide work on the educational, historical, recreational, and grouse, and whether such differentiation regional genetic profiles of greater sage scientific value. * * *’’ As addressed may be significant to the remainder of grouse are suggestive and demonstrate a above, the DPS policy reflects this the taxon. marked difference between the broader objective and does not limit the Additional studies to investigate the population segment of western sage concept of significance strictly to range-wide genetic profiles of greater grouse within the Columbia Basin and genetic distinctiveness. sage grouse are ongoing (Quinn et al. the population segment in central and The available information regarding 1997; Benedict and Quinn 1998; southern Oregon. However, these results the historic distribution and potential Benedict et al. 2001). To date, range- do not necessarily indicate that genetic isolation of western sage grouse within wide investigations include samples differentiation of this population the Columbia Basin demonstrates that from Colorado, Utah, Nevada, segment is significant to the remainder this population segment is likely California, Oregon, and Washington. of the taxon. To what extent the forces experiencing increased directional Sample sizes are minimal for portions of of isolation, adaptive change, genetic selection due to marginal and varied
VerDate 11
habitats at the taxon’s range periphery, disease or predation; (4) inadequacy of grazing pressure from large native exhibiting genetic consequences of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (5) herbivores since the latest period of reduced gene flow from other other natural or human-caused factors glaciation, roughly 12,000 years before population segments, and responding affecting the DPS’ continued existence. present (Mack and Thompson 1982, (and will continue to respond) to the (1) Present or threatened destruction, Daubenmire 1988). Excessive grazing different anthropogenic influences in modification, or curtailment of habitat pressure can have significant impacts on the region. or range. A number of influences have the shrub steppe ecosystems found Based on the above information, we been implicated in the decline of greater throughout the historic range of greater conclude that loss of the population sage grouse distribution and abundance sage grouse (Fleischner 1994), and these segment of western sage grouse that throughout the species’ range (Crawford impacts may be exacerbated in the remains within the Columbia Basin and Lutz 1985, Blus et al. 1989, Braun Columbia Basin. In this region, would represent a significant gap in the et al. 1994, Drut 1994, WDFW 1995, excessive grazing removes current historic range of the taxon (i.e., the loss Fischer et al. 1996, Connelly and Braun herbaceous growth and residual cover of of a conspicuous peripheral and isolated 1997, Schroeder et al. 1999). Of primary native grasses and forbs, and can extension of historic range and concern are impacts to native shrub increase the canopy cover and density representation of the taxon within a steppe habitats, which include of sagebrush and invasive species unique ecological setting). conversion for agriculture, urban and (Daubenmire 1988, WDFW 1995, mineral resources developments, Conclusion Livingston 1998). These impacts may be construction of utility and especially critical to western sage grouse To summarize, we find that the transportation corridors, and habitat populations during the spring nesting discrete population segment of western degradation through overgrazing, brush and brood rearing periods, and may sage grouse that occurs in Washington is control, altered fire frequencies, and negatively affect their reproductive significant to the remainder of the exotic species invasions. Other potential potential (Crawford 1997, Connelly and taxon, and thus represents a distinct influences that may be associated with Braun 1997, Schroeder et al. 1999). population segment. The significance of greater sage grouse population declines The latest available estimate (1993) of this population segment is primarily include predation, excessive hunting, the number of cattle supported in due to its persistence in the unique disease and parasitism, chemical Douglas County, which also supports ecological setting of the Columbia Basin. applications for pest control, weather the northern subpopulation of the In addition, information concerning the cycles, and recreational activities. As a Columbia Basin DPS, is roughly 20,000 historic and current distribution of result of these combined influences, (WDFW 1995). It is currently unclear if western sage grouse indicates that the greater sage grouse distribution and this level of livestock use in the county loss of the Columbia Basin population abundance have continued to decline may have negative effects on western segment would represent a significant over the past decade, and a number of sage grouse or their habitats. Prior to gap in the historic range of the taxon. populations may now be at risk of 1992, livestock grazing pressure was Finally, the available genetic extinction throughout the species’ range intense throughout the area of Kittitas information on western sage grouse, (in WSCSGW 1996 and 1998). and Yakima Counties that now while inconclusive, further supports the Currently, greater sage grouse comprises the YTC, which supports the recognition of this population as a DPS. populations may be considered secure southern subpopulation of the Columbia We have determined that extirpation of in five States, including Montana, Basin DPS. In 1992, grazing intensity this population segment may result in Wyoming, Idaho, Nevada, and Oregon was reduced at the YTC within the the loss of unique characteristics within (Connelly and Braun 1997). western sage grouse protection areas the taxon, likely precluding further Native Americans began grazing identified by the Army. In 1995, cattle scientific inquiry into potential horses in the Columbia Basin in the grazing was eliminated throughout the differentiation of these characteristics. mid-1700s and, by the mid-1800s, installation (Livingston 1998). Twice As required by our DPS policy, we European settlers had established annually during spring and fall, flocks determined that the bounds of this DPS extensive cattle and horse grazing of sheep are trailed through the YTC are conterminous with the historic operations throughout the shrub steppe over a period of several weeks (Pounds distribution of western sage grouse habitats used by western sage grouse pers. comm. 1999). It is unknown to within the Columbia Basin ecosystem (Daubenmire 1988, WDFW 1995, what degree current livestock use levels (Figure 1). Consequently, we refer to Livingston 1998). By the late 1800s, may be impacting western sage grouse this population segment as the sheep production became increasingly or their habitat at the YTC. However, Columbia Basin DPS for the remainder important and large flocks were grazed impacts from past livestock grazing are of this finding. along with other previously established still evident throughout the installation Consideration of threats to, and livestock herds. Concurrent with (Livingston 1998). conservation measures for, the significant declines in native shrub During the first half of the 1900s, large Columbia Basin DPS are addressed steppe habitats (see below), portions of the shrub steppe habitats on below. contemporary grazing levels are much deeper soils within the Columbia Basin reduced from historic levels. However, were converted for dryland crop Summary of Factors Affecting the DPS large livestock operations continue production (Daubenmire 1988, Franklin The Act establishes five categories of within the shrub steppe habitats of the and Dyrness 1988, WDFW 1995). During threat that, either singly or in Columbia Basin to the present. From the mid-1900s, a number of hydro- combination, indicate a DPS may be 1986 to 1993, roughly 500,000 cattle electric dams were developed on the threatened or endangered. The five were being supported in nine central Columbia and Snake Rivers in listing factors that must be considered Washington counties that historically Washington and Oregon. The reservoirs are—(1) present or threatened harbored western sage grouse (WDFW formed by these projects impacted destruction, modification, or 1995). native shrub steppe habitats adjacent to curtailment of habitat or range; (2) over- There is some evidence that the shrub the rivers and led to further conversion utilization for commercial, recreational, steppe habitats of the Columbia Basin of large expanses of upland shrub scientific, or educational purposes; (3) evolved in the absence of substantial steppe habitats in the Columbia Basin
VerDate 11
for irrigated agriculture (WDFW 1995, combat forces to Fort Lewis in western carry a fire. The Army considered fire Franklin and Dyrness 1988). It has been Washington (USDD 1994). This action management and control in its planning estimated that approximately 60 percent was undertaken to accommodate efforts for the restationing action (USDD of the original shrub steppe habitat in brigade-level maneuver exercises and 1996), and the YTC has since developed Washington has been converted, may result in an increase in overall a detailed fire management plan (USDD primarily for agricultural uses (Dobler training activity and associated impacts 1998). However, the potential for 1994). While at much reduced levels, at the YTC. Large-scale training relatively large range fires to occur at shrub steppe habitats within the exercises at the YTC are scheduled to the YTC remains. In 1996, over 25,000 Columbia Basin continue to be occur at 18- to 24-month intervals and ha (60,000 ac) of shrub steppe habitat, converted for both dryland and irrigated may involve more than 10,000 troops much of it currently and potentially crop production. In addition, the U.S. and 1,000 tracked and wheeled vehicles. used by western sage grouse, was Bureau of Reclamation retains options Small-scale training exercises are also burned as a result of training activities. for further development of the Columbia conducted annually at the YTC by other A fire of this magnitude within the Basin Irrigation Project in central United States’ (e.g., Washington identified western sage grouse Washington (USDI 1998). Major National Guard) and allied military protection areas would jeopardize the portions of Washington’s shrub steppe units (USDD 1989, Livingston 1998). subspecies’ persistence at the ecosystem are considered among the In the fall of 1995, the Army installation (Livingston 1998). least protected areas in the state conducted its first large-scale training (2) Over-utilization for commercial, (Cassidy 1997). exercise at the YTC following the recreational, scientific, or educational Large areas of privately owned lands restationing action. Analysis of the purposes. Recent scientific in Douglas County are currently impacts from this exercise indicated investigations in Washington have withdrawn from crop production and that over 9 percent of the sagebrush resulted in some mortality of western planted to native and non-native cover plants within the western sage grouse sage grouse. However, the level of under the federal Conservation Reserve protection areas experienced major mortality incurred is not likely to Program (CRP), established in 1985 structural damage. In addition, significantly influence the viability of (USDA 1998). Lands under the CRP are modeling exercises indicated that the Columbia Basin DPS (Schroeder very important to the northern sagebrush cover would decline due to pers. comm. 1999; Pounds pers. comm. subpopulation of the Columbia Basin similar training scenarios if conducted 1999). DPS (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999). on a biannual basis (Cadwell et al. The northern subpopulation of the These areas, some of which have been 1996). Analyses of the potential impacts Columbia Basin DPS occurs primarily set aside since the late 1980s, can to other shrub steppe components that on private lands and is not subject to provide the essential grass and shrub may be important to western sage grouse extensive viewing by the general public cover requirements of western sage at the YTC (e.g., grass, forb, and insect or other recreational activities grouse on lands previously used for quality and abundance), or those (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999). The YTC agriculture. The juxtaposition of CRP associated with the smaller, ongoing closely manages recreation and sage lands with the remaining areas of native training activities, are not currently grouse viewing by the general public shrub steppe habitats and crop lands available. However, it has been using the installation, and these may further increase the value of these suggested that native vegetation on activities are not believed to be habitat patches for western sage grouse impacted sites with limited soil significant to the well-being of the (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999). A disturbance will recover following large- southern subpopulation of the Columbia number of CRP contracts in Washington scale maneuver exercises (Cadwell et al. Basin DPS (Pounds pers. comm. 1999). have expired since 1995, and more are 1996). In addition, the YTC conducts The Columbia Basin DPS has not been scheduled to expire from now through aggressive revegetation efforts for subject to hunting since 1987 (WDFW 2002. New contracts completed in 1998 sagebrush and native grasses within the 1995). for Douglas County have increased the western sage grouse protection areas (3) Disease or predation. Greater sage acreage of CRP lands potentially (Livingston 1998) and has eliminated grouse are subject to a number of available for use by western sage grouse. season-long grazing on the installation mortality factors related to disease and However, contracts extend for just 10 (USDD 1996). Evaluation of the quality predation (WDFW 1995). However, years and new standards for CRP lands or quantity of naturally recovered areas there are apparently no documented will be implemented that may require and the efficacy of revegetation efforts is severe episodes of disease or predation replanting of significant acreage under currently not available. that have played a significant role in the existing contracts (USDA 1998; Natural and human-caused fire is a population declines and range reduction Schroeder pers. comm. 1999). Presently, significant threat to western sage grouse of western sage grouse. Episodes of it is unclear what effects these changes throughout the Columbia Basin because, disease or altered predation patterns have had, or will have, on the northern at increased frequencies, it can remove may play an important role in the subpopulation of the Columbia Basin sagebrush from the vegetation dynamics of small and isolated DPS. assemblage (USDI 1994, WDFW 1995). populations, and increase the risk of In 1991, the Army expanded the YTC Sagebrush is easily killed by fire their extirpation (see below). along its northern boundary by (Daubenmire 1988) and, in the absence (4) Inadequacy of existing regulatory approximately 24,000 ha (60,000 ac) to of a sufficient seed source, may not mechanisms. Revegetation standards form its present configuration and size readily reinvade sites where it has been under the CRP promote the of approximately 130,000 ha (325,000 removed. Fire may be especially improvement of habitat conditions for ac). One of the primary justifications for damaging at the YTC where military the northern subpopulation of the expansion of the installation was to training activities provide multiple Columbia Basin DPS, and the CRP reduce impacts to heavily used areas by ignition sources, vegetative cover is restricts livestock grazing on contract allowing rotational training exercises relatively continuous, and invasive lands except under extraordinary and rehabilitation of impacted sites species such as cheatgrass (Bromus circumstances. However, these (USDD 1989). In 1994, the Army tectorum) and knapweed (Centauria measures are not specifically restationed mechanized and armored spp) may provide fine fuels that can promulgated for the protection of
VerDate 11
western sage grouse, and there are few training events (over-flights, troop Columbia Basin DPS are subject to other mechanisms that regulate grazing movements, etc.). Small, isolated different threats of varying magnitude. practices or the conversion of native populations may also be at greater risk However, we conclude that the overall habitats on privately owned lands. to the effects of inbreeding (Benedict et magnitude of threats to the Columbia The Service is currently assisting with al. 2001, Oyler-McCance et al. in litt. Basin DPS of western sage grouse is development of a county-wide Habitat 2001). Although it is unlikely that any moderate, and that the overall Conservation Plan (HCP) for private one of these factors have played a immediacy of these threats is imminent. lands in central Washington (Foster significant role in the population Under our listing and recovery priority Creek Conservation District, Douglas declines and range reductions of guidance (48 FR 43098), a DPS for County). When completed, the HCP will western sage grouse, these combined which threats are moderate and include measures to protect the influences may now play an important imminent is assigned a Listing Priority northern subpopulation of the Columbia role in the dynamics of the relatively Number of 9. Basin DPS. However, the Act does not small and isolated subpopulations that We intend that any proposed listing provide regulatory protections for make up the Columbia Basin DPS. action for the Columbia Basin DPS of unlisted species during development of Finding western sage grouse will be as accurate HCPs (USDI 1996). and effective as possible. Therefore, we Some illegal or accidental shooting of We reviewed the petition, information will continue to accept additional western sage grouse may occur in available in our files, other published information and comments from other Washington in association with hunting and unpublished information submitted concerned governmental agencies, the seasons for other upland game species. to us during the public comment period scientific community, industry, or any However, the state hunting moratorium following our 90-day petition finding other interested party concerning this and hunting regulations implemented and consulted with recognized prairie finding. by the Army at the YTC appear to be grouse experts and other federal, state, sufficient to control this form of and tribal resource agencies within the References Cited mortality, and it is not likely to historic range of western sage grouse. A complete list of references cited significantly influence the viability of On the basis of the best scientific and herein is available upon request from the Columbia Basin DPS (Schroeder commercial information available, we the Upper Columbia Fish and Wildlife pers. comm. 1999; Pounds pers. comm. find that listing the Columbia Basin DPS Office (see ADDRESSES section). 1999). of western sage grouse as threatened is The Army implements a number of warranted, but precluded by higher Author regulations at the YTC to promote priority listing actions. This document was prepared by Chris environmental protection of the In making this finding, we recognize Warren, Upper Columbia Fish and installation’s natural resources. that there have been declines in the Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section). However, various impacts to the distribution and abundance of western habitats important to western sage sage grouse throughout the Columbia Authority grouse occur, and are primarily the Basin, primarily attributed to the loss The authority for this action is the result of training-related fire and direct and degradation of native shrub steppe Endangered Species Act, as amended damage to vegetation communities from habitats. These impacts are likely due to (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). training maneuvers (see above). a combination of factors including crop Dated: April 30, 2001. (5) Other natural or human-caused production, fire, military training, over- factors affecting the DPS’ continued grazing by livestock, rural and suburban Marshall P. Jones, Jr., existence. The fragmented, isolated development, and dam construction. Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. nature of the Columbia Basin DPS is a The Columbia Basin DPS of western [FR Doc. 01–11356 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] concern for conservation of the taxon sage grouse is also at increased risk from BILLING CODE 4310–55–P within the Columbia Basin ecosystem. A inbreeding depression and random preliminary viability analysis conducted environmental influences due to its by the WSGWG (1998) indicates that small size and level of fragmentation. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE neither subpopulation is likely viable We also recognize that various state and over the long term (approximately 100 Federal agencies in Washington and National Oceanic and Atmospheric years). In addition to the relatively Oregon, and throughout the species’ Administration large-scale impacts on native shrub historic distribution, are actively steppe habitats (above), other naturally managing the birds to try to improve 50 CFR Part 635 occurring impacts and human their overall population status and/or [Docket No. 010319074–1104–02; I.D. influences of lesser magnitude may pose attempting to restore them to currently 022201B] threats to the Columbia Basin’s isolated unoccupied habitats. subpopulations. Potential risks include Due to a backlog of listing decisions RIN 0648–AP13 direct impacts to individuals from and funding constraints, a proposed rule Atlantic Highly Migratory Species inclement weather conditions, altered to list the Columbia Basin DPS of (HMS) Fisheries; Pelagic Longline predator demographics or behavior, western sage grouse will be developed Management agricultural practices (e.g., cultivation, in accordance with our October 22, harvest, etc.), vehicle collisions, pest 1999, (or subsequent) LPG (64 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries control measures, scientific FR57114). Under the LPG, we prioritize Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and investigations, and military training our listing activities based upon the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), (e.g., smoke obscurant and live-fire magnitude of threats to a listable entity, Commerce. exercises, etc.). Impacts may also result followed by the immediacy of the ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. from indirect disturbance of the threats, and, finally, by the taxonomy of subpopulations caused by agricultural an entity (i.e., monotypic genus, SUMMARY: NMFS withdraws its proposal and grazing activities, transportation followed by species, then subspecies / to extend the closure of the Charleston corridors, recreation, and military DPS). The two subpopulations of the Bump area to pelagic longline fishing
VerDate 11
through May 31, 2001. Through a rule and stated that the proposed will continue to evaluate existing previously issued final rule, the extension would have little impact over bycatch reduction measures as well as Charleston Bump area remains closed to the long-term to these fish on a stock- pursue additional measures as pelagic longline fishing annually from wide basis and that the extension has no necessary. However, due to the large February 1 through April 30. scientific basis. NMFS also received economic impacts extending the closure DATES: The proposed rule published on comments stating that the extension could have, the short time period in March 30, 2001 (66 FR 17389), is should last through the month of June which fishermen and dealers would withdrawn as of May 2, 2001. to recoup lost bycatch reduction have to adjust fishing patterns to avoid ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final benefits for the delay of the East Florida the Charleston Bump, and the fact that Environmental Assessment and Coast closure as well as the delay of the NMFS does not know at this time the Regulatory Impact Review that Charleston Bump closure. Additional actual impact on bycatch reduction of accompany this notification of comments noted that NMFS’ estimates both the delay in the Charleston Bump withdrawal can be obtained from of the number of vessels that fish in and East Florida coast closures and the Christopher Rogers, Acting Chief, February in the Charleston Bump is actual time/area closures, NMFS has Highly Migratory Species Management high, especially for this year due to bad determined that extending the closure of Division, Office of Sustainable weather, and that fishermen should not the Charleston Bump area through May Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West be punished because NMFS made an 31 is unwarranted. Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. error. Additional analyses described in the NMFS also received comments final Environmental Assessment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: regarding the economic impacts that the indicate that while effort in the Karyl Brewster-Geisz, NMFS, at (301) proposed extension could have on the Charleston Bump was low compared to 713–2347 or by email at karyl.brewster- fishermen and dealers in the Charleston past years, the fishermen who did fish [email protected], or Jill Stevenson, Bump area. These comments included: in February caught slightly more billfish NMFS-Southeast Regional Office at fishermen fishing in the Charleston and sea turtles than the average. Thus, (727) 570–5447 or by email at Bump in May and June target dolphin extending the closure could possibly [email protected]. fish, not swordfish; dolphin fish fishing regain some of the bycatch reductions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A final costs less (shorter leaders, no lightsticks, that may have been lost due to the rule (65 FR 47214, August 1, 2000) to less bait, etc.) and, therefore, profits are delay. However, the degree of bycatch implement a regulatory amendment to higher in May than any other time of reduction achieved by a May 2001 the Fishery Management Plan for year; 25 percent of a fisherman’s annual closure would not contribute Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks income is received in May; the Small significantly to bycatch reduction in the included a provision to close the Business Administration has declared pelagic longline fishery beyond the Charleston Bump area to pelagic South Carolina a disaster area due to the immediate short-term; on the other longline fishing on an annual basis from shrimp fishery failure and an extension hand, the economic impacts from this February 1 through April 30. NMFS would further exacerbate the problem one-time extension could be very subsequently delayed the effective date for these communities; the short notice significant for fishermen, particularly in of the closed area for 2001 to March 1 of the extension would not give light of the August 1, 2000, final rule. to correct the coordinates of the closed fishermen sufficient time to adjust In the August 1, 2000, final rule and its areas and to distribute this information fishing patterns to minimize economic accompanying Final Supplemental to affected fishermen and law and social impacts; fishermen and Environmental Impact Statement, NMFS enforcement (66 FR 8903, February 5, dealers around both the Charleston determined that it was not necessary to 2001). On March 30, 2001, NMFS Bump and East Florida Coast have been close the Charleston Bump in May in proposed to extend the closure period of relying on and planning for the area to order to achieve the objectives of the the Charleston Bump area through May reopen on May 1 since the closure dates final rule and reduce bycatch and 31, 2001 (66 FR 17389). were announced last August; and bycatch reduction. Despite the delay in The intent of the proposed action was recreational fishing is economically the closure of the Charleston Bump, to partially recover environmental valuable to the communities and any because the objectives of the proposed benefits in terms of bycatch reduction reduction in longline bycatch could rule were the same as the August 1, that were likely lost when the closure benefit the communities especially 2000, final rule, NMFS agrees with its was delayed from February 1, 2001, given the tournaments that open in May. earlier decision and feels it is necessary until March 1, 2001. In a draft NMFS also received miscellaneous to wait until more data are gathered Environmental Assessment prepared in comments that included: the comment regarding the result of the existing support of the proposed action, NMFS period was too short given the length of closures and any bycatch reductions evaluated the costs and benefits of the a longline trip; U.S. fishermen already gained before adjusting the August 1, extension consistent with the objectives take voluntary action to reduce bycatch 2000, final rule any further. of the final rule previously and additional regulations may have NMFS acknowledges that bycatch in implementing the seasonal closure. The negative impacts in negotiating the pelagic longline fishery is an proposed action would not have conservation measures internationally; international issue that requires affected the closure dates for the if NMFS closes the Charleston Bump for international cooperation. The United Charleston Bump area in future years. an extended period, fishermen will be States is working to develop NMFS requested comments from the forced to fish offshore even if it is international conservation measures and public and held a public hearing on unsafe to do so; NMFS should evaluate will continue to negotiate at the April 3, 2001. the effectiveness of existing closures International Commission for the NMFS received many comments on before proposing new ones; and NMFS Conservation of Atlantic Tunas in the proposed rule. Some of the needs to research and implement other support of U.S. fisheries, to the extent comments supported the proposed rule methods of bycatch reduction and VMS. that their prosecution is consistent with and noticed the environmental benefits NMFS is concerned about bycatch U.S. domestic legislation. While NMFS in terms of bycatch reduction. Other and bycatch mortality in all Atlantic is aware that the comment period for the comments did not support the proposed highly migratory species fisheries and proposed rule was shorter than 45 days,
VerDate 11
the timing of the proposal required a require consideration of traditional was published in the Federal Register short comment period in the event that fisheries. Safety is the responsibility of on March 30, 2001 (66 FR 17389) is final regulations and supporting each fisherman. While NMFS works to withdrawn. reduce safety concerns related to documents needed to be prepared. Dated: May 1, 2001. Additionally, NMFS agrees that regulatory actions, fishermen should John Oliver, recreational fishing is economically account for the distance from shore if an valuable to communities; however, area is closed and they redistribute their Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. NMFS must manage fisheries consistent fishing effort. [FR Doc. 01–11420 Filed 5–2–01; 4:25 pm] with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Withdrawal of Proposed Rule BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Conservation and Management Act and Accordingly, for the reasons stated in its implementing guidelines, which the preamble, the proposed rule that
VerDate 11
Notices Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 88
Monday, May 7, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER quality, grades, grading programs, and County or Municipal government, and contains documents other than rules or services which facilitate trading of any authorized agent that has a financial proposed rules that are applicable to the agricultural products and assure interest in the commodity involved. public. Notices of hearings and investigations, consumers of quality products which Estimate of Burden: Public reporting committee meetings, agency decisions and are graded and identified under USDA rulings, delegations of authority, filing of burden for this collection of information petitions and applications and agency programs. To provide programs and is estimated to average 0.0007 hours per statements of organization and functions are services, section 203(h) of the AMA response (33,492 total hours divided by examples of documents appearing in this directs and authorizes the Secretary of 48,127 total annual responses). section. Agriculture to inspect, certify, and Respondents: Applicants who are identify the grade, class, quality, applying for grading and inspection quantity, and condition of agricultural services, and the Qualified Through DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE products under such rules and Verification Program. regulations as the Secretary may Estimated Number of Respondents: Agricultural Marketing Service prescribe, including assessment and 1,672. [FV–01–332] collection of fees for the cost of the service. The regulations in 7 CFR part Estimated Number of Responses per Notice of Request for Extension and 52 provide a voluntary program for Respondent: 28.784. Revision of a Currently Approved grading processed fruits and vegetables Estimated Total Annual Burden on Information Collection and related products on the basis of U.S. Respondents: 33,492. standards and grades. AMS also Comments are invited on: (1) Whether AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, provides other types of voluntary the proposed collection of information USDA. services under the regulations, e.g., is necessary for the proper performance ACTION: Notice and request for contract and specification acceptance of the functions of the agency, including comments. services, facility assessment services whether the information will have and certifications of quantity and SUMMARY: In accordance with the practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the quality. Voluntary grading services are Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 agency’s estimate of the burden of the available on a resident basis or a lot-fee U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice proposed collection of information basis. Respondents may request resident announces the intention of the including the validity of the service on a continuous basis or on an Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to methodology and assumptions used; (3) as-needed basis. The service is paid for request an extension for and revision to ways to enhance the quality, utility, and by the user (user-fee). Because this is a a currently approved information clarity of the information to be voluntary program, respondents need to collection in support of the Regulations collected; and (4) ways to minimize the request or apply for the specific service Governing Inspection and Certification burden of the collection of information they wish, and in doing so, they provide of Processed Fruits and Vegetables and on those who are to respond, including information. Since the AMA requires Related Products. the use of appropriate automated, that the cost of service be assessed and electronic, mechanical, or other DATES: Comments may be submitted on collected, information is collected to technological collection techniques or or before July 6, 2001. establish the Agency’s cost. The other forms of information technology. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS: information collection requirements in Comments may be sent to Mr. James R. Contact James R. Rodeheaver, Processed this request are essential to carry out the Rodeheaver, Processed Products Branch, Products Branch, Fruit and Vegetable intent of the AMA, to provide the Fruit and Vegetable Programs, Programs, Agricultural Marketing respondents the type of service they Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, request, and to administer the program. Department of Agriculture, Room 0709, STOP 0247, 1400 Independence The information collected is used only South Building, STOP 0247, P.O. Box Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250– by authorized representatives of the 96456, Washington, DC 20090–4693; 0247; fax (202) 690–1527; or e-mail USDA (AMS, Fruit and Vegetable faxed to (202) 690–1087; or e-mailed to ‘‘[email protected]’’. Programs’ national staff; regional [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: directors and their staffs; Area Officers- All comments received will be ‘‘Regulations Governing Inspection and in Charge and their staffs; and resident available for public inspection during Certification of Processed Fruits and Federal graders). The information is regular business hours at the same Vegetables and Related Products—7 used to administer and to conduct and address. CFR 52’’. carry out the grading services requested All responses to this notice will be OMB Number: 0581–0123. by the respondents. The Agency is the summarized and included in the request Expiration Date of Approval: primary user of the information. for OMB approval. All comments will December 31, 2001. Information is needed to carry out become a matter of public record. Type of Request: Extension and inspection and grading services to revision of a currently approved evaluate products as to quality for Dated: May 1, 2001. information collection. compliance with the respective grade Kenneth C. Clayton, Abstract: The Agricultural Marketing standards or product specifications. Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.) Affected public may include any Service. (AMA) directs and authorizes the partnership, association, business trust, [FR Doc. 01–11429 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Department to develop standards of corporation, organized group, and State, BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Information about customers’ All responses to this notice will be perceptions of USDA-procured products summarized and included in the request Agricultural Marketing Service is sought as a sound management for OMB approval. All comments will [Docket No. PY–01–006] practice to support AMS activities also become a matter of public record. under 7 CFR 250, regulations for Dated: May 1, 2001. Notice of Request for an Extension of ‘‘Donation of Foods for Use in the Kenneth C. Clayton, United States, Its Territories and a Currently Approved Information Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Collection Possessions and Areas Under Its Service. Jurisdiction.’’ The information collected [FR Doc. 01–11430 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, will be used primarily by authorized USDA. representatives of USDA (AMS, and the BILLING CODE 3410–32–P ACTION: Notice and request for Food and Nutrition Service) and shared comments. with State government agencies and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE product suppliers. To enable customers SUMMARY: In accordance with the to mail cards directly to the commodity Foreign Agricultural Service Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 program that is soliciting the U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice information, several versions of Form Meeting on Agreement Between the announces the intention of the AMS–11 will be used, each with a United States and the European Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to different return address. Response Community on Sanitary Measures To request an extension of a currently information about products produced by Protect Public and Animal Health in approved information collection in a particular supplier may be shared with Trade in Live Animals and Animal support of customer-focused that supplier. Similarly, response Products improvement initiatives for USDA- information from customers located in a procured poultry, livestock, fruit, and particular State may be shared with AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, vegetable products. government agencies within that State. USDA. DATES: Comments on this notice must be Estimate of Burden: Public reporting ACTION: Notice of meeting. received by July 6, 2001. burden for this collection of information SUMMARY: The Foreign Agricultural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: is estimated to average 0.083 hours (5 Service (FAS) is informing the public of Contact David Bowden, Jr., minutes) per response. a meeting to be held on May 15, 2001, Standardization Branch, Poultry Respondents: State, local, and tribal at the U.S. Department of Agriculture Programs, Agricultural Marketing governments, and not-for-profit (USDA) to discuss the general U.S. Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, businesses. negotiating objectives, particularly item- 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Stop Estimated Number of Respondents: specific export priorities under the U.S. 0259, Washington, DC 20250–0259, 8,400. and European Community (EC) (202) 720–3506. Estimated Number of Responses per Veterinary Equivalency Agreement SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Respondent: 1. (VEA). This would include specific Title: Customer Service Survey for Estimated Total Annual Burden on sanitary measures and certification USDA-Donated Food Products Respondents: 700 hours. issues that currently impede or prohibit OMB Number: 0581–0182. Copies of this information collection trade or potential regulatory changes Expiration Date, as approved by OMB: can be obtained from David Bowden, Jr., that would facilitate trade in live 12/31/2001. Standardization Branch, at (202) 720– animals and animal products between Type of Request: Extension of a 3506. the United States and the EC. U.S. currently approved information Send comments regarding, but not Government agencies, including the collection. limited to, the following: (a) Whether Food Safety Inspection Service, Abstract: Starting with a 1996 pilot the collection of information is Agricultural Marketing Service, Animal project by AMS, customers have been necessary for the proper performance of and Plant Health Inspection Service, able to use the Customer Opinion the functions of the agency, including USDA. Food and Drug Administration, Postcard, Form AMS–11, a 4- by 6-inch whether the information will have National Marine Fisheries Service, and postcard to voluntarily submit their practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative perceptions of poultry, livestock, fruit, agency’s estimate of burden, including will be participating in the meeting. and vegetable products procured by the validity of the methodology and DATES: The meeting will be held on May USDA for school lunch and other assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance 15, 2001, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. This domestic food programs. These cards the quality, utility, and clarity of the meeting may close early if all business have proven to be a quick and information to be collected; and (d) is finished. inexpensive way for AMS to learn ways to minimize the burden of the customer perception of USDA collection of information on those who ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at commodities; helping the Agency make are to respond, including through the the U.S. Department of Agriculture, improvements to its products. AMS use of appropriate automated, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., South would like to continue the use of the electronic, mechanical, or other Building, Washington, DC 20250. customer opinion postcards to get technological collection techniques or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. voluntary customer feedback on various other forms of information technology. Catherine Otte or Mr. Bobby Richey at products each year by reapproval of the Comments should be sent to: David (202) 720–1340. Customer Opinion Postcard, Form Bowden, Jr., Chief, Standardization SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In July 20, AMS–11. In this way AMS will be better Branch, Poultry Programs, Agricultural 1999, the United States and the EC able to meet the quality expectations of Marketing Service, U.S. Department of signed the Veterinary Equivalency school food service personnel and the Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., Agreement. The Agreement entered into 26 million school children who SW., Stop 0259, Washington, DC 20250– force on August 1, 1999, and covers consume these products daily. 0259. more than $3 billion in combined U.S.
VerDate 11
and EC live animal and animal product Information on Services for Individuals (Forest Plan). In mid May of 2001, trade. With Disabilities Acting Forest Supervisor Tamara The objective of the Agreement is to For information on facilities or Malone (responsible official) plans to facilitate trade in live animals and services for individuals with make the resultant Environmental animal products between the EC and disabilities, or to request special Assessment available for a 30 day public comment period. United States by establishing a assistance at the meeting, contact FAS at mechanism for the recognition of the above location as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Send requests for equivalence of sanitary measures Signed at Washington, DC on May 2, 2001. documents to: Forest Supervisor, Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National maintained by each Party consistent Mattie R. Sharpless, with the protection of public and animal Forest, 231 North Main Street, Rutland, Acting Administrator. Vermont 05701. health and to improve communication [FR Doc. 01–11426 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and cooperation on sanitary measures. BILLING CODE 3410–10–M Christopher Zimmer, Forester/ The Agreement calls for a Joint Recreation Planner, at 607–546–4470 Management Committee to meet each DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ext. 311 TDD 607–546–4476; or direct year and identify progress and set electronic mail to: [email protected]. priorities on outstanding issues for the Forest Service future. Prior to the Joint Management RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Tamara S. Malone, Acting Forest Supervisor, 231 Committee meeting currently scheduled Availability of an Environmental for June 2001, the U.S. Government North Main Street, Rutland, Vermont Assessment for an amendment to the 05701. would like to receive input from U.S. Finger Lakes National Forest Land and industries on priority areas for Resource Management Plan; Schuyler SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This immediate and future attention. The Country, New York amendment would apply to the No-Tan- U.S. Government is requesting input on Takto Trail and 71 acres of newly AGENCY: general U.S. negotiating objectives, Forest Service, USDA. acquired land on the Finger Lakes particularly item-specific export ACTION: Notice of Availability of an National Forest in the form of amending priorities under the VEA. This would Environmental Assessment. the Land and Resource Management Plan to allow for Mountain use on the include specific sanitary measures and SUMMARY: On March 26, 1999, Finger certification issues that currently No-Tan-Takto Trail as well as long term Lakes National Forest District Ranger, management of the newly acquired impede or prohibit trade or potential Martha Twarkins, set forth a proposal to regulatory changes that would facilitate lands. This is a non-significant amend the 1987 Finger Lakes National amendment. trade in live animals and animal Forest Land and Resource Management products. Input received will be Plan (Forest Plan). In mid May of 2001, Dated: April 30, 2001. considered by the Executive Branch in Acting Forest Supervisor Tamara Tamara S. Malone, formulating U.S. positions and Malone (responsible official) plans to Acting Forest Supervisor. objectives in this area. make the resultant Environmental [FR Doc. 01–11373 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] A complete copy of the agreement can Assessment available for a 30 day public BILLING CODE 3410–11–M be viewed on the FDA International comment period. Copies of the Cooperative Agreements Web Site at: environmental Assessment will be http://www.fda.gov/oia/default.htm. available upon request. The current DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE preferred alternative (the Mountain Bike The document is the second listed Rural Utilities Service under the European Community and is Alternative), would relocate a one mile portion of the No-Tan-Takto Trail from titled ‘‘Veterinary Equivalence Southern Illinois Power Cooperative; off of a busy town road and onto newly Framework Agreement.’’ Notice of finding of No Significant acquired land. The newly acquired land Impact Public Meeting would be classified into Management Area 3.1, (which emphasizes evenaged AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. The public meeting will take place at timber management and roaded natural ACTION: Notice of finding no significant the U.S. Department of Agriculture, recreation). It would also allow for impact. 1400 Independence Avenue SW., mountain bike use on the Trail. All Washington, DC, back of the cafeteria, comments received will be evaluated, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that South Building. All visitors should and may result in supplementation of the Rural Utilities Service (RUS), enter at Wing 2 on the C Street side of the Environmental Assessment or be pursuant to the National Environmental the South Building. To accommodate all incorporated into the final decision. Policy Act of 1969, as amended, the public meeting participants, we request This notice is provided pursuant to Council on Environmental Quality that individuals planning to attend section 10(c) of the Act and National regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), should so inform the Department in Environmental Policy Act regulations and RUS Environmental Policies and advance by contacting: Foreign (40 CFR 1506.6, 453 FR 55990) and Procedures (7 CFR part 1794), has made Agricultural Service, International National Forest System Land and a finding of no significant impact Trade Policy, Europe, Africa and Middle Resource Management Planning (FONSI) with respect to a project East Division, Stop 1024, South regulations (36 CFR 219.35, 65 FR proposed by Southern Illinois Power Building, 1400 Independence Avenue 6745145)). Cooperative (SIPC) of Marion, Illinois. SW., Washington, DC 20250; phone: DATES: On March 26, 1999, Finger Lakes The project consists of re-powering of (202) 720–1340; facsimile: (202) 690– National Forest District Ranger, Martha Units 1 through 3 located at Marion 2079. Please indicate the organization Twarkins, set forth a proposal to amend Generating Station owned by SIPC. The represented, if any, including the names the 1987 Finger Lakes National Forest three existing coal fired boilers will be and titles of individuals attending. Land and Resource Management Plan replaced with a new Circulating
VerDate 11
Fluidized Bed (CFB) boiler that will floodplains, wetlands, cultural COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS provide the total capacity of 120 MW. resources, threatened and endangered The CFB boiler will normally be fired species and their critical habitat, air and Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting with Illinois Bituminous coal and/or water quality, and noise. RUS has also of the Pennsylvania Advisory Illinois Bituminous coal refuse. No determined that there would be no Committee additional transmission facilities will be negative impacts of the proposed project Notice is hereby given, pursuant to required. The Marion Generating Station on minority communities and low- the provisions of the rules and is located approximately eight miles income communities as a result of the regulations of the U.S. Commission on south of Marion in Williamson County, construction of the project. Civil Rights, that a meeting of the Illinois. RUS may provide financial The EA and the FONSI is available for Pennsylvania Advisory Committee to assistance to SIPC for this project. public review at the RUS or the the Commission will convene at 12 p.m. RUS has concluded that the impacts headquarters of SIPC at the addresses and adjourn at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, of the proposed project would not be provided in this notice and at the May 23, 2001, at Philadelphia significant and the proposed action is following location: Convention Center, Conference Room B, not a major federal action significantly Marion Carnegie Library, 206 South 12th and Arch Streets, Philadelphia, affecting the quality of the human Market Street, Marion, Illinois 62959, Pennsylvania 19107. The purpose of the environment. Therefore, the preparation Tel: (618) 993–5935. meeting is to have the Committee of an environmental impact statement is review and vote on its report, ‘‘Barriers not necessary. Dated: May 1, 2001. Blaine D. Stockton, to Minority and Women Owned FOR FUTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nurul Assistant Administrator, Electric Program, Businesses in Pennsylvania,’’ and plan Islam, Environmental Protection future activities. Specialist, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. 01–11405 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Persons desiring additional Engineering and Environmental Staff, information, or planning a presentation BILLING CODE 3410–15–P Stop 1571, 1400 Independence Avenue, to the Committee, should contact Ki- SW., Washington, DC 20250–1571, Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern telephone: (202) 720–1414, e-mail: Regional Office, 202–376–7533 (TDD [email protected]. Information is COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS 202–376–8116). Hearing-impaired also available from Mr. Dick Myott, persons who will attend the meeting Environmental & Planning Department Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting and require the services of a sign Manager, Southern Illinois Power of the Michigan Advisory Committee language interpreter should contact the Cooperative, 11543 Lake of Egypt Road, Regional Office at least ten (10) working Marion, Illinois 62959, telephone (618) Notice is hereby given, pursuant to days before the scheduled date of the 964–1448, Ext. 268. His e-mail address the provisions of the rules and meeting. is: [email protected]. regulations of the U.S. Commission on The meeting will be conducted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RUS, in Civil Rights, that a meeting of the pursuant to the provisions of the rules accordance with its environmental Michigan Advisory Committee to the and regulations of the Commission. policies and procedures, required that Commission will convene at 9 a.m. and Dated at Washington, DC, May 1, 2001. SIPC prepare an Environmental adjourn at 1 p.m. on Thursday, May 17, Edward A. Hailes, Jr., Analysis reflecting the potential impacts 2001, at the Holiday Inn Fairlane- of the proposed facilities. The Dearborn, 5801 Southfield Service General Counsel. Environmental Analysis, which Drive, Detroit, Michigan 48228. The [FR Doc. 01–11369 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] includes input from federal, state, and purpose of the meeting is to hold a press BILLING CODE 6335–01–P local agencies, has been reviewed and conference to release the Committee’s accepted as RUS’ Environmental report, Civil Rights Issues Facing Arab Assessment (EA) for the project in Americans in Michigan. Also, the COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS accordance with 7 CFR 1794.41. SIPC Committee will discuss current events Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting published notices of the availability of and plan future activities. of the South Carolina Advisory the EA and solicited public comments Persons desiring additional Committee per 7 CFR 1792.42. The 30-day information, or planning a presentation comment period on the EA for the to the Committee, should contact Notice is hereby given, pursuant to proposed CFB boiler project ended Constance M. Davis, Director of the the provisions of the rules and April 16, 2001. The U.S. Environmental Midwestern Regional Office, 312–353– regulations of the U.S. Commission on Protection Agency, Region 5, reviewed 8311 (TDD 312–353–8362). Hearing- Civil Rights, that a meeting of the South the EA and stated that the proposed impaired persons who will attend the Carolina Advisory Committee to the project should not adversely affect meeting and require the services of a Commission will convene at 1 p.m. and human health or significantly degrade sign language interpreter should contact adjourn at 5 p.m. on Thursday, May 31, the environment. They further stated the Regional Office at least ten (10) 2001, at the Adam’s Mark Columbia, that the use of appropriate measures for working days before the scheduled date 1200 Hampton Street, Columbia, South the control of dust, noise, and erosion of the meeting. Carolina 29201. The purpose of the during construction activities should be The meeting will be conducted meeting is to meet with invited sufficient to alleviate the moderate or pursuant to the provisions of the rules representatives of the South Carolina short-term impacts that are likely to and regulations of the Commission. Department of Education who will occur. No other comments were update the Committee on the progress received on the EA. Dated at Washington, DC, May 1, 2001. and/or problems regarding the Based on the EA, RUS has concluded Edward A. Hailes, Jr., implementation of the South Carolina that the proposed action will not have General Counsel. Education Accountability Act of 1998. a significant effect to various resources, [FR Doc. 01–11370 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Persons desiring additional including important farmland, BILLING CODE 6335–01–P information, or planning a presentation
VerDate 11
to the Committee, should contact Bobby The applicant is now requesting to establish a general-purpose foreign- D. Doctor, Director of the Southern authority to expand the general-purpose trade zone in Washington Township, Regional Office, 404–562–7000 (TDD zone to include the jet fuel storage and Jefferson County, Pennsylvania, 404–562–7004). Hearing-impaired distribution system (approx. 7 acres) at adjacent to the Pittsburgh Customs port persons who will attend the meeting the Philadelphia International Airport of entry. The application was submitted and require the services of a sign in Philadelphia and Tinicum Township, pursuant to the provisions of the FTZ language interpreter should contact the Pennsylvania. The site consists of jet Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), Regional Office at least ten (10) working fuel storage tanks (130,000 barrels), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR days before the scheduled date of the pipelines, and other facilities and part 400). It was formally filed on April meeting. structures for loading and unloading 27, 2001. The applicant is authorized to The meeting will be conducted fuel. The facility is owned by the City make the proposal under Pennsylvania pursuant to the provisions of the rules of Philadelphia. The jet fuel system Consolidated Statute, Title 66, Chapter and regulations of the Commission. activity is currently handled by Aircraft 31 of Act 116 of 1978. The proposed zone would be the Dated at Washington, DC, May 1, 2001. Service International, Inc. second general-purpose zone in the Edward A. Hailes, Jr., No specific manufacturing requests are being made at this time. Such Pittsburgh Customs port of entry area. General Counsel. requests would be made to the Board on The existing zone is FTZ 33 in [FR Doc. 01–11368 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] a case-by-case basis. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Grantee: BILLING CODE 6335–01–P In accordance with the Board’s Regional Industrial Development regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff Corporation of Southwestern has been designated examiner to Pennsylvania, Board Order 124, 42 FR DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE investigate the application and report to 59398, 11/17/77). the Board. The proposed new zone (337 acres) Foreign-Trade Zones Board Public comment on the application is would be located at the DuBois-Jefferson invited from interested parties. County Airport complex, Route 830, [Docket 20–2001] Submissions (original and 3 copies) Washington Township, Falls Creek. The shall be addressed to the Board’s proposed zone project is part of the Foreign-Trade Zone 35—Philadelphia, Executive Secretary at the address applicant’s economic development Pennsylvania, Area Application For below. The closing period for their efforts which cover a six county region Expansion receipt is July 6, 2001. Rebuttal (Cameron, Clearfield, Elk, Jefferson, McKean and Potter). The proposed zone An application has been submitted to comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period site is owned by the Clearfield-Jefferson the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board Counties Regional Airport Authority may be submitted during the subsequent (the Board) by the Philadelphia Regional and is also part of the Keystone 15-day period (to July 23, 2001). Port Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Opportunity Zone, a local and state tax A copy of the application and Zone 35, requesting authority to expand exemption program. its zone to include the Philadelphia accompanying exhibits will be available The application indicates a need for International Airport fuel system and for public inspection at each of the foreign-trade zone services in the north related facilities within the Philadelphia following locations: U.S. Department of central Pennsylvania region. Several Customs port of entry. The application Commerce, Export Assistance Center, firms have indicated using zone was submitted pursuant to the The Curtis Center, Suite 580 West, 6th procedures for such items as powdered provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones & Walnut Streets, Philadelphia, PA metal parts, wood products, electronic Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), 19106; Office of the Executive Secretary, card connectors, and glass food and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 4008, containers. Specific manufacturing part 400). It was formally filed on May U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th & approvals are not being sought at this 1, 2001. Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., time. Requests would be made to the FTZ 35 was approved on March 24, Washington, DC 20230. Board on a case-by-case basis. 1978 (Board Order 128, 43 FR 14531, 4/ Dated: May 1, 2001. In accordance with the Board’s 6/78) and expanded on August 21, 1980 Dennis Puccinelli, regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff (Board Order 162, 45 FR 58388, 9/3/80) Executive Secretary. has been designated examiner to and on December 29, 1993 (Board Order [FR Doc. 01–11433 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] investigate the application and report to 678, 59 FR 1372, 1/10/94). The zone BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P the Board. project currently consists of seven sites As part of the investigation, the in the Philadelphia area: Site 1 (176,541 Commerce examiner will hold a public sq. ft.)—located at Pier 78 South, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE hearing on June 5, 2001, at 1 p.m., Philadelphia; Site 2 (24 acres)—located Jefferson County Court House, Main at Pier 98 South Annex, Philadelphia; Foreign-Trade Zones Board Court Room, Brookville, Pennsylvania Site 3 (341,000 sq. ft.)—consisting of 15825. Piers 38 and 40, Philadelphia; Site 4 (35 [Docket 19–2001] Public comment on the application is acres)—Penn Terminals Complex, One Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone— invited from interested parties. Saville Avenue, Eddystone; Site 5 (19 Jefferson County, Pennsylvania Submissions (original and 3 copies) acres)—warehouse complex located at Application and Public Hearing shall be addressed to the Board’s 3033 S. 63rd Street, Philadelphia; Site 6 Executive Secretary at the address (32 acres)—Publicker Site, located at An application has been submitted to below. The closing period for their 2937 Christopher Columbus Boulevard, the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board receipt is July 6, 2001. Rebuttal Philadelphia; and, Site 7 (2 acres)— (the Board) by the North Central comments in response to material American Foodservice Corporation’s Pennsylvania Regional Planning and submitted during the foregoing period cold storage facility, located at 400 Drew Development Commission (a may be submitted during the subsequent Court, King of Prussia. Pennsylvania not-for-profit corporation), 15-day period (to July 23, 2001).
VerDate 11
A copy of the application and managers and technical experts from they also will become a matter of public accompanying exhibits will be available Northern Ireland and the Border record. during this time for public inspection at Counties of Ireland, thereby improving Dated: May 1, 2001. the following locations: DuBois- their skills while enhancing U.S. Madeleine Clayton, Jefferson County Airport, Route 830, commercial opportunities in the region. Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Falls Creek, PA 15840; Office of the AMBIT was launched in 1995 to Office of the Chief Information Officer. Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade demonstrate America’s interest in [FR Doc. 01–11331 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Zones Board, Room 4008, U.S. supporting the peace process by Department of Commerce, 14th and encouraging economic development in BILLING CODE 3510–HE–P Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Northern Ireland and the Six Border Washington, DC 20230. Counties of Ireland. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Dated: April 30, 2001. The U.S. Department of Commerce works in partnership with the IFI, an Dennis Puccinelli, International Trade Administration organization established in 1986 by the Executive Secretary. British and Irish Governments to SABIT: Applications and [FR Doc. 01–11434 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] promote economic/social progress and Questionnaires BILLING CODE 3510–D5–P to encourage contact, dialog, and reconciliation in the region. The United ACTION: Proposed collection; comment States, the European Union, Canada, request. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Australia, and New Zealand contribute SUMMARY: to the IFI budget. The Department of International Trade Administration Commerce, as part of its continuing II. Method of Collection effort to reduce paperwork and American Management and Business respondent burden, invites the general Internship Training (AMBIT) Program: The intern applications are sent to public and other Federal agencies to Applications intern candidates via facsimile, e-mail, or mail upon request by a delegated take this opportunity to comment on the ACTION: Proposed collection; comment agency of the IFI. Feedback surveys are continuing information collections, as request. given to participating companies and required by the Paperwork Reduction interns at the completion of the Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 SUMMARY: The Department of programs. U.S.C. 3506 (c) (2) (A)). Commerce, as part of its continuing DATES: Written comments must be effort to reduce paperwork and III. Data submitted on or before July 6, 2001. respondent burden, invites the general OMB Number: 0625–0224. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments public and other Federal agencies to Form Number: N/A. to Madeleine Clayton, Departmental take this opportunity to comment on the Type of Review: Regular submission. Paperwork Clearance Officer, (202) 482– continuing information collections, as Affected Public: Business or other 3129, Email [email protected]., required by the Paperwork Reduction non-profit, individuals (non-U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6086, Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 citizens). 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Estimated Number of Respondents: Washington, DC 20230. 450. DATES: Written comments must be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: submitted on or before July 6, 2001. Estimated Time per Response: 1–3 hours. Requests for additional information or ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Estimated Total Annual Burden copies of the information collection to Madeleine Clayton, Departmental Hours: 1,050. instruments and instructions should be Paperwork Clearance Officer, (202) 482– Estimated Total Annual Cost: directed to: Tracy M. Rollins, SABIT, 3129, Email [email protected]., $63,000.00. Room 3319, Department of Commerce, Department of Commerce, Room 6086, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, IV. Request for Comments Washington, DC 20230; phone (202) Washington, DC 20230. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 482–0073, fax (202) 482–2443. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the proposed collection of information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests for additional information or is necessary for the proper performance copies of the information collection of the functions of the agency, including I. Abstract instruments and instructions should be whether the information shall have The Special American Business directed to: Tracy M. Rollins, SABIT, practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Internship Training (SABIT) programs Room 3319, Department of Commerce, agency’s estimate of the burden of the Department of Commerce’s 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, (including hours and cost) of the International Trade Administration Washington, DC 20230; phone (202) proposed collection of information; (c) (ITA), are a key element in the U.S. 482–0073, fax (202) 482–2443. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Government’s efforts to support the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: clarity of the information to be economic transition of the Newly collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Independent States (NIS) of the former I. Abstract burden of the collection of information Soviet Union. SABIT places business The U.S. Department of Commerce’s on respondents, including through the executives and scientists from the International Trade Administration use of automated collection techniques Independent States in U.S. firms for (ITA), in collaboration with the or other forms of information one-to-six month internships to gain International Fund for Ireland (IFI), has technology. firsthand experiences working in a established the American Management Comments submitted in response to market economy. This unique private & Business Internship Training (AMBIT) this notice will be summarized and/or sector-U.S. Government partnership was program. AMBIT provides one-week to included in the request for OMB created in order to tap the U.S. private six-month training programs for approval of this information collection; sector’s expertise in assisting the NIS’s
VerDate 11
transition to a market economy while burden of the collection of information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: boosting U.S.-NIS long-term trade. on respondents, including through the Under the ‘‘regular’’ (grants) SABIT use of automated collection techniques The Applicable Statute and Regulations program, qualified U.S. firms will or other forms of information Unless otherwise indicated, all receive funds through a cooperative technology. citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as Comments submitted in response to agreement with ITA to help defray the amended (the Act), are references to the cost of hosting interns. The information this notice will be summarized and/or provisions effective January 1, 1995, the collected by the Application is needed included in the request for OMB effective date of the amendments made by the SABIT staff to recruit and screen approval of this information collection; respondents and provide U.S. firms they also will become a matter of public to the Act by the Uruguay Round with a pool of eligible candidates from record. Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, which to select interns. Intern unless otherwise indicated, all citations Dated: May 1, 2001. to the Department’s regulations are to applications are required to determine Madeleine Clayton, the suitability of candidates for SABIT the regulations at 19 CFR part 351 Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, (2000). internships. Feedback surveys and end- Office of the Chief Information Officer. of-internship reports are needed to [FR Doc. 01–11332 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Background enable SABIT to track the success of the program as regards trade between the BILLING CODE 3510–HE–P On February 14, 2001, the Department U.S. and NIS, as well as to improve the published a notice of opportunity to content and administration of the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE request an administrative review of the programs. antidumping duty order on certain cut- The closing date for applications and International Trade Administration to-length carbon-quality steel plate from supplemental materials is [A–475–826] Italy (66 FR 10269, 10270). On March approximately 120 days after date of 22, 2001, the Department initiated an publication in the Federal Register. Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality administrative review for the period Pursuant to section 632(a) of the Foreign Steel Plate From Italy: Rescission of July 29, 1999, through January 31, 2001, Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (the Antidumping Duty Administrative pursuant to requests made by ‘‘Act’’) funding for the program will be Review petitioners and Palini on February 28, provided by the Agency for 2001 (66 FR 16037, 16038). On March International Development (A.I.D.). AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 27, 2001, Palini withdrew its request II. Method of Collection Department of Commerce. that the Department conduct an administrative review. On April 25, The applications are sent to U.S. ACTION: Notice of rescission of 2001, petitioners withdrew their request companies and intern candidates via antidumping duty administrative facsimile or mail upon request. review. that the Department conduct an Feedback surveys are given to administrative review. participating U.S. companies and SUMMARY: On March 22, 2001, the Rescission of Review interns at the completion of the Department of Commerce (the programs. Department) initiated an administrative Section 351.213(d)(1) of the review of the antidumping duty order III. Data Department’s regulations provides that a on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality party that requests an administrative OMB Number: 0625–0225. steel plate from Italy, for the period July review may withdraw the request Form Number: N/A. 29, 1999, through January 31, 2001, within 90 days after the date of Type of Review: Regular submission. pursuant to a request made by publication of the notice of initiation of Affected Public: Business or other Bethlehem Steel Corporation, U.S. Steel the requested administrative review. non-profit, individuals (non-U.S. Group, a unit of USX Corporation, Ispat The Department is rescinding this citizens). Inland Inc., National Steel Corporation, Estimated Number of Respondents: and LTV Steel Company, Inc., review because the requesting parties, 1,600. (collectively petitioners) and Palini & petitioners and Palini, have withdrawn Estimated Time per Response: 2 Bertoli S.p.A. (Palini) on February 28, their requests for an administrative hours. 2001 (66 FR 16037, 16038). In review within the 90 day time limit and Estimated Total Annual Burden accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), no other interested parties have Hours: 3,200. the Department is rescinding this requested a review. Estimated Total Annual Cost: administrative review because the The notice is in accordance with $80,000.00. producer, Palini, and petitioners have section 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR IV. Request for Comments withdrawn their requests for an 351.213(d)(4). administrative review in a timely Comments are invited on: (a) Whether manner. Dated: May 1, 2001. the proposed collection of information Holly A. Kuga, is necessary for the proper performance EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 2001. Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import of the functions of the agency, including FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administration. whether the information shall have Maisha Cryor or Zev Primor, AD/CVD [FR Doc. 01–11436 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Enforcement, Office 4, Group II, Import agency’s estimate of the burden Administration, International Trade BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P (including hours and cost) of the Administration, U.S. Department of proposed collection of information; (c) Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; clarity of the information to be telephone: (202) 482–5831 or (202) 482– collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 4114, respectively.
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from expiration of the period to appeal the Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping CIT’s March 22, 2001 decision or, if that International Trade Administration Administrative Review, 64 FR 56759 decision is appealed, pending a final [A–549–502] (October 21, 1999) (Final Results). decision by the Federal Circuit. The Following publication of the Final Department will instruct Customs to Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes Results, Allied Tube and Conduit, liquidate relevant entries covering the and Tubes From Thailand: Notice of Corp., petitioner in this case, filed a subject merchandise effective May 22, Court Decision and Suspension of lawsuit with the CIT challenging the 2001, in the event that the CIT’s ruling Liquidation Department’s date of sale and duty is not appealed. drawback determinations in the Final Effective January 20, 2001, Bernard T. AGENCY: Import Administration, Results. On January 18, 2001, the CIT Carreau is fulfilling the duties of the International Trade Administration, remanded the above-referenced Assistant Secretary for Import Department of Commerce. proceeding to the Department of Administration. SUMMARY: On March 22, 2001, in Allied Commerce for reconsideration of the Dated: April 30, 2001. Tube and Conduit, Corp. v. United following issue: (1) To explain why the States, Court No. 99–11–00715, Slip. Department’s duty drawback Bernard T. Carreau, Op. 01–31 (CIT 2001), a lawsuit methodology, which employed facts Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import challenging the Department of available, is consistent with the Administration. Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’s’’) final objectives of the facts available [FR Doc. 01–11437 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] results of administrative review of the provision, 19 U.S.C. 1677(e)(a), and BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P antidumping order on certain welded accounts for gaps in respondent’s carbon steel pipes and tubes from information; or alternatively calculate a Thailand, the Court of International new duty drawback adjustment which is DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Trade (CIT) affirmed the Department’s consistent with this objective. See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Allied Tube and Conduit Corp. v. remand determination and entered a Administration judgment order. In its remand United States, Court No. 99–11–00715, determination, the Department Slip Op. 01–03 (CIT 2001). On February [I.D. 042501E] addressed the issue of use of facts 14, 2001, the Department issued its available for the duty drawback amount Draft Results of Redetermination to the Endangered and Threatened Species; received by producer/exporter Saha plantiff and defendant-intervenor to Take of Anadromous Fish Thai Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (Saha Thai). As comment. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries a result of the remand determination, In the Draft Results of Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and the final antidumping duty rate for Saha Redetermination, we reconsidered our Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), methodology in accordance with the Thai was increased from 9.65 percent to Commerce. 9.84 percent. This decision was not in CIT’s order and determined that the simple average methodology applied ACTION: Notice of availability and harmony with the Department’s original request for comment. final determination. Consistent with the did not adequately function as a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for modified duty drawback adjustment for SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Federal Circuit in Timken Co. v. respondent. Therefore, we recalculated the Oregon Department of Fish and United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. the adjustment using the weighted Wildlife (ODFW) has submitted a 1990) (Timken), the Department will average of the duty drawback unit Fisheries Management and Evaluation continue to order the suspension of values by invoice. Neither party Plan (FMEP) pursuant to the protective liquidation of the subject merchandise submitted comments to the Department regulations promulgated for Upper until there is a ‘‘conclusive’’ decision in on the Draft Results of Redetermination. Willamette River (UWR) steelhead this case. If the case is not appealed, or The Department’s Final Results of under the Endangered Species Act if it is affirmed on appeal, the Redetermination were identical to the (ESA). The FMEP specify the future Department will instruct Customs to Draft Results of Redetermination. management of inland recreational The CIT affirmed the Department’s liquidate Saha Thai’s entries of subject fisheries potentially affecting the UWR Final Results of Redetermination on merchandise during the March 1997– steelhead. This document serves to March 22, 2001. See Allied Tube and February 1998 period of review. notify the public of the availability of Conduit, Corp. v. United States, Court EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 2001. the FMEP for review and comment No. 99–11–00715, Slip. Op. 01–31 (CIT before a final approval or disapproval is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2001). Javier Barrientos or Sally Gannon, AD/ made by NMFS. CVD Enforcement Group III, Office 7, Suspension of Liquidation DATES: Written comments on the draft Import Administration, International The U.S. Court of Appeals for the FMEPs must be received at the Trade Administration, U.S. Department Federal Circuit in Timken held that the appropriate address or fax number (see of Commerce, 14th Street and Department must publish notice of a ADDRESSES) no later than 5 p.m. Pacific Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, decision of the CIT or the Federal standard time on June 6, 2001. DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2243 or Circuit which is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with ADDRESSES: Written comments and (202) 482–0162, respectively. the Department’s final determination. requests for copies of the draft FMEPs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Publication of this notice fulfills that should be addressed to Lance Kruzic, obligation. The Federal Circuit also held Sustainable Fisheries Division, Hatchery Background that the Department must suspend and Inland Fisheries Branch, Roseburg The Department published notice of liquidation of the subject merchandise Field Office, 2900 NW Stewart Parkway, its final results of administrative review until there is a ‘‘conclusive’’ decision in Roseburg, OR 97470 or fax (541) 957– of the antidumping order on certain the case. Therefore, pursuant to Timken, 3386. The documents are also available welded carbon steel pipes and tubes, on the Department must continue to on the Internet at http:// October 21, 1999. Certain Welded suspend liquidation pending the www.nwr.noaa.gov/. Comments will not
VerDate 11
be accepted if submitted via e-mail or Authority of review requested, e.g. new, revision, the Internet. Under section 4 of the ESA, the extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Secretary of Commerce is required to Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Lance Kruzic, Roseburg, OR at phone adopt such regulations as he deems Description of the need for, and number 541–957–3381 or e-mail: necessary and advisable for the proposed use of, the information; (5) [email protected],. conservation of species listed as Respondents and frequency of threatened. The ESA salmon and collection; and (6) Reporting and/or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR 42422, July Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites notice is relevant to the Upper 10, 2000) specifies categories of public comment. Willamette River Steelhead activities that contribute to the The Department of Education is (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Evolutionarily conservation of listed salmonids and especially interested in public comment Significant Unit (ESU). sets out the criteria for such activities. addressing the following issues: (1) Is Background The rule further provides that the this collection necessary to the proper prohibitions of paragraph (a) of the rule functions of the Department; (2) will ODFW has submitted to NMFS an do not apply to activities associated this information be processed and used FMEP (Upper Willamette River Winter with fishery harvest provided that an in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate Steelhead in Sport Fisheries of the FMEP has been approved by NMFS to of burden accurate; (4) how might the Upper Willamette Basin) for inland be in accordance with the salmon and Department enhance the quality, utility, recreational fisheries potentially steelhead ESA 4(d) rule (65 FR 42422, and clarity of the information to be affecting listed adult and juvenile UWR July 10, 2000). collected; and (5) how might the steelhead. These include fisheries Department minimize the burden of this Dated: April 30, 2001. occurring in the Willamette River and collection on the respondents, including tributaries above Willamette Falls, Margaret Lorenz, through the use of information including the North and South Santiam Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, technology. Rivers, and the Molalla River. The Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Dated: May 1, 2001. objective of the FMEP is to harvest John Tressler, known, hatchery-origin steelhead and [FR Doc. 01–11421 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] other fish species in a manner that does BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Leader, Regulatory Information Management, Office of the Chief Information Officer. not jeopardize the survival and recovery of the UWR steelhead ESU. All fisheries Office of the Undersecretary DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION included in this FMEP will be managed Type of Review: New. such that only hatchery-origin steelhead Notice of Proposed Information Title: National Study of Title I that are adipose fin clipped may be Collection Requests Schools—Data Collection Instruments. retained. Impacts levels to listed UWR Frequency: Annually. steelhead are specified in the FMEP. AGENCY: Department of Education. Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Population viability analysis and risk SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. assessments in the FMEP indicate the Information Management Group, Office Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour extinction risk for listed steelhead under of the Chief Information Officer, invites Burden: the proposed fishery impact levels to be comments on the proposed information Responses: 22,000. low. A variety of monitoring and collection requests as required by the Burden Hours: 23,225. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. evaluation tasks are specified in the Abstract: This National Study of Title FMEP to assess the abundance of DATES: Interested persons are invited to I Schools will be the main source of steelhead, determine fishery effort and submit comments on or before July 6, nationally-representative school-level catch of steelhead and angler 2001. information on the implementation of compliance. A review of compliance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Title I provisions and standards-based with the provisions of the FMEP will be 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of reform generally, over a three-year conducted by ODFW annually and a 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires period from the 2001–02 through 2003– comprehensive review to evaluate the that the Office of Management and 04 school years. The study will examine effectiveness of the FMEP will occur at Budget (OMB) provide interested and describe how Title I schools are a minimum of every 5 years. Federal agencies and the public an early using standards-based reforms to assist ODFW has provided NMFS a draft of opportunity to comment on information in improving learning, with a particular the Conservation Assessment of collection requests. OMB may amend or focus on implementation of provisions Steelhead Populations in Oregon waive the requirement for public in the Title I program that are designed (Assessment) as part of the FMEP consultation to the extent that public to support such improvements. The submittal. The Assessment provides the participation in the approval process study will also examine more population viability analysis and risk would defeat the purpose of the specifically the quality of instruction assessment developed for ODFW’s information collection, violate State or and instructional support in Title I FMEP. This Assessment is also available Federal law, or substantially interfere schools, with a focus on implementation for review and comment. with any agency’s ability to perform its of Title I provisions designed to support As specified in the July 10, 2000 ESA statutory obligations. The Leader, more effective instruction and 4(d) rule for salmon and steelhead (65 Regulatory Information Management instructional support. FR 42422), NMFS may approve an Group, Office of the Chief Information Requests for copies of the proposed FMEP if it meets criteria set forth in § Officer, publishes that notice containing information collection request may be 223.203 (b)(4)(i)(A) through (I). Prior to proposed information collection accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or final approval of an FMEP, NMFS must requests prior to submission of these should be addressed to Vivian Reese, publish notification announcing its requests to OMB. Each proposed Department of Education, 400 Maryland availability for public review and information collection, grouped by Avenue, SW, Room 4050, Regional comment. office, contains the following: (1) Type Office Building 3, Washington, D.C.
VerDate 11
20202–4651. Requests may Washington notice are estimates only. The ACTION: Notice of final priority and also be electronically mailed to the Department is not bound by any selection criteria for Fiscal Year (FY) internet address estimates in this notice. 2001. [email protected] or faxed to Project Period: Up to 12 months. 202–708–9346. Please specify the SUMMARY: The Secretary announces the FOR APPLICATIONS AND FURTHER complete title of the information final priority and selection criteria INFORMATION CONTACT: Safe and Drug- collection when making your request. under the Elementary and Secondary Free Schools Program, 400 Maryland Comments regarding burden and/or the Education Act of 1965, Title X, Part L, Avenue, SW, 3E332, Washington, DC collection activity requirements should Physical Education for Progress Grant 20202–6123. Telephone: 202/401–2140. be directed to Jacqueline Montague at Program. The Office of Elementary and Fax: 202/260–7767. Email: (202) 708–5359 or via her internet Secondary Education will administer address [email protected]. [email protected]. Internet: this grant competition. The Secretary Individuals who use a http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS takes this action to help initiate, telecommunications device for the deaf If you use a telecommunications expand, and improve physical (TDD) may call the Federal Information device for the deaf (TDD), you may call education programs in local educational Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– the Federal Information Relay Service agencies. 8339. (FIRS) at 1–888–877–8339. Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of EFFECTIVE DATE: This priority and [FR Doc. 01–11339 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] this document, or an application selection criteria are effective June 18, BILLING CODE 4000–01–U package, in an alternative format (e.g., 2001. Braille, large print, audiotape, or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: computer diskette) on request to the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Connie Ann Deshpande, U.S. program contact listed under FOR Department of Education, 400 Maryland [CFDA No. 84.215F] APPLICATIONS AND FURTHER INFORMATION Avenue, SW—Room 3E332, CONTACT. However, the Department is Washington, DC 20202–6123. Office of Elementary and Secondary not able to reproduce in an alternative Education: Physical Education for Telephone: (202) 401–2140, email format the standard forms included in address: [email protected]. Progress Grant Program; Notice the application package. Inviting Applications for New Awards If you use a telecommunications for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Electronic Access to This Document device for the deaf (TDD), you may call You may view this document, as well the Federal Information Relay Service SUMMARY: The Secretary invites (FIRS) at 1–888–877–8339. applications for new awards for FY 2001 as all other Department of Education under the Physical Education for documents published in the Federal Individuals with disabilities may Progress Grant Program competition Register, in text or Adobe Portable obtain this document in an alternative (84.215F). The Office of Elementary and Document Format (PDF) on the Internet format (e.g., Braille, large print, Secondary Education, Safe and Drug- at the following site: www.ed.gov/ audiotape, or computer diskette) on Free Schools Program will administer legislation /FedRegister. request to the contact person listed at this competition. To use PDF, you must have the Adobe the beginning of this section. Purpose of Program: To assist local Acrobat Reader, which is available free Note: This notice does not solicit educational agencies (LEAs) to initiate, at the previous site. If you have applications. In any year in which the Secretary chooses to use this final priority expand, and improve physical questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) toll and selection criteria, we invite applications education programs in LEAs. through a notice in the Federal Register. A Eligible Applicants: Only LEAs are free at 1/888/293–6498; or in the notice inviting applications under this eligible to submit an application under Washington, DC area at 202–512–1530. competition is published elsewhere in this this competition. Note: The official version of this document issue of the Federal Register. Applications Available: May 3, 2001. is the document published in the Federal Deadline for Transmittal of Register. Free Internet access to the official SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Applications: June 18, 2001. edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO General Deadline for Intergovernmental Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ In making awards under this grant Review: August 10, 2001. index.html. Applicable Regulations: (a) The competition, the Secretary shall ensure Education Department General Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 8351. an equitable distribution of awards Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in Dated: April 27, 2001. between local educational agencies 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, Thomas M. Corwin, serving urban and rural areas, and between local educational agencies 85, 97, 98, and 99; (b) The regulations Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for in 34 CFR part 299; and (c) the final Elementary and Secondary Education. serving large and small numbers of students. Contingent upon the priority and selection criteria for this [FR Doc. 01–11440 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] availability of funds, the Secretary may grant competition as published BILLING CODE 4000–01–U elsewhere in this issue of the Federal make additional awards in FY 2002 Register. from the rank-ordered list of nonfunded Award Information: The estimated DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION applications from this competition. range of awards under this competition Administrative Costs is $200,000—$400,000, with an average [CDFA No. 84.215F] award of $300,000. We estimate that Not more than 5 percent of the grant approximately 16 awards will be made. Physical Education for Progress Grant funds made available to a local Please note that the range of awards, Program educational agency under this program average size of awards, number of in any fiscal year may be used for awards, and available funding in this AGENCY: Department of Education. administrative costs.
VerDate 11
Federal Share Competitive Preference: Within the (a) The extent to which the proposed The Federal share for grants under absolute priority in this notice, the activities constitute a coherent, this program may not exceed 90 percent Secretary gives preference to sustained program of training in the of the total cost of a project. applications that meet the following field. (20 points) competitive priority: Applicants that (b) The extent to which the design of Prohibition Against Supplanting provide an assurance that at least one- the proposed project reflects up-to-date Grant funds made available under this half of the funding provided to them knowledge from research and effective program shall be used to supplement under this program will be used to practice. (10 points) and not supplant other Federal, State, benefit students who attend schools (c) The extent to which the goals, and local funds available for physical identified for improvement by their objectives, and outcomes to be achieved education activities. States, consistent with the requirements by the proposed project are clearly in Title I, Section 1116(c) of the specified and measurable. (5 points) Participation of Home Schooled or Elementary and Secondary Education Private School Students (d) The extent to which the design of Act of 1965. the proposed project is appropriate to, An applicant for funds under this Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2) the and will successfully address, the needs program may provide for the Secretary awards 5 points to an of the target population or other participation of home schooled children application that meets this competitive identified needs. (10 points) priority. These points are in addition to and their parents and teachers, or (4) Quality of the project evaluation. any points the applicant earns under the children enrolled in private non-profit (15 points) selection criteria for the program. elementary and secondary schools, and In determining the quality of the their parents and teachers. Applicants Selection Criteria evaluation, the following factors are are not required to propose services for considered: these groups. The Secretary uses the following selection criteria to evaluate (a) The extent to which the methods Special Rule applications for new grants under this of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and Grant funds made available under this competition. The maximum score for all appropriate to the goals, objectives, and program shall not be used to fund of these criteria is 100 points. The outcomes of the proposed project. (5 extracurricular activities. maximum score for each criterion or points) Absolute Priority: Under 34 CFR factor under that criterion is indicated (b) The extent to which the methods 75.105(c)(3) and Title X, Part L of the in parentheses. of evaluation include the use of Elementary and Secondary Education (1) Need for project. (20 points) objective performance measures that are Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8351 et seq.), the In determining the need for the clearly related to the intended outcomes Secretary gives an absolute preference to proposed project, the following factors of the project and will produce applications that meet the following are considered: quantitative and qualitative data to the priority, and funds under this (a) The magnitude of the need for the extent possible. (5 points) competition only those applications that services to be provided or the activities (c) The extent to which the methods meet the following absolute priority: to be carried out by the proposed of evaluation will provide performance Local educational agency (LEA) projects project. (10 points) feedback and permit periodic to initiate, expand, and improve (b) The extent to which specific gaps assessment of progress toward achieving physical education programs in schools. or weaknesses in services, intended outcomes. (5 points) infrastructure, or opportunities have Such programs must be designed to Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking assist the LEA in making progress been identified and will be addressed by toward meeting State standards for the proposed project, including the Under the Administrative Procedure physical education, by providing funds nature and magnitude of those gaps or Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department for training and education of teachers weaknesses. (10 points) generally offers interested parties the and staff, and for equipment and (2) Significance. (20 points) opportunity to comment on a proposed support, to enable students in one or In determining the significance of the priority and selection criteria. However, more grades kindergarten through 12 to proposed project, the following factors in order to make timely grant awards in participate actively in physical are considered: fiscal year (FY) 2001, the Secretary has education activities. Under this absolute (a) The likelihood that the proposed decided to issue this notice without first priority, to be considered for funding, project will result in system change or publishing a proposed priority and an applicant is required to: improvement. (10 points) selection criteria for public comment. (1) Have conducted a needs (b) The extent to which the proposed This priority will apply to the FY 2001 assessment of how well its current project involves the development or grant competition only. The Secretary physical education program is enabling demonstration of promising new takes this action under section 437(d)(1) the LEA to attain State standards for strategies that build on, or are of the General Education Provisions Act. physical education; alternatives to, existing strategies. (5 Intergovernmental Review (2) Based on the results of that needs points) assessment, include in its application a (c) The importance or magnitude of This program is subject to Executive description of how the proposed the results or outcomes likely to be Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 activities will help the LEA make attained by the proposed project, CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the progress toward meeting State standards especially improvements in teaching Executive order is to foster an for physical education; and; and student achievement. (5 points) intergovernmental partnership and a (3) Set measurable goals and (3) Quality of the project design. (45 strengthened federalism. The Executive objectives for the proposed project and points) order relies on processes developed by provide a description of how progress In determining the quality of the State and local governments for toward achieving goals will be design of the proposed project, the coordination and review of proposed measured annually. following factors are considered: Federal financial assistance.
VerDate 11
This document provides early From the available funds, awards will Applicable Regulations: The notification of our specific plans and initially be made to successful Education Department General actions for this program. applicants from States in which the Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in Applicable Program Regulations: (a) current Parental Assistance Program 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, and The Education Department General grants are expiring. Thus, in this 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR competition, a grant will first be Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 80 parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 97, awarded to a successful applicant from (Uniform Administrative Requirements for 98, and 99. (b) The regulations in 34 each of the following twelve Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State CFR part 299. jurisdictions: Alabama, Arkansas, and Local Governments) apply to an LEA that is part of a consortium receiving assistance. Electronic Access to This Document Guam, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, (1) Competitive Preference: The You may view this document, as well Oregon, Rhode Island, and South Secretary has published elsewhere in as all other Department of Education Carolina. The remaining funds will be this issue of the Federal Register a documents published in the Federal used to award grants to successful notice of final priorities, which Register, in text or Adobe Portable applicants from any of the States, the establishes a competitive preference of Document Format (PDF) on the Internet District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and up to 10 additional points in this at the following site: www.ed.gov/ the outlying areas. As a result, all states competition. legislation/FedRegister will have at least one parental Invitational Priority: Schools must To use PDF, you must have Adobe information and resource center; some provide a safe, disciplined environment Acrobat Reader, which is available free States will have a second center funded. conducive to learning. Projects funded at the previous site. If you have An LEA, by itself, is not eligible for under this program are in a unique questions about using PDF, call the U.S. an award. However, an LEA may be part position to incorporate in their services Government Printing Office (GPO) toll of a consortium with a nonprofit activities that assist parents, schools, free at 1–888–293–6498; or in the organization that applies. In those and the community in implementing Washington, DC area at (202) 512–1530. instances, the award would be made to strategies to reduce youth violence. The Note: The official version of this document the nonprofit organization, which Secretary invites applicants to include is the document published in the Federal would serve as the fiscal agent. Register. Free Internet access to the official as part of their proposals activities to edition of the Federal Register and the Code For purposes of this competition, help parents recognize early warning of Federal Regulations is available on GPO nonprofit organizations do not include signs that relate to violence and other Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ institutions of higher education, State troubling behaviors. However, under 34 index.html educational agencies, LEAs, CFR 75.105(c)(1), an applicant that (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance intermediate school districts, schools, meets this invitational priority receives Number 84.215F, Physical Education for government entities, or hospitals. no competitive or absolute preference Progress Grant Program) Applications Available: May 7, 2001. over applications that do not meet the Deadline for Transmittal of priority. Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 8351. Applications: June 21, 2001. Description of Program: The Parental Dated: April 27, 2001. Deadline for Intergovernmental Assistance Program supports parental Thomas M. Corwin, Review: August 7, 2001. information and resource centers that Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Available Funds: $12,000,000. Of this Elementary and Secondary Education. amount, approximately $5.5 million are designed to meet the unique training, information, and support needs [FR Doc. 01–11441 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] will be used to award a grant to of parents of children from birth BILLING CODE 4000–01–U successful applicants from each of the twelve jurisdictions specifically through five years of age and of parents identified above. The remaining amount of children enrolled in elementary and DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION will be used to award grants to secondary schools, particularly parents who are economically or educationally [CFDA No.: 84.310A] successful applicants from any State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, or disadvantaged. Funded centers must serve both urban and rural areas, and Parental Assistance Program;Notice the outlying areas. The Department will fund no more than two parent centers in use at least half of their grant award to Inviting Applications for New Awards serve areas with high concentrations of for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 any jurisdiction. Estimated Range of Awards: $200,000 low-income families. Activities of the Purpose of Program: The purpose of to $700,000. center must focus on serving parents of the Parental Assistance Program, 20 Note: Due to anticipated variances in the low-income, minority, and limited- U.S.C. 5911, et seq., is to (1) increase scope of proposed activities and the number English proficient parents. Each center parents’ knowledge of and confidence in of program beneficiaries, the estimated range must use part of its funds to support child-rearing activities, such as teaching is very broad. Parents as Teachers Programs or Home and nurturing their young children; (2) Estimated Number of Awards: 25. Of Instruction Programs for Preschool strengthen partnerships between parents this number, a grant will be awarded to Youngsters. (Descriptions of these and professionals in meeting the a successful applicant from each of the programs are in the application educational needs of children aged birth twelve jurisdictions identified above. package.) through five years and the working The remaining thirteen awards will be Applicants should be aware that the relationship between home and school; made to successful applicants from any legislation at 20 U.S.C. 5912 establishes and (3) enhance the developmental State, the District of Columbia, Puerto specific requirements for the progress of the children assisted under Rico, or the outlying areas. organizational structure, operation, and the program. Note: These estimates are projections for activities of the parent centers. To be Eligible Applicants: Nonprofit the guidance of potential applicants. The eligible for funding, an applicant must organizations, and nonprofit Department of Education is not bound by any meet these statutory requirements. (A organizations in consortia with local estimates in this notice. copy of the program legislation is educational agencies (LEAs). Project Period: Up to 12 months. included in the application package.)
VerDate 11
In instances in which more than one Individuals who use a agencies (LEAs), to establish parental parent center is funded in a jurisdiction, telecommunications device for the deaf information and resource centers. Under the centers should collaborate with each (TDD) may call the Federal Information the funding priority, the Secretary gives other as part of their networking Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–888–877– competitive preference to eligible non- responsibilities. (A list of current 8339. profit organizations that apply in grantees is included in the application Individuals with disabilities may consortium with one or more LEAs with package.) obtain this document in an alterntive low-performing schools and propose to Applicants should be aware that format (e.g., Braille, large print, implement comprehensive strategies section 1118(g) of the Elementary and audiotape, or computer diskette) on designed to strengthen school-family- Secondary Education Act of 1965, as request to the contact person listed community partnerships in order to amended by the Improving America’s above. help children in low-performing schools Schools Act of 1994, requires schools Individuals with disabilities may also reach challenging academic standards. and districts receiving Title I funds to obtain a copy of the application package EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2001. assist parents and parent organizations in an alternative format on request to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On by informing them of the existence and the contact person listed. However, the January 12, 2001, we published in the purpose of the parent information and Department is not able to reproduce in Federal Register a notice of proposed resource center in their State, providing an alternative format the standard forms priority (NPP) for the FY 2001 grant them with a description of the services included in the application package. competition under the Parental and programs provided by the center, Electronic Access To This Document: Assistance Program. In the NPP we advising parents on how to use the You may view this document, as well as announced our intent to give applicants center, and helping them contact the other Department of Education that meet the preference up to 10 center. Consequently, applicants should documents published in the Federal additional points in the competition be prepared to address the demand for Register, in text or Adobe Portable with the number of points awarded to their services created by this Document Format (PDF) on the Internet be determined on the basis of how well requirement. at the following site: www.ed.gov/ the applicant addressed the competitive Selection Criteria: The Secretary will legislation/FedRegister preference. This notice of final funding use selection criteria and factors from 34 To use PDF you must have Adobe priority announces the final competitive CFR 75.210 to evaluate applications Acrobat Reader, which is available free preference for the competition. under this competition. The specific at the preceding site. If you have Note: This notice of final priority does not selection criteria and factors that will be questions about using PDF, call the U.S. used in evaluating applications are solicit applications. A notice inviting Government Printing Office (GPO), toll applications under this competition is detailed in the application package. free, at 1–888–293–6498, or in the published elsewhere in this issue of the The maximum score for all of the Washington, DC area at (202) 512–1530. Federal Register. selection criteria is 100 points. The total Note: The official version of this document maximum score of an application is 110 is the document published in the Federal Analysis of Comments and Changes points (100 points under the selection Register. Free Internet access to the official Four parties submitted comments in criteria and a maximum of 10 points edition of the Federal Register and the Code response to the proposed priority. Two of Federal Regulations is available on GPO under the competitive preference of the parties supported the priority, one referenced elsewhere in this notice and Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ index.html party requested that the Department published separately in this issue of the specify the percentage of grant funds Federal Register.) Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 5911 et seq. that should be focused on the priority, The maximum points for each and another party indicated that a criterion are as follows: Dated: May 1, 2001. (1) Need for project—20 points. Thomas M. Corwin, parent center-LEA consortium priority (2) Quality of the project design—22 Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for would eliminate the autonomy and points. Elementary and Secondary Education. effectiveness of the centers. The (3) Quality of project services—20 [FR Doc. 01–11438 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] comments of the latter two parties are summarized below. points. BILLING CODE 4000–01–U (4) Quality of project personnel—9 Comment: One commenter points. recommended that the Department (5) Adequacy of resources—7 points. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION indicate the amount of staff and funds (6) Quality of the project evaluation— that should be focused on the priority. [CFDA No. 84.310A] 22 points. Discussion: The Secretary believes Intergovernmental Review: This Parental Assistance Program that applicants should be given as much program is subject to the requirements flexibility as possible in designing of Executive Order 12372 AGENCY: Office of Elementary and proposals that best address the funding (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Secondary Education, Department of priority. The number of points that an Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR Education. applicant receives under the priority part 79. (Intergovernmental Review ACTION: Notice of Final Priority for should be based on how well the instructions are contained in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001. applicant addresses the priority, and not application package.) on the amount of resources that the For Applications and Information SUMMARY: The Secretary announces a applicant proposes to spend on the Contact: Rachael Couch, (202) 401– final funding priority for the FY 2001 priority. 0039, U.S. Department of Education, grant competition under Parental Changes: None. 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, FOB 6, Assistance Program (20 U.S.C. 5911 et Comment: One commenter indicated Room 3E243, Mail Stop 6400, seq.). This program provides grants to that requiring parent centers to work Washington, DC 20202. The e-mail eligible non-profit organizations, and more formally with school districts in a address for Ms. Couch is: rachael eligible non-profit organizations in consortium would eliminate the [email protected]. consortium with local educational autonomy and effectiveness of the
VerDate 11
centers. The commenter believes that by Avenue, SW., FOB 6, Room 3E243, Mail under the National Environmental working independently of schools, the Stop 6400, Washington, DC 20202. The Policy Act (NEPA) on the proposed centers can better assist families who do e-mail address for Ms. Couch is: construction, operation, and not feel connected with the schools and [email protected]. decontamination/decommissioning of provide families with the tools needed Individuals who use a two depleted uranium hexafluoride to create change in the schools. telecommunications device for the deaf (DUF6) conversion facilities, at Discussion: The Secretary is not (TDD) may call the Federal Information Portsmouth, Ohio and Paducah, requiring non-profit organizations to Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–888–877– Kentucky. DOE intends to use the apply in consortium with one or more 8339. proposed facilities to convert its LEAs. However, the Secretary believes Individuals with disabilities may inventory of DUF6 to a more stable that strengthening school-community- obtain this document in an alternative chemical form suitable for storage, family partnerships will help children format (e.g., Braille, large print, beneficial use or disposal. in low-performing schools succeed in audiotape, or computer diskette) on Approximately 700,000 metric tons of school. Under the priority, the parent request to the contact person listed DUF6 in about 57,700 cylinders are centers still will have considerable above. stored at DOE’s Paducah, Portsmouth, autonomy in designing proposals that Individuals with disabilities may also and Oak Ridge, Tennessee, sites. best meet local needs and in obtain a copy of the application package DOE is issuing this Advance Notice coordinating with low-performing in an alternative format on request to pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.31(b) to inform schools in implementing comprehensive the contact person listed. However, the the public and interested parties early strategies to assist children in these Department is not able to reproduce in about the proposed action, the range of schools. The Secretary notes that the an alternative format the standard forms alternatives, and the nature of impact legislation explicitly supports consortia included in the application package. analysis to be considered in the EIS. of non-profit organizations and school DOE intends later to issue a formal Electronic Access to This Document districts. The priority is designed to Notice of Intent (NOI) and conduct a encourage such consortia. You may view this document, as well public scoping process during which Changes: None. as other Department of Education DOE will invite the public to comment Competitive Preference: Under 34 documents published in the Federal on the scope, proposed action, and CFR 75.105(c)(2), the Secretary gives a Register, in text or Portable Document possible alternatives considered in the competitive preference in the FY 2001 Format (PDF) on the Internet at the EIS. DOE seeks comments on this competition under the Parental following site: www.ed.gov/legislation/ Advance Notice, and they can be Assistance Program. To receive this FedRegister submitted as explained below. preference, an applicant must— To use PDF you must have Adobe DATES: DOE plans to issue the NOI later (1) Consist of a consortium that Acrobat Reader, which is available free this year. After the NOI is issued, DOE includes a non-profit organization and at the preceding site. If you have will conduct public scoping meetings to one or more LEAs with low-performing questions about using PDF, call the U.S. assist in defining the scope of the EIS schools. The low-performing schools Government Printing Office (GPO), toll and to identify significant issues to be must be schools identified as in need of free, at 1–888–293–6498, or in the addressed. The dates and locations of all improvement under section 1116(c) of Washington, DC area at (202) 512–1530. scoping meetings will be announced in Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Note: The official version of this document the NOI or subsequent Federal Register Education Act of 1965, as amended. is the document published in the Federal notices and in local media before the (2) Propose to implement Register. Free Internet access to the official meetings. edition of the Federal Register and the Code comprehensive strategies designed to ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or strengthen school-family-community of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ suggestions on the scope of the EIS and partnerships in order to help children in index.html. questions concerning the proposed the low-performing schools reach project to: Kevin Shaw, U.S. Department challenging academic standards. The Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 5911 et seq. of Energy, Office of Environmental applicant must clearly describe the role Dated: May 1, 2001. Management, Office of Site Closure— of the non-profit organization and the Thomas M. Corwin, Oak Ridge Office (EM–32), 19901 LEA(s) in conducting these activities Germantown Road, Germantown, with the low-performing schools. Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education. Maryland 20874, fax (301) 903–2978, e- (3) Provide documentation from the mail [email protected] identified low-performing schools [FR Doc. 01–11439 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000–01–U (please use ‘A–NOI Comments’ for the demonstrating that the schools will subject). cooperate and coordinate with the For general information on the DOE applicant in implementing the proposed NEPA process, please contact Carol M. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY activities. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA An applicant that meets the Policy and Compliance, EH–42, U.S. competitive preference will receive up Advance Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Department of Energy, 1000 to 10 points in the competition. These Independence Avenue, SW., points are in addition to any points the Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facilities Washington, DC 20585–0119, telephone applicant earns under the selection (202) 586–4600 or leave a message at criteria. The number of points that will AGENCY: Department of Energy. (800) 472–2756. be awarded will be determined on the ACTION: Advance notice of intent. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: basis of how well the applicant addresses the competitive preference. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Background FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Energy (DOE) is providing advance Depleted UF6 results from the process Rachael Couch, (202) 401–0039, U.S. notice of its intent to prepare an of making uranium suitable for use as Department of Education, 400 Maryland Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) fuel in nuclear reactors or for military
VerDate 11
applications. The use of uranium in and OEPA reached an agreement. This and natural) cylinders stored at the these applications requires increasing agreement sets aside the issue of ETTP site, and the removal of the DUF6 the proportion of the uranium-235 whether the DUF6 is subject to Resource from the ETTP site or the conversion of isotope found in natural uranium, Conservation and Recovery Act the material by December 31, 2009. which is approximately 0.7% (by regulation and institutes a negotiated In July 1998, the President signed weight), through an isotopic separation management plan governing the storage Public Law (Pub. L.) 105–204. This law process. A U–235 ‘‘enrichment’’ process of the Portsmouth DUF6. The agreement directed the Secretary of Energy to called gaseous diffusion has historically also requires DOE to continue its efforts prepare ‘‘a plan to ensure that all been used in the United States. The to evaluate potential use or reuse of the amounts accrued on the books’’ of the gaseous diffusion process uses uranium material. The agreement expires in United States Enrichment Corporation in the form of UF6, primarily because 2008. (USEC) for the disposition of DUF6 UF6 can conveniently be used in the gas In 1994, DOE began work on the would be used to commence form for processing, in the liquid form Programmatic Environmental Impact construction of, not later than January for filling or emptying containers, and Statement for Alternative Strategies for 31, 2004, and to operate, an onsite in the solid form for storage. Solid UF6 the Long-Term Management and Use of facility at each of the gaseous diffusion is a white, dense, crystalline material Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6 plants at Paducah and Portsmouth, to that resembles rock salt. PEIS). The DUF6 PEIS was completed in treat and recycle DUF6 consistent with Over the last five decades, large 1999 and identified conversion of DUF6 the National Environmental Policy Act quantities of uranium were enriched to another chemical form for use or (NEPA). DOE responded to Pub. L. 105– using gaseous diffusion. ‘‘Depleted’’ UF6 long-term storage as part of a preferred 204 by issuing the Final Plan for the (DUF6) is a product of the process and management alternative. In the Conversion of Depleted Uranium was stored at the three uranium corresponding Record of Decision for Hexafluoride (referred to herein as the enrichment sites located at Paducah, the Long-Term Management and Use of ‘‘Conversion Plan’’) in July 1999. The Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and the Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (ROD) Conversion Plan describes DOE’s intent East Tennessee Technology Park (64 FR 43358, August 10, 1999), DOE to chemically process the DUF6 to create (ETTP—formerly known as the K–25 decided to promptly convert the DUF6 products that would present both a Site) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Depleted inventory to depleted uranium oxide, lower long-term storage hazard and uranium is uranium that, through the depleted uranium metal, or a provide a material that would be enrichment process, has been stripped combination of both. The ROD further suitable for use or disposal. of a portion of the uranium-235 that it explained that depleted uranium oxide DOE initiated the Conversion Plan once contained so that it has a lower will be used as much as possible and with the announced availability of a uranium-235 proportion than the 0.7 the remaining depleted uranium oxide draft Request for Proposals (RFP) on weight-percent found in nature. The will be stored for potential future uses July 30, 1999, for a contractor to design, uranium in most of DOE’s DUF6 has or disposal, as necessary. In addition, construct, and operate DUF6 conversion between 0.2 to 0.4 weight-percent according to the ROD, conversion to facilities at the Paducah and Portsmouth uranium-235. depleted uranium metal will occur only uranium enrichment plant sites. Based DOE has management responsibility if uses are available. on comments received on the draft RFP, for approximately 700,000 metric tons During the time that DOE was DOE revisited some of the assumptions (MT) of DUF6 contained in about 57,700 analyzing its long-term strategy for about management of the DUF6 steel cylinders at the Portsmouth, managing the DUF6 inventory, several inventory made previously in the PEIS Paducah, and ETTP sites, where it has other events occurred related to DUF6 and ROD. For example, as documented stored such material since the 1950s. management. In 1995, the Department in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory The characteristics of UF6 pose potential began an aggressive program to better study, Assessment of Preferred Depleted health and environmental risks. UF6 manage the DUF6 cylinders, known as Uranium Disposal Forms (ORNL/TM– emits low levels of gamma and neutron the DUF6 Cylinder Project Management 2000/161, June 2000), four potential radiation. Also, when released to the Plan. In part, this program responded to conversion forms (triuranium octoxide atmosphere, UF6 reacts with water the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety (U308), uranium dioxide (U02), uranium vapor in the air to form hydrogen Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 95–1, tetrafluoride (UF4), and uranium metal) fluoride (HF) and uranyl fluoride Safety of Cylinders Containing Depleted were evaluated and found to be (UO2F2), both chemically toxic Uranium. This program included more acceptable for near-surface disposal at substances. In light of such rigorous and frequent inspections, a low-level radioactive waste disposal characteristics, DOE stores UF6 in a multi-year program for painting and sites such as those at DOE’s Nevada Test manner designed to minimize the risk to refurbishing of cylinders, and Site and Envirocare of Utah, Inc. workers, the public, and the construction of concrete-pad cylinder Therefore, the RFP was modified to environment. yards. Implementation of the DUF6 allow for a wide range of potential In October 1992, the Ohio Cylinder Project Management Plan has conversion product forms and process Environmental Protection Agency been successful, and, as a result, on technologies. However, any of the (OEPA) issued a Notice of Violation December 16, 1999, the DNFSB closed proposed conversion forms must have (NOV) alleging that DUF6 stored at the out Recommendation 95–1. an assured, environmentally acceptable Portsmouth facility is subject to In February 1999, DOE and the path for final disposition. regulation under state hazardous waste Tennessee Department of Environment On October 31, 2000, DOE issued a laws applicable to the Portsmouth and Conservation (TDEC) entered into a final RFP to procure a contractor to Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The NOV consent order which included a design, construct and operate DUF6 stated that OEPA had determined DUF6 requirement for the performance of two conversion facilities at the Paducah and to be a solid waste and that DOE had environmentally beneficial projects: the Portsmouth plant sites. The conversion violated Ohio laws and regulations by implementation of a negotiated plants that result from this procurement not evaluating whether such waste was management plan governing the storage will convert the DUF6 to a more stable hazardous. DOE disagreed with this of the small inventory (relative to other chemical form that is suitable for either assessment, and in February 1998, DOE sites) of all UF6 (depleted, low enriched, beneficial use or disposal. The selected
VerDate 11
contractor will design the conversion conversion. The conversion products disposal sites, will be considered. plants using the technology it proposes (i.e., depleted uranium as well as Further, DOE would appreciate and construct the plants. The selected fluorine components produced during comments regarding whether there are contractor also will operate the plants the conversion process) would be additional siting alternatives for one or for a five-year period, which will stored, put to beneficial uses, or more new conversion facilities that include maintaining depleted uranium disposed of at an appropriate disposal should be considered. and product inventories, transporting all facility. This alternative is consistent Preliminary Environmental Analysis uranium hexafluoride storage cylinders with the Conversion Plan, which DOE in Tennessee to a conversion plant at submitted to Congress in July 1999, in This EIS represents the second level Portsmouth, as appropriate, and response to Pub. L. 105–204. of a tiered environmental review transporting converted product for Technology subalternatives for the process being used to evaluate and which there is no use to a disposal site. preferred alternative will include those implement the DUF6 management The selected contractor will be expected technology processes identified in program. Tiering refers to the process of to prepare excess material for disposal response to the final RFP for DUF6 first addressing general (programmatic) at an appropriate site. DOE is evaluating conversion services, plus any other matters in a PEIS followed by more the five proposals it received and technologies that DOE believes must be narrowly focused (project level) anticipates awarding a contract during considered. (Technologies specify the environmental review that incorporates the first quarter of 2002. Since the site processes used for conversion and the by reference the more general specific NEPA process will not be products of conversion.) Local siting discussions. The DUF6 PEIS, issued in completed prior to contract award, the subalternatives for building and April 1999, was the first level of this contract will be structured such that the operating conversion facilities within tiered approach. NEPA process will be completed in the Paducah and Portsmouth plant The DUF6 PEIS addressed the advance of a go/no-go decision. (See boundaries will be considered. Timing potential environmental impacts of NEPA Process below.) options, such as staggering the start of broad strategy alternatives, including the construction and operation of the analyses of the general impacts of (1) Purpose and Need for Agency Action two conversion facilities, will also be continued storage of DUF6 at DOE’s DOE needs to convert its inventory of considered for the preferred alternative. current storage sites, (2) technologies for DUF6 to a more stable chemical form for One Conversion Plant Alternative. An converting the DUF6 to other chemical storage, use or disposal. This need alternative of building and operating forms, (3) storage of conversion follows directly from the decision only one conversion facility at either the products for subsequent use or disposal, presented in the August 1999 Record of Portsmouth or the Paducah site will be (4) use of conversion products, (5) Decision for Long-Term Management considered. This plant could differ in transportation of materials, and (6) and Use of Depleted Uranium size or production capacity from the two disposal. The ROD for the DUF6 PEIS Hexafluoride, namely to begin proposed for Portsmouth and Paducah. declared DOE’s decision to promptly conversion of the DUF6 inventory as Technology and local siting convert the DUF6 inventory to a more soon as possible. subalternatives will be considered as stable chemical form. This tiered EIS This EIS will assess the potential with the preferred alternative. will address specific issues associated environmental impacts of constructing, Use of Existing UF6 Conversion with the implementation of the DUF6 operating and decontaminating/ Capacity Alternative. DOE will consider PEIS ROD. decommissioning DUF conversion using already-existing UF6 conversion 6 NEPA Process facilities at the Portsmouth and Paducah capacity at commercial nuclear fuel sites, as well as other reasonable fabrication facilities in lieu of The EIS for the proposed project will alternatives. The EIS will aid constructing one or two new conversion be prepared pursuant to the NEPA of decisionmaking on DUF6 conversion by plants. DOE is currently evaluating the 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), Council evaluating the environmental impacts of feasibility of using existing conversion on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA the range of reasonable alternatives, as capacity, although no expression of Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500—1508), well as providing a means for public interest has been received from such and DOE’s NEPA Implementing input into the decisionmaking process. facilities. Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021). The Department is committed to No Action Alternative. Under the ‘‘no Following the publication of the Notice ensuring that the public has ample action’’ alternative, cylinder of Intent, DOE will hold scoping opportunity to participate in this management activities (handling, meetings, prepare and distribute the review. inspection, monitoring, and draft EIS for public review, hold public maintenance) would continue the hearings to solicit public comment on Preliminary Alternatives ‘‘status quo’’ at the three current storage the draft EIS, and publish a final EIS. Below is a preliminary list of sites indefinitely, consistent with the Not less than 30 days after the alternatives to be considered in the EIS. DUF6 Cylinder Project Management publication of the U.S. Environmental This list of alternatives is subject to Plan and the consent orders, which Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Notice of modifications in response to comments includes actions needed to meet safety Availability of the final EIS, DOE may received during the public scoping and environmental requirements. issue a ROD documenting its decision process. Where applicable under the concerning the proposed action. Preferred Alternative. Under the alternatives listed above, transportation In addition to the above steps, DOE preferred alternative, two conversion options, such as truck, rail, and barge, will consider environmental factors in facilities would be built: One at the will be considered for shipping DUF6 selecting a contractor for the conversion Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant site cylinders to a conversion facility and services through the procurement and another at the Portsmouth Gaseous conversion products to a storage or process, including preparation of an Diffusion Plant site. The cylinders disposal facility. Also, for each environmental critique and synopsis currently stored at the ETTP site near technology alternative, alternatives for pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.216. The Oak Ridge, Tennessee, would be conversion products, including storage, environmental critique will evaluate the transported to Portsmouth for use, and disposal at one or more environmental data and information
VerDate 11
submitted by each offeror and will be Related NEPA Reviews ACTION: Notice of availability of report subject to the confidentiality Final Programmatic Environmental and initiation of public comment requirements of the procurement Impact Statement for Alternative period. process. DOE will prepare a publicly Strategies for the Long-Term SUMMARY: The Department of Energy available environmental synopsis, based Management and Use of Depleted (the Department or DOE) announces the on the environmental critique, to Uranium Hexafluoride (DOE/EIS–0269, initiation of a public comment period document the consideration given to April 1999); Final Waste Management on the possible recommendation of the environmental factors in the contractor Programmatic Environmental Impact Yucca Mountain Site in Nevada by the selection process. The environmental Statement for Managing Treatment, Secretary of Energy to the President for synopsis will be filed with the EPA and Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive development as a spent nuclear fuel and will be incorporated into the EIS. In and Hazardous Waste (DOE/EIS–0200– accordance with 10 CFR 1021.216(i), F, May 1997); Disposition of Surplus high-level nuclear waste geologic since the NEPA process will not be Highly Enriched Uranium, Final repository. To facilitate the public completed prior to contract award, the Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ review and comment process, the contract will be structured to allow the EIS–0240, June 1996); Environmental Department announces today the NEPA review process to be completed Assessment for the Refurbishment of availability of the Yucca Mountain in advance of a go/no-go decision. Uranium Hexafluoride Cylinder Storage Science and Engineering Report (YMS&ER). This report provides the Preliminary Identification of EIS Issues Yards C–745–K, L, M, N, and P and Construction of a New Uranium public with a summary of the DOE intends to address the following Hexafluoride Cylinder Storage Yard (C– information and data collected to date issues when assessing the potential 745–T) at the Paducah Gaseous by the Department in its multi-year environmental impacts of the Diffusion Plant, Paducah, Kentucky study and characterization of the Yucca alternatives in this EIS. Potential (DOE/EA–1118, July 1996); Mountain site as a potential spent environmental impacts will be Environmental Assessment for DOE Sale nuclear fuel and high-level waste evaluated for the site-specific conditions of Surplus Natural and Low Enriched repository. A decision to recommend found at the Portsmouth, Paducah, and Uranium (DOE/EA–1172, October 1996); the site has not been made; the YMS&ER ETTP sites, and at other sites, as and Environmental Assessment for the is being issued to describe the results of appropriate. DOE invites comment on Lease of Land and Facilities within the site characterization studies completed these and any other issues that should East Tennessee Technology Park, Oak to date, the waste forms to be disposed, be addressed in the EIS: Ridge, Tennessee (DOE/EA–1175, 1997). a repository and waste package design, —Potential effects on the public and and updated assessments of the long workers from exposure to radiological Scoping Meetings term performance of the potential and hazardous materials from normal The purpose of this Advance Notice is repository. The Department intends for operations and reasonably foreseeable to inform the public and interested the YMS&ER, and its supporting accidents at the sites and during parties early about DOE’s plans to documents, to be used by the public as transportation of DUF6 cylinders and prepare an EIS for proposed DUF6 an aid in providing comments on the conversion products between sites. conversion facilities and to encourage technical information and data —Potential effects on air, soil, ecological early public involvement in the EIS underlying the Department’s resources, water quality and cultural process. DOE intends to hold public consideration of a possible resources. scoping meetings in Oak Ridge, recommendation of the site. This —Potential socioeconomic impacts Tennessee; Paducah, Kentucky; and summer, after the release of additional associated with the workforce needed Portsmouth, Ohio, to solicit both oral information, DOE will announce the for construction and operations, and and written comments from interested dates, locations and times for public environmental justice issues. parties. The dates and times of such hearings on the possible —Compliance with applicable Federal, meetings will be announced in the NOI, recommendation and the date for the state, local requirements and which DOE plans to issue later this year, end of the public comment period. In agreements. or in subsequent Federal Register addition, in recognition of the fact that —Pollution prevention, waste notices and in local media before the technical and scientific analyses are minimization, and energy and water meetings. continuing, and that the pertinent use reduction technologies to Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of regulatory framework is not currently in eliminate or reduce use of energy, May, 2001. final form, the issuance of additional water, and hazardous substances and Steven V. Cary, information, beyond that anticipated for to minimize environmental impacts. Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of release this summer, may be warranted. —Potential impacts on local and DOE- Environment, Safety and Health. By making the large amount of wide waste management capabilities. information developed by the —Potential impacts on available [FR Doc. 01–11384 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Department on the Yucca Mountain site resources, including land, materials, available in stages, the Department and energy. intends to provide the public and —Potential cumulative impacts of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY interested parties with ample time to past, present, and reasonably review all the available materials and foreseeable future actions (including Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste formulate their comments regarding a impacts resulting from the activities Management; Yucca Mountain Science possible site recommendation by the of the United States Enrichment and Engineering Report; Site Secretary. Corporation). Recommendation Consideration and DATES: —Potential irreversible and irretrievable Request for Comment The public may submit written commitment of resources. comments at this time. DOE will issue —Relationship between short-term use AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive additional information this summer and of the environment and long-term Waste Management, Department of will at that point announce the dates, productivity. Energy. locations and times of public hearings
VerDate 11
on the Secretary’s consideration of a amended the NWPA. In the Nuclear include the results of ongoing potential site recommendation. Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987 sensitivity studies and uncertainty ADDRESSES: Written comments should (Public Law No. 100–203), Congress study analyses (Supplemental Science be addressed to Carol Hanlon, U.S. directed the Department to characterize and Performance Analyses), as well as Department of Energy, Yucca Mountain only the Yucca Mountain, Nevada site the results of a preliminary evaluation Site Characterization Office, (M/S #025), for a possible geologic repository. of the Yucca Mountain site’s preclosure P.O. Box 30307, North Las Vegas, The Department has studied Yucca and postclosure performance against the Nevada 89036–0307, or provided by Mountain for over 20 years. Over the Department’s proposed site suitability electronic mail to [email protected]. course of those years, the Department guidelines (Preliminary Site Suitability Written comments should be identified has performed detailed scientific Evaluation). That preliminary on the outside of the envelope, and on investigations of the geology, hydrology, evaluation will consider any newly the comments themselves, with the geochemistry, and other characteristics available information in addition to the designation: ‘‘Possible Site of the site to determine whether it is a information provided in the YMS&ER. Recommendation for Yucca Mountain.’’ suitable place to build a geologic Although there is no statutory Comments can also be submitted by repository. The DOE has also developed requirement for development or facsimile to 1–800–967–0739. Copies of a preliminary design for a potential issuance of these documents, the DOE is any written comments, and documents repository and for the waste packages in providing the documents to facilitate referenced in this notice may be which spent nuclear fuel and high-level public comments before and during the inspected and photocopied in the DOE radioactive waste might be stored. The public hearings. results of these scientific investigations Step 2. Comments received during the Freedom of Information Act Reading and the preliminary design efforts have public comment period will be Room located at the Yucca Mountain been analyzed to assess the possible considered by the Secretary before a Science Center, 4101B Meadows Lane, future performance of the potential decision is made whether to recommend Las Vegas, Nevada, (702) 295–1312, repository in the geologic setting of the the site to the President. After between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., site. The YMS&ER provides a summary considering the comments received, if Monday through Friday, except for of these studies and design efforts to the Secretary decides to recommend the Federal holidays. Documents referenced date. site, the NWPA requires the Secretary to in this notice may also be found on the notify the governor and legislature of B. Site Recommendation Process Internet at http://www.ymp.gov and at the state of Nevada and wait at least 30 http://www.rw.doe.gov (YMS&ER only). Under Section 114 (a)(1) of the days before submitting the For more information concerning public NWPA, as amended, the Secretary’s recommendation to the President. If the participation, please refer to the decision whether to recommend the site Secretary decides not to recommend the Opportunity for Public Comment will be made following the completion site, appropriate notification will be section of this notice. of public hearings and completion of made to the Congress and the State of Copies of the YMS&ER may be site characterization activities under Nevada. requested by telephone (1–800–967– section 113 of the NWPA, as amended. Step 3. If the Secretary decides to 3477) or over the Internet via the Yucca The following steps describe the recommend approval of the site and 30 Mountain Project website using the process for the Secretary’s days has elapsed since notification of document ordering form at http:// determination whether to recommend the State of Nevada, the Secretary would www.ymp.gov under the listing ‘‘Yucca the site to the President; for the then provide the recommendation to the Mountain Science and Engineering President’s decision whether to approve President along with the basis for the Report.’’ the site; and for the role of the state of recommendation, as required under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Nevada and Congress in the approval or section 114(a)(1) of the NWPA. That Department of Energy, Office of Civilian denial of any recommendation by the basis for recommendation would Radioactive Waste Management, Yucca President. Also summarized are the include, among other items, comments Mountain Site Characterization Office, steps necessary for the DOE to prepare received on the YMS&ER and (M/S #025), P.O. Box 30307, North Las a license application to the Nuclear subsequent documents; the views and Vegas, Nevada 89036–0307, 1–800–967– Regulatory Commission (NRC) and for comments submitted by the governor 3477. the NRC to grant an authorization to and legislature of any state, along with begin construction, if the site is the Secretary’s response to such views; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: approved. the preliminary comments of the NRC I. Introduction Step 1. The NWPA, as amended, concerning the extent to which the at- requires the Secretary to hold public depth site characterization analysis and A. Yucca Mountain Site hearings in the vicinity of the Yucca the waste form proposal seem to be Characterization Mountain site. The hearings will sufficient for inclusion in any In 1982, Congress passed the Nuclear provide the DOE with an opportunity to subsequent license application; and a Waste Policy Act (NWPA) (Public Law inform residents of the area that the site final Environmental Impact Statement 97–425), designating the federal is being considered for possible (EIS) for the Yucca Mountain site. (The government as the responsible entity for recommendation for development of a Department is in the process of the safe and permanent disposal of repository and receive their comments. preparing this EIS. For more spent nuclear fuel and high-level The YMS&ER, issued this date, provides information on the status of that process radioactive waste. Also in the NWPA, a summary of scientific and technical see a separate Federal Register Notice of Congress established a comprehensive information relevant to the site May 4, 2001.) Upon submission to the framework for the siting, construction recommendation process. This summer, President, the Secretary’s and operation of a geologic repository as DOE will be issuing additional recommendation and basis for the the primary mechanism by which the information that the Secretary will use recommendation would be available to federal government would ensure the in his consideration of a possible the public. safe and permanent disposal of such recommendation for the Yucca Step 4. If, after receiving a radioactive material. In 1987, Congress Mountain site. This information will recommendation by the Secretary and
VerDate 11
the basis for the recommendation, the activities, before reaching any decision available on the Internet (http:// President considers the Yucca Mountain on a possible site recommendation. www.ymp.gov) or in print. The public is site qualified for application for a The information and analyses in the encouraged to review these documents, construction authorization for a YMS&ER are also based on the status of in addition to the YMS&ER, in repository, the President may approve regulations, as presently proposed, that developing comments on the possible the site for the development of a would govern the public health and site recommendation. The supporting repository and recommend the site to safety standard for a spent nuclear fuel documents incorporate an extensive Congress. The President’s and high-level waste repository at Yucca foundation of scientific, engineering, recommendation to Congress would be Mountain (EPA standards proposed for and programmatic research that accompanied by the Secretary’s codification at 40 CFR part 197), the analyzed the Yucca Mountain site, the recommendation, and the basis for the licensing requirements for such a proposed repository and waste package recommendation. repository (NRC requirements proposed designs, and other information. The Step 5. If the President submits a for codification at 10 CFR part 63), and supporting documents are hierarchically recommendation of the site to Congress, the suitability of the Yucca Mountain organized: at the top are comprehensive the state of Nevada will have 60 days to site for a repository (DOE guidelines integrating documents that support this submit a notice of disapproval to proposed for codification at 10 CFR part report directly, and an extensive set of Congress. If Nevada does not submit a 963). The Department expects that the technical reports that explain in more notice, the Yucca Mountain site subject regulations will be finalized in detail the basis for the analyses designation will become effective, 60 the near future. The currently proposed presented. Some of the major integrating days after the President’s regulations provide a reasonable basis documents are: recommendation is submitted to for the consideration of a possible site recommendation. In recognition of the The Total System Performance Congress. If the state of Nevada does Assessment—Site Recommendation. submit a notice, the Yucca Mountain fact that technical and scientific The Preliminary Preclosure Safety site designation would be disapproved analyses are continuing, and that the Assessment for a Monitored Geologic unless, during the first 90 days of pertinent regulatory framework is not Repository. continuous session after the notice of currently in final form, the issuance of The Draft Environmental Impact Statement disapproval is submitted, Congress additional information or analyses, for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level passes a joint resolution of repository beyond that anticipated for release this summer, may be warranted. Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye siting approval and the President signs The YMS&ER is available on the County, Nevada. it into law. Internet, on compact disc, and in print. The Yucca Mountain Site Description. Step 6. If the site designation becomes The document contains information The Monitored Geologic Repository Project effective, the Secretary will that would be included in the basis for Description Document. subsequently submit a license any site recommendation from the Key technical references include nine process model reports that describe how the application to the NRC for authorization Secretary to the President, as specified to construct a repository and provide a natural and engineered systems at a potential by Section 114(a)(1)(A), (B), and (C) of repository are expected to behave. For copy to the governor and legislature of the NWPA. The organization of the example, these reports describe how water Nevada. The NWPA requires the NRC to YMS&ER is consistent with the order of would move from the surface to the issue a final decision approving or information identified in Section 114 of repository and how the waste package would disapproving the construction the NWPA. Section 1 introduces the perform over time. Reports summarizing authorization within three years after report and provides background hundreds of scientific and engineering receiving the application. However, the information on the site recommendation studies on a wide variety of topics support law provides that the NRC can extend approval process and a summary of the the YMS&ER in more detail, including: the deadline by up to one year if it information in the succeeding sections Analysis model reports describing the submits to the Secretary of Energy and detailed scientific models of how the of the report. Section 2 describes the potential repository might behave in the Congress a written report explaining the design of the potential repository at future; reason for the NRC’s failure to meet the Yucca Mountain, including preliminary Scientific reports of the results of site three-year deadline. engineering specifications for the characterization investigations, regional C. Information for the Public Comment facility. Section 3 describes the waste studies, and studies of natural analogues to a potential repository; Process forms to be disposed and proposed waste package designs. Section 4 Descriptions of design requirements, As explained above, the Department discusses the data related to the safety design analyses, and design alternative is making available the YMS&ER in of the Yucca Mountain site, including a studies for the repository surface and conjunction with the initiation of the subsurface facilities, engineered barrier description of how the natural and systems, and waste packages. site recommendation process. The engineered repository systems would report describes the results of site work together to protect public health Concurrent with the release of the characterization, the waste forms to be and limit the release of radionuclides to YMS&ER, DOE will also be issuing a disposed of, the preliminary design of the environment. It explains the Supplement to the Draft Environmental the repository and the waste packages, relationship between the waste form, Impact Statement for a Geologic and the results of assessments of the waste package, and the geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent potential repository performance. The medium at Yucca Mountain. It also Nuclear Fuel and High-Level information presented provides the describes analyses of the future long- Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Department’s existing technical basis for term performance of a Yucca Mountain Nye County, Nevada. The availability of public and stakeholder comments on repository. Section 5 describes the that document was announced in a the possible recommendation. The analyses performed to evaluate the separate Federal Register Notice, dated Department will continue to collect and safety of the potential repository during May 4, 2001, together with information refine its analysis and information base, operation and before final closure. on the opportunities for public in response to public comments and as The YMS&ER references numerous comment on the document and public part of its ongoing characterization supporting documents, which are hearings to be held.
VerDate 11
II. Opportunity for Public Comment schedule under which AES Medina will DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY engage in wholesale electric power and A. Participation in Comment Process energy transactions at market-based Federal Energy Regulatory Interested persons are invited to rates. AES Medina also requested Commission participate in the comment process by waiver of various Commission submitting written data, views, or regulations. In particular, AES Medina [Docket No. ER01–1807–001] comments with respect to the subject set requested that the Commission grant forth in this notice. The Department blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 Carolina Power & Light Company and encourages the maximum level of public of all future issuances of securities and Florida Power Corporation; Notice of participation possible in this process. assumptions of liability by AES Medina. Filing Individuals, coalitions, states or other On April 11, 2001, pursuant to government entities, and others are delegated authority, the Director, May 1, 2001. urged to submit written comments on Division of Corporate Applications, Take notice that on April 26, 2001, the possible recommendation of the Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Carolina Power & Light Company Yucca Mountain site. granted requests for blanket approval (CP&L) and Florida Power Corporation B. Written Comment Procedures under Part 34, subject to the following: Within thirty days of the date of the (FPC), tendered for filing revision to the The DOE invites the public to order, any person desiring to be heard modification of the Open Access comment on a possible site or to protest the blanket approval of Transmission Tariff (OATT) of CP&L recommendation for the Yucca issuances of securities or assumptions of and FPC that was tendered for filing Mountain site. Written comments liability by AES Medina should file a April 16, 2001 in this docket. The should be identified on the outside of motion to intervene or protest with the modification consists of a complete the envelope, and on the comments Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, copy of the OATT in the format required themselves, with the designation: 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. by Order No. 614. The modification is ‘‘Possible Site Recommendation for 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 being made to comply with the Yucca Mountain.’’ In the event any and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of requirement of Order No. 614 that when person wishing to submit written Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 a tariff or rate schedule is revised, the comments cannot provide them directly, and 385.214). entire tariff or rate schedule must be alternative arrangements can be made Absent a request to be heard in refiled in the format required by that by calling [(800) 967–3477]. All opposition within this period, AES order. The filing also incorporates comments received and other relevant Medina is authorized to issue securities information will be considered by the amendments to the OATTs of CP&L and and assume obligations or liabilities as FPC that the Commission accepted for DOE before a decision is made on the a guarantor, indorser, surety, or potential site recommendation. All filing prior to the consummation of their otherwise in respect of any security of merger. comments submitted will be available another person; provided that such for examination at the Yucca Mountain issuance or assumption is for some Copies of the filing were served upon Science Center in Las Vegas, Nevada. lawful object within the corporate the public utility’s jurisdictional Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR purposes of the applicant, and customers, North Carolina Utilities 1004.11, any person submitting compatible with the public interest, and Commission and South Carolina Public information or data that is believed to be is reasonably necessary or appropriate Service Commission. confidential, and which may be exempt for such purposes. Any person desiring to be heard or to by law from public disclosure, should The Commission reserves the right to protest such filing should file a motion submit one complete copy, as well as require a further showing that neither two copies from which the information to intervene or protest with the Federal public nor private interests will be Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 considered confidential has been adversely affected by continued First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, deleted. The Department of Energy will approval of AES Medina’s issuances of in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 make its own determination of any such securities or assumptions of liability. claim and treat it accordingly. Notice is hereby given that the of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Issued in Washington, DC on April 27, deadline for filing motions to intervene 2001. or protests, as set forth above, is May 11, 385.214). All such motions and protests Lake Barrett, 2001. should be filed on or before May 17, Acting Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Copies of the full text of the Order are 2001. Protests will be considered by the Waste Management. available from the Commission’s Public Commission to determine the [FR Doc. 01–11383 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E., appropriate action to be taken, but will BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Washington, D.C. 20426. The Order may not serve to make protestants parties to also be viewed on the Internet at http:/ the proceedings. Any person wishing to /www.ferc.fec.us/online/rims.htm (call become a party must file a motion to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 202–208–222 for assistance). Comments, intervene. Copies of this filing are on protests, and interventions may be filed file with the Commission and are Federal Energy Regulatory electronically via the internet in lieu of available for public inspection. This Commission paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) filing may also be viewed on the [Docket No. ER01–1381–000] and the instructions on the Internet at http: Commission’s web site at http:// //www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call AES Medina Valley Cogen, L.L.C.; www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. 202–208–2222 for assistance). Notice of Issuance of Order David P. Boergers, Comments, protests and interventions May 1, 2001. Secretary. may be filed electronically via the AES Medina Valley Cogen, L.L.C. [FR Doc. 01–11343 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR (AES Medina) submitted for filing a rate BILLING CODE 6717–01–M 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
VerDate 11
on the Commission’s web site at http:/ Room. This filing may be viewed on the site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ /www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ doorbell.htm. rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for Linwood A. Watson, Jr., assistance). Comments, protests, and David P. Boergers, Acting Secretary. interventions may be filed electronically Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–11351 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 [FR Doc. 01–11347 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–M CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the BILLING CODE 6717–01–M instructions on the Commission’s web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY doorbell.htm. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory David P. Boergers, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Secretary. Commission [Docket No. RP01–384–000] [FR Doc. 01–11344 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–M Chandeleur Pipe Line Company; [Docket Nos. ER01–1353–000, ER01–1354– 000 and ER01–1355–000 (Not consolidated)] Notice of Compliance Filing DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY May 1, 2001. PacifiCorp; Notice of Convening Take notice that on April 23, 2001, Federal Energy Regulatory Session Chandleleur Pipe Line Company Commission May 1, 2001. (Chandeleur) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised [Docket No. RP96–383–028] In PacifiCorp, 95 FERC ¶ 61,122 Volume No. 1, the following tariff (2001), the Commission addressed Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of sheets, to become effective May 1, 2001: various proposed unexecuted service Tariff Filing Third Revised Sheet No. 18 agreements filed by PacifiCorp for Fourth Revised Sheet No. 29 May 1, 2001. service to Utah Associated Municipal First Revised Sheet No. 18A Take notice that on April 26, 2001, Power Systems, Utah Municipal Power Original Sheet No. 29A Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) filed Agency and Deseret Generation and Fourth Revised Sheet No. 19 with the Commission the following Transmission Cooperative (collectively, Third Revised Sheet No. 32 Fifth Revised Sheet No. 19A tariff sheet to correct and update the ‘‘Customers’’). Pursuant to the order, the Second Revised Sheet No. 48 description of a previously filed Commission stated that the dispute Original Sheet No. 19A.01 negotiated rate transaction: regarding whether PacifCorp properly First Revised Sheet No. 67A First Revised Sheet No. 1402 filed proposed agreements with these Original Sheet No. 19A.02 Customers as well as appropriate terms DTI requests an effective date of April Sixth Revised Sheet No. 69 of such service may best be resolved 1, 2001, for the negotiated rate. Fourth Revised Sheet No. 19B through good faith negotiations between Fifth Revised Sheet No. 69A DTI states that copies of the filing Second Revised Sheet No. 19C have been served on all parties on the the parties. Accordingly, the First Revised Sheet No. 69B official service list, DTI’s customers, and Commission directed the Commission’s Chandeleur states that the purpose of interested state commissions. Dispute Resolution Service (DRS) to this filing is to comply with the Any person desiring to be heard or to convene a meeting of the parties within Commission’s order issued November protest said filing should file a motion 7 days to explore the use of an ADR 30, 2000, in RM96–1–015 wherein the to intervene or a protest with the process to foster negotiation and Commission adopted, by reference in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, agreement. Section 284 of its Regulations (18 CFR 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC The convening session in this matter 284.12), Version 1.4 of the GISB 20426, in accordance with Sections will be held via conference call with the standards implementing certain 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s parties to the three dockets listed above. standardized business practices. Rules and Regulations. All such motions The conference will be held on May 3, Any person desiring to be heard or to or protests must be filed in accordance 2001 at 2 p.m. EST. Participating parties protest said filing should file a notion to with Section 154.210 of the should contact Amy Blauman for the intervene or a protest with the Federal Commission’s Regulations. Protests will necessary call-in information. Her Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 be considered by the Commission in telephone number is (202) 208–2143 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. determining the appropriate action to be and her e-mail address is 20426, in accordance with Sections taken, but will not serve to make [email protected]. 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s protestants parties to the proceedings. Rules and Regulations. All such motions Any person wishing to become a party The purpose of the convening session or protests must be filed in accordance must file a motion to intervene. Copies will be to assist the parties developing with Section 154.210 of the of this filing are on file with the an ADR process to achieve a resolution Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Commission and are available for public of the issues. be considered by the Commission in inspection in the Public Reference David P. Boergers, determining the appropriate action to be Room. This filing may be viewed on the taken, but will not serve to make web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ Secretary. protestants parties to the proceedings. rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for [FR Doc. 01–11341 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Any person wishing to become a party assistance). Comments, protests, and BILLING CODE 6717–01–M must file a motion to intervene. Copies interventions may be filed electronically of this filing are on file with the via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Commission and are available for public CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the inspection in the Public Reference instructions on the Commission’s web
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY /www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call to intervene or a protest with the 202–208–2222 for assistance). Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Comments, protests, and interventions 888 First Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Commission may be filed electronically via the 20426, in accordance with sections [Docket Nos. ER01–1178–000, ER01–1178– internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s 001, ER01–1178–002] 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Rules and Regulations. All such motions on the Commission’s web site at or protests must be filed in accordance Sempra Energy Resources; Notice of http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. with Section 154.210 of the Issuance of Order Commission’s Regulations. Protests will David P. Boergers, be considered by the Commission in May 1, 2001. Secretary. determining the appropriate action to be Sempra Energy Resources (Sempra) [FR Doc. 01–11342 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] taken, but will not serve to make submitted for filing a rate schedule BILLING CODE 6717–01–M protestants parties to the proceedings. under which Sempra will engage in Any person wishing to become a party wholesale electric power and energy must file a motion to intervene. Copies transactions at market-based rates. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of this filing are on file with the Sempra also requested waiver of various Commission and are available for public Commission regulations. In particular, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission inspection in the Public Reference Sempra requested that the Commission Room. This filing may be viewed on the grant blanket approval under 18 CFR [Docket No. RP01–387–000] web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ part 34 of all future issuances of rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for securities and assumptions of liability Texas Eastern Transmission, LP; assistance). Comments, protests, and by Sempra. Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC interventions may be filed electronically On April 10, 2001, pursuant to Gas Tariff via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 delegated authority, the Director, May 1, 2001. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Division of Corporate Applications, instructions on the Commission’s web Office of Markets, Tariffs and Rates, Take notice that on April 26, 2001, Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ granted requests for blanket approval doorbell.htm. under part 34, subject to the following: Eastern) tendered for filing as part of its Within thirty days of the date of the FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh Revised David P. Boergers, order, any person desiring to be heard Volume No. 1 and First Revised Volume Secretary. or to protest the blanket approval of No. 2, revised tariff sheets to be effective [FR Doc. 01–11348 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] June 1, 2001 as listed on Appendix A to issuances of securities or assumptions of BILLING CODE 6717–01–M liability by Sempra should file a motion the filing. to intervene or protest with the Federal Texas Eastern states that the purpose Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 of this filing is to increase the ASA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, Usage Surcharge from zero to the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 various amounts, by zone, shown on Federal Energy Regulatory of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Appendix B. For transportation from the Commission and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and East La Zone to the M–3 Zone, the ASA Usage Surcharge is proposed to be set at [Docket Nos. RP01–236–001, RP00–481– 385.214). 001, and RP00–553–004] Absent a request to be heard in $0.0354 per dth. The need to increase opposition within this period, Sempra is the ASA Usage Surcharge at this time is Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line authorized to issue securities and the result of the significant increase in Corporation; Notice of Compliance assume obligations or liabilities as a the Applicable Shrinkage Deferred Filing guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise Account balance from $26,602 as of in respect of any security of another August 31, 2000 to $22,625,398 as of May 1, 2001. person; provided that such issuance or March 31, 2001. In order to ameliorate Take notice that on April 19, 2001, assumption is for some lawful object the impact on customers’ rates of this Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line within the corporate purposes of the buildup in the Applicable Shrinkage Corporation (Transco) in compliance applicant, and compatible with the Deferred Account balance, Texas with the Commission’s order issued public interest, and is reasonably Eastern is proposing to commerce March 30, 2001 in the referenced necessary or appropriate for such recovery of such costs effective June 1, dockets, (March 30 Order), tendered this purposes. 2001, rather that waiting until December filing to explain how its proposed tariff The Commission reserves the right to 1, 2001. The practical result of revisions filed on February 28, 2001, in require a further showing that neither commencing recovery of those costs Docket No. RP01–236 (February 28 public nor private interests will be effective June 1, 2001 is to spread the Filing) relate to Transco’s compliance adversely affected by continued recovery of such costs over eighteen with Order Nos. 637 and 587–L. approval of Sempra’s issuances of months (June 1, 2001 through November In addition, Transco submits herein, securities or assumptions of liability. 30, 2002) rather than 12 months pursuant to the commission’s directive Notice is hereby given that the (December 1, 2001 through November in the March 30 Order, certain new and deadline for filing motions to intervene 30, 2002) if Texas Eastern waited until revised tariff sheets to its FERC Gas or protests, as set forth above, is May 10, its October 31, 2001 annual ASA filing. Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, 2001. Texas Eastern states that copies of its which tariff sheets were submitted on a Copies of the full text of the Order are filing have been mailed to all affected pro forma basis in Transco’s previous available from the Commission’s Public customers and interested state Order No. 637 compliance filing in Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., commissions. Docket No. RP00–481–000 and were not Washington, DC 20426. The Order may Any person desiring to be heard or to superseded by the February 28 Filing. also be viewed on the Internet at http:/ protest said filing should file a motion The enclosed tariff sheets, which are
VerDate 11
enumerated in Appendix A to the filing, will be considered by the Commission taken, but will not serve to make are proposed to be effective as described in determining the appropriate action to protestants parties to the proceedings. more fully herein. be taken, but will not serve to make Any person wishing to become a party Any person desiring to protest said protestants parties to the proceedings. must file a motion to intervene. Copies filing should file a protest with the Copies of this filing are on file with the of this filing are on file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Commission and are available for public Commission and are available for public 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC inspection in the Public Reference inspection in the Public Reference 20426, in accordance with Section Room. This filing may be viewed on the Room. This filing may be viewed on the 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ web at http://ww.ferc.fed.us/online/ Regulations. All such protests must be rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for filed on or before May 8, 2001. Protests assistance). Comments, protests and assistance). Comments, protests, and will be considered by the Commission interventions may be filed electronically interventions may be filed electronically in determining the appropriate action to via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 be taken, but will not serve to make CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the protestants parties to the proceedings. instructions on the Commission’s web instructions on the Commission’s web Copies of this filing are on file with the site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ Commission and are available for public doorbell.htm. doorbell.htm. inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the David P. Boergers, David P. Boergers, web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/ Secretary. Secretary. rims.htm (call 202–208–2222 for [FR Doc. 01–11349 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–11345 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] assistance). Comments, protests and BILLING CODE 6717–01–M BILLING CODE 6717–01–M interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY instructions on the Commission’s web Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/ Commission Commission doorbell.htm. [Docket No. RP01–385–000] David P. Boergers, [Docket No. RP01–386–000] Secretary. USG Pipeline Company; Notice of [FR Doc. 01–11346 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Compliance Filing Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc.; BILLING CODE 6717–01–M Notice of Filing of Cash-Out Report May 1, 2001. Take notice that on April 23, 2001, May 1, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY USG Pipeline Company (USGPC) Take notice that on April 23, 2001, tendered for filing as part of its FERC Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc. Federal Energy Regulatory Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the (Williams) tendered for filing, pursuant Commission following revised tariff sheets: First to Article 9.8(d) of the General Terms Revised Sheet No. 34, First Revised and Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff, [Docket No. RP97–71–027] Sheet No. 52, First Revised Sheet No. its report of net cash out activity. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line 56, and First Revised Sheet No. 71. Williams states that pursuant to the Corporation; Notice of Refund Report USGPC states that the purpose of this cash-out mechanism contained in filing is to comply with the Section 9.8(a)(iv) of Williams’ tariff, May 1, 2001. Commission’s Order No. 587–M issued Shippers are given the option of Take notice that on April 25, 2001 November 30, 2000, in Docket No. resolving their imbalances by the end of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line RM96–1–015. USGPC states that it the calendar month following the month Corporation (Transco) tendered for proposes to place these revised tariff in which the imbalance occurred by filing with the Commission a refund sheets into effect on May 1, 2001. cashing out such imbalances at 100% of report showing that on November 1, USGPC states that complete copies of the spot market price applicable to 2000 and March 26, 2001, Transco this filing are being provided to its sole Williams as published in the first issue submitted refunds/surcharges to all customer, United States Gypsum of Inside FERC’s Gas Market Report for affected shippers in docket No. RP97– Company, which receives service as the month in which the imbalance 71–000, et. al. Transco states that the certificated under Part 157 of the occurred. Net monthly imbalances total refund amounts, including interest, Commission’s regulations, and to which are not resolved by the end of the were $89,302,453.55 and interested state commissions. second month following the month in $25,132,257.36, respectively. Any person desiring to be heard or to which the imbalance occurred and Transco states that copies of the filing protest said filing should file a motion which exceed the tolerance specified in are being mailed to its affected to intervene or protest with the Federal Section 9.8(b) are cashed out at a customers and interested State Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 premium or discount from the spot Commissions. First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. price according to the schedules set Any person desiring to protest said 20426, in accordance with Sections forth in Section 9.8(c). filing should file a protest with the 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s Williams states that it is filing its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Rules and Regulations. All such motions report of net cash out activity, which 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC or protests must be filed in accordance shows net cash out costs to the company 20426, in accordance with Section with Section 154.210 of the of $474,851.98 for the twelve months 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Commission’s Regulations. Protests will ended September 30, 2000. Regulations. All such protests must be be considered by the Commission in Williams states that a copy of its filing filed on or before May 8, 2001. Protests determining the appropriate action to be was served on all jurisdictional
VerDate 11
customers and interested state and the state regulatory commissions Comment date: May 16, 2001, in commissions. within the PJM control area. accordance with Standard Paragraph E Any person desiring to be heard or to Comment date: May 16, 2001, in at the end of this notice. protest said filing should file a motion accordance with Standard Paragraph E 5. Valley Electric Association, Inc. to intervene or a protest with the at the end of this notice. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, [Docket No. ER01–1229–001] 2. California Independent System 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Operator Corporation Take notice that on April 25, 2001, 20426, in accordance with Sections Valley Electric Association, Inc. 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s [Docket No. ER98–3594–007] tendered for filing an amendment to its Rules and Regulations. All such motions Take notice that on April 25, 2001, filing in this proceeding. or protests must be filed on or before the California Independent System Comment date: May 16, 2001, in May 8, 2001. Protests will be considered Operator Corporation (ISO) tendered for accordance with Standard Paragraph E by the Commission in determining the filing revised ISO Tariff sheets to at the end of this notice. appropriate action to be taken, but will comply with the Commission’s March 6. FirstEnergy Operating Companies: not serve to make protestants parties to 28, 2001 Order in the above-referenced The Cleveland Electric Illuminating the proceedings. Any person wishing to docket. Company, Ohio Edison Company, become a party must file a motion to The ISO states that the filing has been Pennsylvania Power Company, The intervene. Copies of this filing are on served on each person designated on the Toledo Edison Company file with the Commission and are official service list compiled by the available for public inspection in the Secretary in this proceeding. [Docket No. EL01–69–000] Public Reference Room. This filing may Comment date: May 16, 2001, in American Transmission Systems, Inc. be viewed on the web at http:// accordance with Standard Paragraph E Take notice that on April 25, 2001, www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call at the end of this notice. the FirstEnergy Operating Companies 202–208–2222 for assistance). and American Transmission Systems, 3. Sithe Edgar LLC, et al. Comments, protests, and interventions Inc. tendered for filing pursuant to Rule may be filed electronically via the [Docket Nos. ER98–1943–002, ER98–2782– 207, 18 CFR 385.207 a petition for a internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 001, ER99–2404–001, ER98–107–001] declaratory order confirming the 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Take notice that on April 23, 2001, identification of local distribution on the Commission’s web site at http:/ Sithe Edgar LLC, Sithe New Boston LLC, facilities made by the Ohio Public /www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. Sithe Framingham LLC, Sithe West Utilities Commission and the David P. Boergers, Medway LLC, Sithe Wyman LLC, Sithe Pennsylvania Public Utility Mystic LLC, AG-Energy, L.P., Power Commission. Secretary. City Partners, L.P., Seneca Power Comment date: May 16, 2001, in [FR Doc. 01–11350 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Partners, L.P., Sterling Power Partners, accordance with Standard Paragraph E BILLING CODE 6717–01–M L.P., Sithe Power Marketing, L.P., and at the end of this notice. Sithe Power Marketing, Inc. (the Sithe 7. California Independent System Jurisdictional Affiliates) tendered for DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Operator Corporation filing an updated market-power analysis Federal Energy Regulatory in compliance with the requirement in [Docket No. ER01–1863–000] Commission the orders granting them authority to Take notice that on April 25, 2001, make power sales at market-based rates. the California Independent System Comment date: May 14, 2001, in [Docket No. ER01–1869–000, et al.] Operator Corporation tendered for filing accordance with Standard Paragraph E a Meter Service Agreement for ISO PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al.; at the end of this notice. Metered Entities between the ISO and Electric Rate and Corporate Regulation 4. Public Service Company of New Calpine Construction Finance Company, Filings Mexico L.P. for acceptance by the Commission. The ISO states that this filing has been April 30, 2001. [Docket No. ER01–615–002] served on Calpine Construction Finance Take notice that the following filings Take notice that on April 25, 2001, Company, L.P. and the California Public have been made with the Commission: Public Service Company of New Mexico Utilities Commission. The ISO is requesting waiver of the 1. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PNM) tendered for filing an amended filing in compliance with the 60-day notice requirement to allow the [Docket No. ER01–1869–000] Commission’s January 24, 2001 order in Meter Service Agreement for ISO Take notice that on April 25, 2001 Docket Nos. ER01–592–000 and ER01– Metered Entities to be made effective PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), 615–000, Western Resources, Inc. and April 11, 2001. tendered for filing an executed Public Service Company of New Comment date: May 16, 2001, in interconnection service agreement Mexico, 94 FERC ¶ 61,050 (2001) accordance with Standard Paragraph E between PJM and FPL Energy MH50, (January 24 Order). On February 23, at the end of this notice. L.P. and an interim interconnection 2001, PNM filed to revise Section 4 of 8. Moses Lake Generating LLC service agreement between PJM and its market-based sales tariff in Calpine Construction Finance Company, compliance with the January 24 Order. [Docket No. EG01–199–000] L.P. PNM states that the amended Take notice that on April 25, 2001, PJM requests a waiver of the compliance filing consists of tariff Moses Lake Generating LLC tendered for Commission’s 60-day notice sheets redesignated to conform to the filing an application for determination requirement to permit the effective dates tariff designation reflected in the of exempt wholesale generator status agreed to by the parties. January 24 Order, and contains no pursuant to section 32(a)(1) of the Copies of this filing were served upon substantive changes to its February 23 Public Utility Holding Company Act of each of the parties to the agreements compliance filing. 1935 (PUHCA). The applicant is a
VerDate 11
limited liability company organized a Participating Generator Agreement Comment date: May 16, 2001, in under the laws of the State of Delaware between the ISO and Calpine accordance with Standard Paragraph E that is engaged directly and exclusively Construction Finance Company, L.P. for at the end of this notice. in developing, owning, and operating acceptance by the Commission. 13. PP Southwest Generation Holdings, one or two facilities which will be The ISO states that this filing has been LLC eligible facilities in Grant County, served on Calpine Construction Finance Washington. The facilities will consist Company, L.P. and the California Public [Docket No. ER01–1870–000] of multiple small duel-fueled (diesel/ Utilities Commission. Take notice that on April 25, 2001, natural gas) generators, which in the The ISO is requesting waiver of the PPL Southwest Generation Holdings, aggregate will be capable of generating 60-day notice requirement to allow the LLC (PPL Southwest Generation up to 60 MW of power, and equipment Participating Generator Agreement to be Holdings) tendered for filing an necessary to interconnect the facilities made effective April 11, 2001. Application for Authority to sell electric to the transmission grid. Comment date: May 16, 2001, in energy, capacity and specified ancillary Comment date: May 16, 2001, in accordance with Standard Paragraph E services at market-based rates. accordance with Standard Paragraph E at the end of this notice. PPL Southwest Generation Holdings at the end of this notice. The 11. Entergy Services, Inc. requests that the Commission permit its Commission will limit its consideration Market-Based Rate Tariff to become [Docket No. ER01–1866–000] of comments to those that concern the effective one business day from the date adequacy or accuracy of the application. Take notice that on April 25, 2001, of filing. Entergy Services, Inc. (Entergy Services) Comment date: May16, 2001, in 9. PacifiCorp tendered for filing with the Federal accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. EC01–91–000] Energy Regulatory Commission an at the end of this notice. unexecuted Network Integration Take notice that on April 25, 2001, Transmission Service Agreement (the 14. Moses Lake Generating LLC PacifiCorp (PacifiCorp) tendered for NITSA), and an unexecuted Network filing an application pursuant to Section [Docket No. ER01–1871–000] Operating Agreement (the NOA) 203 of the Federal Power Act and Part between Entergy Services and the Take notice that on April 25, 2001, 33 of the Regulations of the Commission following parties: (1) Mississippi Delta Moses Lake Generating LLC (Moses for authorization of a disposition of Energy Agency (MDEA), a joint action Lake), an electric power developer jurisdictional facilities whereby NA agency organized and existing under the organized under the laws of Delaware, General Partnership will transfer all of laws of the State of Mississippi, tendered for filing acceptance of its the outstanding common stock of composed of the Clarksdale Public market-based rate tariff, waiver of PacifiCorp to newly-formed PacifiCorp Utilities Commission of the City of certain requirements under Subparts B Holdings, Inc. (PHI) in exchange for the Clarksdale, Mississippi (Clarksdale) and and C of Part 35 of the Commission’s capital stock of PHI. PacifiCorp will the Public Service Commission of Yazoo regulations, and preapproval of remain an indirect subsidiary of City of the City of Yazoo City transactions under Part 34 of the Scottish Power plc. PacifiCorp intends Mississippi (Yazoo City); (2) Clarksdale; regulations. to transfer over time the non-regulated and (3) Yazoo City. Moses Lake is intending to construct, business of PacifiCorp Group Holdings Entergy Services requests that the own, and operate a facility with a Company (PGHC) and its subsidiaries to NITSA and NOA be accepted for filing capacity up to 60 MW in Grant County, PHI. effective as of May 1, 2001, and requests Washington. The proposed restructuring plan also waiver of the Commission’s regulations Comment date: May 16, 2001, in includes the transfer of the common to the extent necessary to permit the accordance with Standard Paragraph E stock of PacifiCorp’s power marketing NITSA and NOA to become effective at the end of this notice. affiliate, PacifiCorp Power Marketing, that date. 15. Arizona Public Service Company Inc. to PHI. As a result of this transfer, Comment date: May 16, 2001, in control over PPM One LLC and PPM Six accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. ER01–1872–000] LLC effectively transfers from at the end of this notice. Take notice that on April 25, 2001, PacifiCorp to PHI, although Arizona Public Service Company (APS) ScottishPower retains ultimate power 12. Carolina Power & Light Company tendered for filing umbrella Service and control. PacifiCorp filed no Section [Docket No. ER01–1867–000] Agreements to provide Short-Term Firm 205 rate proceeding in this application, Take notice that on April 25, 2001, and Non-Firm Point-to-Point and states that the transaction will Carolina Power & Light Company Transmission Service to Conoco, Inc. change only PacifiCorp’s internal (CP&L) tendered for filing an executed under APS Open Access Transmission upstream corporate structure, and have Service Agreement between CP&L and Tariff. no impact on competition, rates or the following eligible buyer, Dynegy A copy of this filing has been served regulation. Applicant has requested Power Marketing, Inc. Service to this on Conoco, Inc., and the Arizona Commission approval of the transaction eligible buyer will be in accordance Corporation Commission. as early as practicable. with the terms and conditions of CP&L’s Comment date: May 16, 2001, in Comment date: May 16, 2001, in Market-Based Rates Tariff, FERC accordance with Standard Paragraph E accordance with Standard Paragraph E Electric Tariff No. 4, for sales of capacity at the end of this notice. at the end of this notice. and energy at market-based rates. 16. American Transmission Company 10. California Independent System CP&L requests an effective date of LLC Operator Corporation April 15, 2001 for this Service Agreement. [Docket No. ER01–1873–000] [Docket No. ER01–1864–000] Copies of the filing were served upon Take notice that on April 25, 2001, Take notice that on April 25, 2001, the North Carolina Utilities Commission American Transmission Company LLC the California Independent System and the South Carolina Public Service (ATCLLC) tendered for filing a Short- Operator Corporation tendered for filing Commission. Term Firm and Short-Term Non-Firm
VerDate 11
Point-to-Point Service Agreement (EDSP). This notice proposes the consume, work with, or import between ATCLLC and Aquila Energy establishment of an Endocrine Disruptor pesticide chemicals, substances that Marketing Corporation. ATCLLC Methods Validation Subcommittee may have an effect cumulative to an requests an effective date of March 26, (EDMVS) as a Subcommittee under the effect of a pesticide, or substances found 2001. National Advisory Council for in sources of drinking water. To Comment date: May 16, 2001, in Environmental Policy and Technology determine whether you or your business accordance with Standard Paragraph E (NACEPT), and requests nominations may have an interest in this notice you at the end of this notice. for members of the EDMVS from should carefully examine section 408(p) interested organizations. NACEPT is a Standard Paragraph of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic chartered federal advisory committee Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food E. Any person desiring to be heard or subject to the provisions of the Federal Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 to protest such filing should file a Advisory Committee Act. Through (Public Law 104–170), 21 U.S.C. 346a(p) motion to intervene or protest with the NACEPT, the EDMVS will provide and amendments to the Safe Drinking Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, technical advice an recommendations to Water Act (SDWA) (Public Law 104– 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. EPA regarding validation of the Tier 1 182), 42 U.S.C. 300j–17. Since other 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 Screening and Tier 2 Testing methods and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of for its Endocrine Disruptor Screening entities may also be interested, the Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 Program (EDSP). Background Agency has not attempted to describe all and 385.214). All such motions or information regarding the Agency’s the specific entities that may be affected protests should be filed on or before the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program by this action. If you have any questions comment date. Protests will be (EDSP) and the mission of the EDMVS regarding the applicability of this action considered by the Commission in are discussed in Unit IV. of to a particular entity, consult the determining the appropriate action to be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. This technical persons listed under FOR taken, but will not serve to make information is being provided to allow FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. protestants parties to the proceeding. interested organizations to review the II. How Can I Get Additional Any person wishing to become a party scope of proposed activities to nominate Information, Including Copies of This must file a motion to intervene. Copies qualified individuals for membership on Document or Other Related Documents? of these filings are on file with the the EDMVS. Commission and are available for public DATES: Nominations must be received 1. Electronically. You may obtain inspection. This filing may also be on or before June 6, 2001. electronic copies of this document, and viewed on the Internet at http:// ADDRESSES: Nominations for certain other related documents that www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call membership may be submitted by mail, might be available electronically, from 202–208–2222 for assistance). electronically, or in person. Please the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// Comments, protests, and interventions follow the detailed instructions for each www.epa.gov/scipoly. To access this may be filed electronically via the method as provided in Unit III. of the document, on the Home Page select internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure ‘‘Endocrine Disruptors’’ which will take 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions proper receipt by EPA, your request you to the OSCP Endocrine Disruptor on the Commission’s web site at http:/ must identify docket control number Screening Program web site. /www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. OPPTS–42212C in the subject line on 2. In person. The Agency has the first page of your response. David P. Boergers, established an administrative record for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Secretary. For the EDMVS under docket control general information contact: TSCA [FR Doc. 01–11340 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] number OPPTS–42212C. The Hotline, Environmental Assistance BILLING CODE 6717–01–P administrative record consists of the Division (7408), Office of Pollution documents specifically referenced in Prevention and Toxics, Environmental this notice, any public comments Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION received during an applicable comment AGENCY Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: 202–554–1404; TDD: 202–554–0551; e- period, and other information related to [OPPTS–42212C; FRL–6778–2] mail: [email protected]. the Endocrine Disruptor Methods For technical information contact: Validation Subcommittee Endocrine Disruptor Screening Anthony Maciorowski, Senior Technical Organizational Meeting. This Program; Establishment of an Advisor, Office of Prevention, Pesticides administrative record includes the Endocrine Disruptor Methods and Toxic Substances; telephone: 202– documents that are physically located in Validation Subcommittee under the 260–3048; e-mail address: the docket, as well as the documents National Advisory Council for [email protected] or that are referenced in those documents. Environmental Policy and Technology; Gary Timm, Senior Technical The public version of the administrative Request for Nominations for Advisor, Office of Prevention, Pesticides record, which includes printed, paper Membership and Toxic Substances; telephone: 202– versions of any electronic comments AGENCY: Environmental Protection 260–1859; e-mail address: that may be submitted during an Agency (EPA). [email protected]. applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the TSCA ACTIONS: Notice; request for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Nonconfidential Information Center, nominations for membership. I. Does This Notice Apply to Me? North East Mall Rm. B–607, Waterside SUMMARY: As mandated by the Federal This action is directed to the public Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as in general. You may be interested in The Center is open from noon to 4 p.m., amended by the Food Quality Protection nominating members to the Monday through Friday, excluding legal Act of 1996, EPA is implementing an subcommittee set forth in this notice if holidays. The telephone number of the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program you produce, manufacture, use, Center is (202) 260–7099.
VerDate 11
III. How Can I Nominate Potential IV. Background report and effects assessment (Ref. 6); a Members to the Endocrine Disruptor series of endocrine disruptor methods A. Authorities Methods Validation Subcommittee? workshops funded by the World Two laws enacted in 1996 authorize Wildlife Fund, Chemical Manufacturer’s You may nominate technically the Agency to screen pesticides and Association, and the Agency (Refs. 1, 3, qualified persons for membership to the other chemicals found in food or in and 7); and co-sponsorship (with the Endocrine Disruptor Methods drinking water sources to determine National Institute of Environmental Validation Subcommittee through the whether they may cause estrogenic or Health Sciences and Department of the mail, in person, or electronically. other endocrine effects in humans. The Interior) of an independent critical Nominations for membership should be impetus for development of EPA’s analysis of the literature on hormonally submitted by the nominating Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program active agents in the environment by the organization, and must include a was an amendment to FFDCA, National Academy of Sciences (Ref. 5). curriculum vitae of the nominee contained in the FQPA of 1996 (Public The foregoing activities coincided with detailing his or her specific area of Law 104–170). The FFDCA (21 U.S.C. the establishment and deliberationsof relevant scientific expertise. Members of 346a(p) as amended requires EPA to: the Endocrine Disruptor Screening and the EDMVS will be selected on the basis develop a screening program, using Testing Advisory Committee (Ref. 2). The complexity of the scientific and of their relevant scientific expertise and appropriate validated test systems and other scientifically relevant information, to regulatory issues surrounding the diversity of perspectives on mammalian, endocrine disruptor issue led EPA to ecological, and in vitro endocrine determine whether certain substances may have an effect in humans that is similar to an seek broad expert advice and counsel disruptor screening and testing methods effect produced by a naturally occurring beyond the Agency. EPA held a public and procedures, toxicity test methods estrogen, or such other endocrine effect as meeting in May of 1996 requesting standardization and validation, and the Administrator may designate. advice on how to develop a chemical and pesticide regulatory 21 U.S.C. 346a(p)(3), also states that in scientifically defensible, pragmatic processes. Members will be appointed carrying out its screening program, EPA approach to endocrine disruptor for 2 years. Subcommittee members screening and testing. The stakeholder shall be appointed with balanced (A) shall provide for the testing of all feedback indicated that a broad based pesticide chemicals and (B) may provide for representation from among the the testing of any other substance that may multi-sector stakeholder committee following sectors: the agrichemical and have an effect that is cumulative to an effect should be established under the Federal commodity chemical industries; of a pesticide chemical if the Administrator Advisory Committee Act. Following a environmental/public interest determines that a substantial population may second public meeting and analysis of organizations; public health be exposed to such a substance. stakeholder interests (Keystone Center organizations; animal welfare Additionally, Congress amended the Convening Report, see www.epa.gov/ organizations; Federal agencies; State, SDWA (42 U.S.C. 300j–17) authorizing scipoly/oscpendo), the Agency local and tribal governments; academia; EPA to provide for the testing under the chartered the Endocrine Disruptor consumers, and the public. Your screening program authorized in the Screening and Testing Advisory FFDCA Committee (EDSTAC). nomination must be received by EPA on EDSTAC was charged with providing or before June 6, 2001. To ensure proper . . .of any other substance that may be advice and recommendations to the receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you found in sources of drinking water if the Agency regarding a strategy for testing identify docket control number OPPTS– Administrator determines that a substantial chemical substances to determine 42212C in the subject line on the first population may be exposed to such whether they may have an effect in substance. (42 U.S.C. 300j–17). page of your request. humans similar to an effect produced by 1. By mail. You may submit a written Through the amended FFDCA, Congress naturally occurring hormones. EDSTAC nomination to: Document Control Office directed EPA to develop an endocrine consisted of 39 representatives from (7407), Office of Pollution Prevention disruptor screening program using industry, environmental and public and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental appropriate validated test systems and health advocacy groups, state Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania other scientifically relevant information government, other Federal agencies, and by August 3, 1998, implement the Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. academic scientists. Over a 2–year program by August 3, 1999, and report period, EDSTAC held eight meetings. To 2. In person or by courier. You may progress to Congress by August 3, 2000. facilitate regional public comment on deliver a written nomination to: OPPT EPA may rely upon FIFRA and TCSA the process, the meetings were held in Document Control Office (DCO) in the testing authority. Under FIFRA section different parts of the country (Chicago, East Tower Rm. G-099, Waterside Mall, 3(c)(2)(B), if EPA determines that San Francisco, New York, Houston, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. The additional data are required to maintain Orlando, Baltimore and Washington) DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., in effect an existing pesticide and provided opportunities for public Monday through Friday, excluding legal registration, it can require pesticide comment. In its final report, EDSTAC holidays. The telephone number for the registrants to provide EPA with (Ref. 2, available at www.epa.gov/ DCO is (202) 260–7093. additional data in support of the scipoly/oscpendo) provided 71 consensus recommendations regarding 3. Electronically. You may submit registrant. Likewise, TSCA section 4 provides EPA authority to require an endocrine disruptor screening your nomination electronically by e- testing of certain industrial chemicals. program. Considering the EDSTAC’s mail to: [email protected]. Use diverse membership, EPA found its Wordperfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format B. Development of EPA’s Endocrine consensus recommendations compelling and avoid the use of special characters Disruptor Screening Program and scientifically rigorous. Therefore, and any form of encryption. All Prior to the passage of the FQPA and EPA closely followed EDSTAC’s advice comments in electronic form must be SDWA, the Agency initiated several and recommendations in developing its identified by docket control number endocrine disruptors investigations Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program OPPTS–42212C. including: the development of a special (EDSP).
VerDate 11
EPA’s EDSP is outlined in the August prevalidation and validation studies on used in the feasibility study were 11, 1998 Federal Register (63 FR 42852) some of the of Tier 1 and Tier 2 assays deemed unreliable for routine regulatory (FRL–6021–3), and further developed as that are likely to be part of the EDSP. use. Presently, EPA is not conducting a proposed statement of policy in the The Endocrine Disruptor Methods any Agency-sponsored studies on HTPS. December 28, 1998 Federal Register (63 Validation Subcommittee will provide The Agency is continuing discussions FR 71542) (FRL–6052–9), available at advice and comment on both the with the Japanese Government on the www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/1998/ ongoing and new studies necessary to development of a different reporter gene December/Day-28/t34298.htm). The validate the EDSP assays. based HTPS system. However, the EDSP proposed statement of policy, 1. Priority setting. Priority setting Japanese studies remain ongoing, and including public comments, was processes will not be included in the must await completion and scientific subsequently reviewed by a joint panel mission statement to the EDMVS, but evaluation before being further of the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel EPA’s ongoing activities are briefly considered. (SAP) and the EPA Science Advisory summarized here for background EPA has also engaged in the Board (SAB) in May 1999. Like Gray et information purposes. As many as development of QSAR models to predict al. (Ref. 3), EDSTAC (Ref. 2) and the 87,000 chemicals may be sorted into endocrine receptor binding activity from NRC (Ref. 5), the SAP/SAB (Ref. 8) final categories for priority setting. However, the molecular structure of chemicals. report concluded that a tiered approach EPA anticipates that tens of thousands The Agency is presently working with relying on a combination of in vivo and of chemicals will be exempted from the Food and Drug Administration to in vitro screens for Tier 1 and a set of screening. Priority setting tools and refine and validate two-dimensional in vivo Tier 2 tests was scientifically processes are being developed by EPA, pharmacophore screening models and reasonable. This conclusion was based its contractors and cooperators. Until three-dimensional CoMFA (comparative upon each group’s assessment of the the Agency completely finalizes its molecular field analysis) models, as current state-of-the-science on the priority setting tools and process, well as the Unversity of Bourgas on evaluation of agents impacting the accurate estimates of how many three dimensional COREPA (Common endocrine system. Another consistent chemicals may actually be candidates Reactivity Pattern) models. The Agency conclusion was the need to validate the for screening remain premature. Yet, is developing estrogen and androgen individual screens and tests in EDSP. EPA expects that 10% or less of the receptor binding data to verify the The validation and peer review are universe of chemicals will undergo model results. The QSAR model science-based process steps, which are actual screening. approaches have the potential to be prerequisite to the final development Public review and comment during incorporated in the EDPSD, provided and approval of test guidelines for development of the EDSP priority they prove to be reliable upon regulatory use (Ref. 4). setting process has been provided completion of ongoing studies and EPA also received public comments through two public workshops held in scientific peer review. on the proposed statement of policy January 1999 and June 2000 (Federal Priority setting is not part of the which were considered by the SAP/SAB Register notices and workshop reports charge to the EDMVS. However, the joint panel review. The Agency will are available at www.epa.gov/scipoly/ Agency will keep the subcommittee respond to these public comments in a oscpendo). The priority setting informed of these activities, in that the future Federal Register notice and final approach is based on development and results have implications for the statement of policy prior to requiring application of a relational database development of in vitro screening and regulatory testing. titledThe Endocrine Disruptor Priority pre-screening methods. The latter will Setting Database (EDPSD). The EDPSD be part of the charge to the C. Implementation of EPA’s Endocrine consolidates existing information and Disruptor Screening Program subcommittee. data on exposure and effects to rank 2. Validation of EDSP assays. The EPA’s ongoing implementation of chemicals. The chemicals are ranked EDSP assays that EPA is developing and Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program within compartments. A number of validating on a priority basis are (EDSP) is science-driven, and based on compartments may be configured on the identified below: the recommendations and comments of basis of exposure and effects Tier 1 Screening Battery Methods EDSTAC (Ref. 2), the FIFRA SAP/SAB characteristics, separately or in • Estrogen (ER) and androgen receptor Joint Panel (Ref. 8), and the NAS (Ref. combination. The current version of the (AR) binding assays 5). In keeping with its FFDCA-mandated EDPSD may be examined at http:// • ER and AR assays with w/ deadline, the Agency forwarded a www.ergweb.com/endocrine. transcriptional activation Report to Congress in August 2000, Recognizing that little relevant effects • Steroidogenesis assay providing the Agency’s progress on information for endocrine disruption • Uterotrophic assay implementation of the EDSP. The above exists for the vast majority of chemicals, • Hershberger assay referenced Federal Register Notices, the Agency is considering approaches • Pubertal female assay w/thyroid SAB/SAP report, Endocrine Disruptor for providing additional information to endpoints Screening Program Report to Congress, assist priority setting. Initially, high • Frog metamorphosis and other EPA EDSP-related throughput pre-screening (HTPS) • Fish reproductive screening assay information are available at technology was viewed as an approach Tier 1 Screening Battery Alternate www.epa.gov/scipoly/oscpendo. The to provide information on the ability of Methods Agency’s Implementation is currently a chemical to bind with hormone • Pubertal male assay w/thyroid proceeding on two fronts. EPA is receptors, thereby improving the endpoints completing development of the assignment of a high screening priority • Aromatase assay Endocrine Disruptor Priority Setting for endocrine active chemicals. An • Rodent in utero through lactation Database and the compartment-based HTPS feasibility study was completed assay approach that the Agency will use to by the Agency in 1999. Following Tier 2 Testing Battery Methods establish priorities for screening external scientific peer review by the • Two-generation mammalian chemicals at a later stage of FIFRA SAP/EPA SAB Joint Panel (Ref. reproductive toxicity study with implementation. EPA has also initiated 8), the HTPS reporter gene methods endocrine endpoints
VerDate 11
• Two-generation avian reproductive All stages and outcomes are part of the methods. ICCVAM and the National toxicity study with endocrine endpoints interagency ICCVAM process. However, Toxicology Program will manage and • Two-generation fish reproductive as indicated in Validation and peer review a background review study with endocrine endpoints Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological document and summarize literature • Two-generation mysid shrimp Test Methods: ‘‘ICCVAM does not derived performance criteria into a reproductive study with endocrine ordinarily address methods applicable generic guidance document that could endpoints to only one agency’’ (Ref. 4, p. 46); and be used for validating estrogen receptor 3. The Validation Process. As a ‘‘test method sponsors may elect to and androgen receptor binding/reporter charter member and co-chair of the arrange for independent peer review by gene assays. Interagency Coordinating Committee on third parties prior to submission of a In addition to EPA’s domestic EDSP the Validation of Alternative Methods method to an agency or ICCVAM’’ (Ref. validation program, certain screening (ICCVAM), EPA (and the EDMVS) will 4, p. 47). Regulatory approval of test assays and tests for international use are follow the interagency validation guidelines remains the sole also being conducted by the framework outlined in Validation and responsibility of each regulatory agency. Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological Although there is widespread interest Organization for Economic Cooperation Test Methods (Ref. 4) for validating the in EPA’s EDSP, the screening and and Development (OECD) Test EDSP screening and testing methods. testing methods are being developed Guidelines Program. EPA is an active The National Institute of Environmental and validated with the specific goal of member of the OECD Test Guidelines Health Sciences (NIEHS) established developing test guidelines for EPA Program activities, as well as the latter’s ICCVAM as a standing committee of regulatory use. The test guidelines will Endocrine Disruptor Testing and Federal agencies to coordinate and ultimately be used by chemical Assessment Workgroup. EPA will rely facilitate interagency validation, manufacturers, pesticide registrants, and upon the OECD mechanism for acceptance, and harmonization of other entities to develop data for validating those EDSP screens and tests toxicological test methods with an submission to EPA in support of the of international interest. The OECD, emphasis on reducing animal use, Agency’s statutorily mandated chemical EPA and ICCVAM have also mutually refining procedures involving animals risk management programs. agreed to this administrative to make them less stressful and EPA will manage the validation arrangement to ensure that all replacing animals where scientifically process for the EDSP with substantial appropriate validation and peer review appropriate. involvement of ICCVAM personnel. steps are achieved in both domestic and The ICCVAM validation process was EPA and ICCVAM have mutually agreed international efforts. designed as a flexible, adaptable to this administrative arrangement to 4. Studies initiated to date by EPA. A framework applicable to conventional ensure that EDSP validation meets number of studies have been initiated and alternative methods, and to meet ICCVAM interagency validation by EPA to provide the data necessary for the needs of diverse test sponsors, principles (Ref. 4), as well as EPA the validation of individual methods. Federal agencies and regulatory guideline development, review, and The results of these ongoing studies, as processes. The framework provides a regulatory approval processes for EPA’s well as advice regarding the design of number of stages and outcomes chemical risk management programs. new studies will be the primary work of including research, methods EPA will manage the process set forth the EDMVS. A summary of studies that development, prevalidation, validation, by ICCVAM for the validation of all of have been initiated by EPA is shown peer review, and regulatory acceptance. the specific in vitro and in vivo EDSP below.
Initial protocol Assays/tests Literature review demonstration Prevalidation studies Validation studies
ER/AR binding assay ••• •
Uterotrophic assay ••• •
Hershberger assay ••• •
Pubertal female assay •••
Pubertal male assay •••
Frog metamorphosis assay •
Fish reproductive screen •
Mammalian 2-generation test •
Avian 2-generation test •
Invertebrate 2-generation test •
VerDate 11
V. Endocrine Disruptor Methods relevant principles, methods and commodity chemical industries; Validation Subcommittee Mission techniques for the initial protocol. environmental/public interest Statement 2. Prevalidation studies. The further organizations; public health development and optimization of organizations; animal welfare A. Purpose and Authority specific EDSP initial protocols through organizations; Federal agencies; State, This mission statement establishes the targeted investigations. The targeted local and tribal governments; academia; Endocrine Disruptor Methods investigations will be designed to consumers, and the public. The Agency Validation Subcommittee (EDMVS) in address questions necessary for an will appoint a Chair and Deputy Chair accordance with the Federal Advisory optimized, transferable protocol suitable for the Subcommittee. Subcommittee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2 for inter-laboratory validation studies. section 9(c)). The EDMVS is being 3. Validation studies. The design and E. Workgroups and Ad Hoc Teams established as a subcommittee under the interpretation of comparative inter- Workgroups and ad hoc teams may be auspices of EPA’s National Advisory laboratory studies to establish the established on an as-needed basis Council for Environmental Policy and reliability and relevance of the EDSP consisting of EDMVS members, or Technology. The purpose of the EDMVS optimized transferable protocols. supplemented with specialists qualified is to provide advice and counsel to the Following validation, the optimized in the technical area of the workgroup EPA on scientific issues associated with transferable protocols will provide the or team appointed by the Agency. Such the conduct of studies necessary for basis for endocrine disruptor test teams will develop in-depth technical validation of Tier 1 and Tier 2 methods guidelines for regulatory use. issues or analyses that may be necessary for the EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor 4. Preparation of EDSP Method for the EDMVS to conduct its Screening Program (63 FR 71542). The Validation documents for external peer deliberations. EDMVS will provide advice and review. All EDSP methods must be peer recommendations regarding: the reviewed prior to approval for F. Meetings development of initial protocols; regulatory use. With advice and The EDMVS will hold up to six prevalidation study designs; validation recommendations of the EDMVS, EPA meeting a year. A regular employee of study designs; and synthesis of will synthesize and interpret data and EPA will act as the Designated Federal prevalidation and validation study information generated in protocol Officer who will be present or results for the EDSP Tier 1 and Tier 2 development, prevalidation studies and represented at all meetings and is methods into documents suitable for validation studies into EDSP method- authorized to adjourn any such external peer review. The EDMVS specific documents suitable for external meetings whenever the official advice and recommendations will be peer review. External scientific peer determines it to be in the public forwarded to the Agency through review of the EDSP methods will be interest. All EDMVS meetings will be NACEPT. Taking into account this arranged by EPA through an Agency- called, announced, and held in advice and recommendations, EPA will approved external scientific peer review accordance with FACA and NACEPT manage and conduct prevalidation and panel. rules, which require open meetings and validation laboratory studies. an opportunity for interested persons to C. Scope of the Activity B. Objectives file comments before or after meetings, The EDMVS and NACEPT will or to make statements during the public EDMVS provides independent advice provide a forum for a diverse group of meetings to the extent time permits. The and counsel to the Agency through individuals representing a broad range date, time, location and any public NACEPT, on scientific and technical of interests and backgrounds from participation instructions for each issues related to validation of EDSP Tier across the country to consult with and meeting will be announced in the 1 and Tier 2 methods, including the make recommendations to the Agency Federal Register at least 30 days before reduction of animal pain suffering and on matters relating to the validation and the meeting date. Each meeting shall be use. Following validation of the external scientific peer review of conducted in accordance with an individual screening methods, the endocrine disruptor screening and agenda approved in advance by the collective data will be integrated and testing methods. The subcommittee will Designated Federal Officer. The meeting evaluated to optimize the configuration analyze issues, review data and information and agenda will be posted of the Tier 1 screening battery. EDMVS protocols, compile information, make on the Agency’s web site as soon as it may also examine new or innovative recommendations to the Agency, and is available, and no later than 15 days methods that may be applicable for undertake other activities necessary to before the meeting date. inclusion in a second phase of meet its responsibilities. validation. Specific areas for advice and VI. References D. Composition counsel include: 1. Ankley, G. T. et al. 1998. Overview 1. Initial protocol development. The The EDMVS shall be composed of 25 of a workshop on screening methods for development and/or review of members approved by the detecting (anti)-estrogenic/androgenic Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Administrator. Members will be chemicals in wildlife. Environmental (EDSP) initial protocols based on selected on the basis of their relevant Toxicology Chemistry. 17: 68-87. existing information and experience scientific expertise and diversity of 2. Endocrine Disruptor Screening and (past and current research). The initial perspectives on endocrine disruptor Testing Advisory Committee: Final protocols will serve as the starting point screening and testing methods and Report. 1998. U. S. Environmental for all subsequent prevalidation studies. procedures, toxicity test methods Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, EPA will prepare a Background Review standardization and validation, and Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, Document (BRD) addressing all critical chemical and pesticide regulatory Washington, DC. areas outlined in Validation and processes. Members will be appointed 3. Gray. L. E. et al. 1997. Endocrine Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological for 2 years. Subcommittee members Screening Methods Workshop Report: Test Methods (Ref. 4) will be prepared shall be appointed with balanced Detection of Estrogenic and Androgenic for each method to summarize, explain, representation from the following Hormonal and Antihormonal Activity and document decisions regarding the sectors: The agrichemical and for Chemicals that Act via Receptor or
VerDate 11
Steroidogenic Enzyme Mechanisms. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that Title: Compatibility with E911 Reproductive Toxicology 11:719-750. does not display a valid control number. Emergency Calling Systems, Fourth 4. National Institute of Environmental Comments are requested concerning (a) Report and Order. Health Sciences. 1997. Validation and whether the proposed collection of Form No.: N/A. Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological information is necessary for the proper Type of Review: Extension of a Test Methods: A report of the ad hoc performance of the functions of the currently approved collection. Interagency Coordinating Committee on Commission, including whether the Respondents: Business or other for- the Validation of Alternative Methods. information shall have practical utility; profit. NIH Publication No. 97-3981, NIEHS, (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s Number of Respondents: 4,000 Research Triangle Park, NC,105 pp. burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance respondents; 16,000 responses. 5. National Research Council. the quality, utility, and clarity of the Estimated Time Per Response: 8 Hormonally Active Agents in the information collected; and (d) ways to hours. Environment. National Academy Press, minimize the burden of the collection of Frequency of Response: Quarterly Washington, DC, 429 pp. information on the respondents, reporting requirement. 6. U. S. EPA. 1997. Special Report on including the use of automated Total Annual Burden: 32,000 hours. Environmental Endocrine Disruptors: collection techniques or other forms of Total Annual Cost: N/A. An Effects Assessment and Analysis. U. information technology. Needs and Uses: The Fourth Report and Order mandates that digital wireless S. Environmental Protection Agency, DATES: Written comments should be E911 service providers must be capable Office of Research and Development, submitted on or before June 6, 2001. If of transmitting 911 calls made using EPA/630/R-96/012, Washington, DC, you anticipate that you will be TTY devices by June 30, 2002. In order 116 pp. submitting comments, but find it to ensure that carriers comply with this 7. U.S. EPA. 1997. Screening Methods difficult to do so within the period of rule and to keep the Commission for Chemicals that Alter Thyroid time allowed by this notice, you should informed of technological advancements Hormone Action, Function, and advise the contact listed below as soon in this regard, the Fourth Report and Homeostasis. U. S. Environmental as possible. Protection Agency, Office of Research Order requires that carriers file a ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Judy and Development, EPA/6000/R-98/057, quarterly TTY progress report, either Boley, Federal Communications Washington, DC, 44 pp. individually or through an industry Commission, Room 1–C804, 445 12th 8. U. S. EPA. 1999. Review of the forum. Street, SW., DC 20554 or via the Internet EPA’s Proposed Environmental OMB Control No.: 3060–0970. to [email protected]. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Title: Section 90.621(e)(2), Selection U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For and Assignment of Frequencies. Science Advisory Board, EPA-SAB-EC- additional information or copies of the Form No.: N/A. 99-013, Washington, DC, 35 pp. information collection(s), contact Judy Type of Review: Extension of a Boley at 202–418–0214 or via the currently approved collection. List of Subjects Internet at [email protected]. Respondents: Business or other for- Environmental protection. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: profit and state, local or tribal OMB Control No.: 3060–0029. government. Dated: April 24, 2001. Title: Application for TV Broadcast Number of Respondents: 1,000. Stephen L. Johnson, Station License. Estimated Time Per Response: .5 Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Form No.: FCC Form 302–TV. hours. Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Type of Review: Revision of a Frequency of Response: On occasion [FR Doc. 01–11412 Filed 5–4–01 8:45 am] currently approved collection. reporting requirement. BILLING CODE 6560–50–S Respondents: Business or other for- Total Annual Burden: 500 hours. profit and not-for-profit institutions. Total Annual Cost: N/A. Number of Respondents: 83. Needs and Uses: Section 90.621 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Estimated Time Per Response: 4–10 requires applicants proposing to modify COMMISSION hours (1–2 hours for respondent; 2–6 operations to use channels for hours for consulting engineer). commercial purposes in certain Notice of Public Information Frequency of Response: On occasion frequency bands in 800 MHz to provide Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the reporting requirement. written notice of the modification to all Federal Communications Commission Total Annual Burden: 224 hours. Public Safety licensees within 70 miles Total Annual Cost: $61,390. of the site of the channels for which the Needs and Uses: FCC Form 302–TV is April 30, 2001. authorization for commercial use is used by licensees and permittees of TV SUMMARY: The Federal Communications sought that operate within 25 kHz of the broadcast stations to obtain a new or Commission, as part of its continuing center of those channels. This modified station license, and/or to effort to reduce paperwork burden requirement seeks to avoid the potential notify the Commission of certain invites the general public and other of interference that could result from the changes in the licensed facilities. The Federal agencies to take this modification of a Private Land Mobile data is used by FCC staff to confirm that opportunity to comment on the radio facility to commercial use. If the the station has been built to terms following information collection(s), as information were not available there specified in the outstanding required by the Paperwork Reduction would be an increased risk of construction permit and to ensure that Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An interference in this band. agency may not conduct or sponsor a any changes made to the station will not collection of information unless it have an impact on other stations and the Federal Communications Commission. displays a currently valid control public. Data is extracted from FCC Form Magalie Roman Salas, number. No person shall be subject to 302–TV for inclusion in the license to Secretary. any penalty for failing to comply with operate the station. [FR Doc. 01–11328 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] a collection of information subject to the OMB Control No.: 3060–0978. BILLING CODE 6712–01–U
VerDate 11
FEDERAL EMERGENCY uses this data to determine whether number (202) 646–3347 or e:mail MANAGEMENT AGENCY FEMA should suspend or terminate [email protected]. collection efforts or compromise the Dated: May 1, 2001. Agency Information Collection respondent’s debts. This data is also Reginald Trujillo, Activities: Proposed Collection; used to locate the debtor’s assets if the Comment Request Director, Program Services Division, debts are to be judicially enforced. Operations Support Directorate. Providing information on FEMA Form [FR Doc. 01–11361 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice and request for 22–13 is voluntary on the part of the comments. debtor. However, if the debtor does not BILLING CODE 6718–01–P SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency provide the information requested, Management Agency (FEMA), as part of FEMA may use more severe collection FEDERAL EMERGENCY its continuing effort to reduce methods. MANAGEMENT AGENCY paperwork and respondent burden, Affected Public: Individuals or invites the general public and other Households. Agency Information Collection Federal agencies to take this Number of Respondents: 600. Activities: Proposed Collection; opportunity to comment on proposed Frequency of Responses: On Comment Request continuing information collections. In Occasion. Hours Per Response: 75. ACTION: Notice and request for accordance with the Paperwork comments. Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 450 hours. 3506(c)(2)(A)), this notice seeks SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Estimated Cost: The cost to comments concerning FEMA’s Debt Management Agency, as part of its respondents is estimated to be $7,074. Collection Financial Statement, which continuing effort to reduce paperwork requests personal financial data from its The cost to the Federal Government is and respondent burden, invites the individual debtors. estimated to be $7,128. general public and other Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Comments agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the proposed new FEMA’s debt collection regulations, 44 Written comments are solicited to (a) information collections. In accordance CFR 11.36(b), FEMA is required to evaluate whether the proposed data with the Paperwork Reduction Act of maintain current credit data on FEMA’s collection is necessary for the proper 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), this debtors including, the individual performance of the agency, including notice seeks comments concerning The debtor’s own financial statement, whether the information shall have National Flood Insurance Telephone executed under penalty for false claim, practical utility; (b) evaluate the Response Center (TRC) and Leads concerning his/her assets and liabilities accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the Application Program. and his/her income and expenses. burden of the proposed collection of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA Form 22–13, Debt Collection information, including the validity of The Financial Statement, collects such data the methodology and assumptions used; National Flood Insurance Program directly from the individual debtor. (c) enhance the quality, utility, and (NFIP) plays a critical role in FEMA’s FEMA uses this data to determine the clarity of the information to be mission for reducing flood losses. debtor’s ability to pay debts due FEMA collected; and (d) minimize the burden Through the NFIP, communities must and to locate the debtor’s assets. of the collection of information on those adopt and enforce floodplain management ordinances to reduce Collection of Information who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, future flood losses. In exchange, Title: Debt Collection Financial electronic, mechanical, or other FEMA’s NFIP makes federally backed Statement. technological collection techniques or flood insurance available to property Type of Information Collection: other forms of information technology, owners in these participating Extension of a currently approved e.g., permitting electronic submission of communities. According to the Flood collection. responses. Comments should be Disaster Protection Act of 1973, OMB Number: 3067–0122. Congress Findings and Declaration of Form Numbers: FEMA Form 22–13, received within 60 days of the date of this notice. Purpose, Section 2(a)(6), Congress finds Debt Collection Financial Statement. that it is the public interest for persons Abstract: FEMA may request a debtor ADDRESSES: Interest persons should already living in flood prone areas to to provide personal financial submit written comments to Muriel B. have an opportunity to purchase flood information on FEMA Form 22–13 Anderson, Chief, Records Management insurance and access to more adequate concerning his or her current financial Branch, Program Services Division, limits of coverage, so that they will be position. This information includes the Operations Support Directorate, Federal indemnified for their losses in the event debtor’s home and employment Emergency Management Agency, 500 C of future flood disasters. In accordance addresses, name of spouse (if any), Street, SW., Room 316, Washington DC with this finding, FEMA attempts to name and age of children (if any), 20472. fulfill the requirement of The Flood amount and sources of the debtor’s and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Disaster Protection Act of 1973 by spouse’s (if any) salaries, stocks, bonds Contact Robin D. Maresco, Accountant, informing and educating potential and other securities, real and personal FEMA Office of Financial Management, purchasers of the requirements to property owned, bank accounts and Financial Policy Division, Policy and purchase flood insurance, when they names of creditors and amounts owed to Standards Branch, 500 C Street, SW, call the National Flood Insurance these creditors. Washington, DC 20742, telephone Telephone Response Center (TRC). With this information, FEMA can number (202) 646–4287 for additional evaluate whether to allow a debtor to information. You may contact Ms. Collection of Information pay the FEMA debts under installment Anderson for copies of the proposed Title: National Flood Insurance repayment agreements and, if so, under collection of information at telephone Telephone Response Center (TRC) and what terms and amounts. FEMA also number (202) 646–2625 or facsimile Leads Application Program.
VerDate 11
Type of Information Collection: New. The TRC is designed to respond to that can write flood insurance policies Form Numbers: FEMA Form 81–95, customer inquires about flood in the area in which they live. Free Flood Insurance Leads. insurance, offers to send customers Affected Public: Individuals or Abstract: The National Flood general information on the National Insurance Telephone Response Center Households, and Business or Other For- Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), refer Profit. (TRC) and Leads Application Program customers to insurance agents, and Estimated Total Annual Burden were established as part of FEMA Cover inform customers of insurance agents America Advertising Campaign in 1995. Hours:
No. of Frequency Hours per Annual burden respondents of response response hours (A) (B) (C) (A × B × C)
Callers to the Telephone Response Center ...... 72,000 1 3 3,600 Lead Program Application FEMA Form 81–95 ...... 448 1 2 15 Outbound Calls Follow-up ...... 6,000 1 3 300 Total ...... 78,448 1 8 3,915
Estimated Cost: $1,050,000 for Dated: April 30, 2001. Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Contracts. Reginald Trujillo, Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Director, Program Services Division, Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Comments Operations Support Directorate. Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Written comments are solicited to: (a) [FR Doc. 01–11362 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Evaluate whether the proposed data BILLING CODE 6718–01–P Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant collection is necessary for the proper Program.) performance of the agency, including FEDERAL EMERGENCY Robert J. Adamcik, whether the information shall have MANAGEMENT AGENCY Deputy Associate Director, Response and practical utility; (b) evaluate the Recovery Directorate. accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the [FEMA–1365–DR] [FR Doc. 01–11360 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] burden of the proposed collection of BILLING CODE 6718–02–P information, including the validity of Mississippi; Amendment No. 1 to the methodology and assumptions used; Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration (c) enhance the quality, utility, and AGENCY: Federal Emergency FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION clarity of the information to be Management Agency (FEMA). collected; and (d) minimize the burden ACTION: Notice. Sunshine Act Meeting of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Federal the use of appropriate automated, of a major disaster declaration for the Maritime Commission. electronic, mechanical, or other State of Mississippi, (FEMA–1365–DR), TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m.—May 10, 2001. technological collection techniques or dated April 17, 2001, and related PLACE: 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., other forms of information technology, determinations. First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, e.g., permitting electronic submission of EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 2001. D.C. responses. Comments should be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: STATUS: A portion of the meeting will be received within 60 days of the date of Madge Dale, Response and Recovery open to the public. The remainder of the this notice. Directorate, Federal Emergency meeting will be closed. ADDRESSES: Interested persons should Management Agency, Washington, DC MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The open submit written comments to Muriel B. 20472, (202) 646–3772. portion of the meeting: Anderson, Chief, Records Management SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice 1. Shipper Export Declaration (SED) Fees Branch, Program Services Division, of a major disaster declaration for the 2. Commission Alternative Dispute Operations Support Directorate, Federal State of Mississippi is hereby amended Resolution Program Emergency Management Agency, 500 C to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been The closed portion of the meeting: Street, SW., Room 316, Washington, DC 1. Executive Tug Franchises—Marine 20472. adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the Terminal Operators Serving the Lower FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: President in his declaration of April 17, Mississippi River Contact Carolyn Goss, Federal Insurance 2001: 2. Exclusive Tug Arrangements in Florida Ports Administration, Marketing Division, Leake and Neshoba Counties for Individual 202–646–3468 for additional Assistance (already designated for Public CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: information. You may contact Ms. Assistance). Bryant L. VanBrakle, Secretary, (202) Anderson at (202) 646–2625 or facsimile Pontotoc County for Individual Assistance. 523–5725. number (202) 646–3347 or by email at (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Bryant L. VanBrakle, Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used [email protected] for copies of Secretary. the proposed collection of information. for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora [FR Doc. 01–11581 Filed 5–3–01; 4:26 pm] Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis BILLING CODE 6730–01–M
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Road, Suite 3000, Mailstop E13,Atlanta, made for 12-month budget period HUMAN SERVICES GA 30341–4146,Telephone: (770) 488– within a project period of one year. 2710,Email address: [email protected] Funding estimates may change. Centers for Disease Control and For program technical assistance, D. Where to Obtain Additional Prevention contact:Tim Groza,Centers for Disease Information [Program Announcement 01089] Control and Prevention,National Center for Injury Prevention and Control 4770 This and all other CDC Grant for Childhood Injury Prevention Buford Highway N.E., Mailstop Announcements may be found and Program in Alaska; Notice of K63,Atlanta, GA 30341– downloaded from the CDC homepage. Availability of Funds 3724,Telephone: (770) 488–4676,Email: Internet address: http://www.cdc.gov [email protected] Click on ‘‘Funding’’ then ‘‘Grants and A. Purpose Dated: May 1, 2001. Cooperative Agreements’’. The Centers for Disease Control and John L. Williams, To obtain business management Prevention (CDC) announces the technical assistance, contact: Ty availability of fiscal year (FY) 2001 Director, Procurement and Grants Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Weaver, Grants Management Specialist, funds for a grant for a Childhood Injury (CDC). Grants Management Branch, Prevention Program in Alaska. This [FR Doc. 01–11380 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Procurement and Grants Office, program addresses the ‘‘Healthy People BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Announcement 01083, Centers for 2010’’ focus area of Injury and Violence Disease Control and Prevention Prevention. The purpose of this program (CDC),2920 Brandywine Road, Suite is to reduce injuries among Alaskan DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 3000, Mailstop E13,Atlanta, GA 30341– children. HUMAN SERVICES 4146,Telephone: (770) 488–2710,E-Mail B. Eligible Applicant address: [email protected]. Centers for Disease Control and Assistance will be provided only to Prevention For program technical assistance, the Alaska Injury Prevention Center please contact: John Hemphill, Project (AIPC). FY 2001 federal appropriations [Program Announcement 01083] Officer, National Center for Injury specifically directs CDC to award funds Prevention and Control, Centers for to this organization. No other Grant To Build Research Capacity in Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), applications are solicited. the Area of Behavioral Disorders and 4770 Buford Highway, NE., Mailstop K– Youth Violence Notice of Availability of 60, Atlanta, GA 30341–3724, Telephone: Note: Title 2 of the United States Code, Funds chapter 26, section 1611 states that an (770) 488–1285, E-Mail address: organization described in section 501(c)(4) of A. Purpose [email protected]. the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that Dated: May 1, 2001. engages in lobbying activities is not eligible The Centers for Disease Control and to receive Federal funds constituting an Prevention (CDC) announces the John L. Williams, award, grant, cooperative agreement, availability of fiscal year (FY) 2001 Director, Procurement and Grants Office, contract, loan, or any other form. funds for a grant program to build Centers for Disease Control and Prevention research capacity in the area of (CDC). C. Availability of Funds behavioral disorders and youth [FR Doc. 01–11374 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Approximately $700,000 is available violence. This program addresses the BILLING CODE 4163–18–P in FY 2001 to fund one award. It is ‘‘Healthy People 2010’’ focus area of expected that the award will begin on or Violence and Abuse Prevention. The about September 30, 2001, and will be purpose of the program is to build DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND made for a 12-month budget and project capacity for further research that will HUMAN SERVICES period. Approximately $470,000 of this discover new approaches to intervene Centers for Disease Control and total is available for a statewide and prevent complex behavior problems Prevention childhood injury prevention program in in children and youth resulting from Alaska. Approximately $230,000 of this genetic and environmental conditions in total is available for collaboration with early childhood that significantly [Program Announcement 01051] the State of Alaska Department of impact the problem of youth violence. Grant for a Program To Promote Health and Social Services. B. Eligible Applicants Training and Education in Basic Life D. Where to Obtain Additional Assistance will be provided only to Support for Children and Adolescents; Information the Kennedy Krieger Institute. No other Notice of Availability of Funds This and other CDC announcements applications are solicited. A. Purpose can be found on the CDC home page Eligibility is limited only to the Internet address—http://www.cdc.gov. Kennedy Krieger Institute because fiscal The Centers for Disease Control and Click on ‘‘Funding’’ then ‘‘Grants and year 2001 Federal Appropriations Prevention (CDC) announces the Cooperative Agreements.’’ If you have specifically directs CDC to award this availability of fiscal year (FY) 2001 questions after reviewing the content of non-profit institute funds to develop funds for a grant program to promote all the documents, business new approaches to help prevent youth training and education in Basic Life management and assistance may be violence and behavioral problems. Support for children and adolescents. obtained from:Ty Weaver, Grants This program addresses the ‘‘Healthy Management Specialist,Grants C. Availability of Funds People 2010 focus area of Injury and Management Branch, Procurement and Approximately $810,288 is available Violence Prevention.’’ The purpose of Grants Office,Announcement in FY 2001 to fund this award. It is this program is to reduce child and 01089,Centers for Disease Control and expected that the award will begin on or adolescent morbidity and mortality Prevention (CDC),2920 Brandywine about September 1, 2001, and will be sustained by illness and injury.
VerDate 11
B. Eligible Applicants Control and Prevention (CDC) Dated: April 25, 2001. Assistance for this project will be announces the following committee John Burckhardt, provided only to the Save a Life meeting. Acting Director, Management Analysis and Foundation. FY 2001 Federal Name: Injury Research Grant Review Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. appropriations specifically directs CDC Committee (IRGRC). to award funds to the Save a Life [FR Doc. 01–11378 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Times and Dates: 6:30 p.m.–9 p.m., BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Foundation. No other applications are May 20, 2001. 8 a.m.–5:30 p.m., May 21, solicited. 2001. Note: Title 2 of the United States Code, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND chapter 26, section 1611 states that an Place: The Westin Atlanta Airport, organization described in section 501(c)(4) of 4736 Best Road, College Park, Georgia HUMAN SERVICES the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that 30337. Centers for Disease Control and engages in lobbying activities is not eligible Status: Open: 6:30 p.m.–7 p.m., May to receive Federal funds constituting an Prevention award, grant, cooperative agreement, 20, 2001. Closed: 7 p.m.–9 p.m., May 20, contract, loan, or any other form. 2001, through 5:30 p.m., May 21, 2001. National Vaccine Advisory Committee, Purpose: This committee is charged Subcommittee on Vaccine Safety and C. Availability of Funds with advising the Secretary of Health Communication Meeting Approximately $810,000 is available and Human Services, the Assistant In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of in FY 2001 to fund one award. It is Secretary for Health, and the Director, the Federal Advisory Committee Act expected that the award will begin on or CDC, regarding the scientific merit and (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease about September 1, 2001, and will be technical feasibility of grant Control and Prevention (CDC) made for a 12-month budget period applications received from academic announces the following Federal within a project period of one year. institutions and other public and private advisory Subcommittee meeting. Funding estimates may change. profit and nonprofit organizations, NAME: National Vaccine Advisory D. Where to Obtain Additional including State and local government Committee (NVAC) Subcommittee on Information agencies, to conduct specific injury Vaccine Safety and Communications. research that focus on prevention and For program technical assistance, TIME AND DATE: 2 p.m.—5 p.m., June 5, control and to support injury prevention contact: 2001. research centers. Paul Burlack, Centers for Disease PLACE: Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Control and Prevention, National Center Matters To Be Discussed: Agenda Room 800, 200 Independence Avenue, for Injury Prevention and Control, 4770 items include a budget update, recent SW, Washington, DC 20201. Buford Highway N.E., Mailstop F42, awards, future meeting dates, discussion STATUS: Open to the public, limited only Atlanta, GA 30341–3724, Telephone of the review process and panelists by the space available. (770) 488–4713, Email: responsibilities, and review of grant NOTICE: In the interest of security, the [email protected] applications. Beginning at 7 p.m., May Department has instituted stringent To obtain business management 20, through 5:30 p.m., May 21, the procedures for entrance to the Hubert H. technical assistance, contact: Committee will review individual Humphrey Building by non-government Angelia Hill, Grants Management research grant applications submitted in employees. Thus, persons without a Specialist, Grants Management Branch, response to Program Announcements government identification card should Procurement and Grants Office, 01013, 01014, 01015, and 01016. This plan to arrive at the building between Announcement 01051, Centers for portion of the meeting will be closed to 12:30 p.m. and 1 p.m. Entrance to the Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the public in accordance with meeting at other times during the day 2920 Brandywine Road, Suite 3000, provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) cannot be assured. Mailstop E13, Atlanta, GA 30341–4146, and (6), title 5 U.S.C., and the STATUS: Open to the public, limited only Telephone 770–488–2785, Email: Determination of the Deputy Director for by the space available. [email protected] Program Management, CDC, pursuant to PURPOSE: This Subcommittee reviews Dated: May 1, 2001. Pub. L. 92–463. issues relevant to vaccine safety and John L. Williams, Agenda items are subject to change as adverse reactions to vaccines. Director, Procurement and Grants Office, priorities dictate. MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED: Review of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention agenda; review of National Infant (CDC). Contact Person for More Information: Richard W. Sattin, M.D., Acting Immunization Week; discussion on [FR Doc. 01–11381 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Executive Secretary, IRGRC, National strengthening the vaccine supply; BILLING CODE 4163–18–P Center for Injury Prevention and follow-up to the ‘‘Workshop on Vaccine Control, CDC, 4770 Buford Highway, Communications’; review of the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) report on DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND NE, M/S K58, Atlanta, Georgia 30341– 3724, telephone 770/488–4330. Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine and HUMAN SERVICES Autism, discussion of the process for The Director, Management Analysis suggesting and selecting immunization Centers for Disease Control and and Services Office, has been delegated Prevention safety issues for review by the IOM in the authority to sign Federal Register 2002; public comment on immunization Notices pertaining to announcements of Injury Research Grant Review safety issues for review in 2002; and meetings and other committee Committee; Meeting committee discussion. management activities, for both the Special Note: The Subcommittee on In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of Centers for Disease Control and Vaccine Safety and Communications will the Federal Advisory Committee Act Prevention and the Agency for Toxic provide a forum for input from the public (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease Substances and Disease Registry. regarding potential issues and topics for
VerDate 11
review in 2002 by the IOM’s Immunization effective date of the recognition of These notices described the addition, Safety Review Committee. This will be the standards announced in this document. withdrawal, and revision of certain first opportunity for the public to provide ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for standards recognized by FDA. When comments on the hypotheses that are being ′′ considered for future review. single copies on a 3.5 diskette of these notices were published, the agency maintained ‘‘html’’ and ‘‘pdf’’ Agenda items are subject to change as ‘‘Modification to the List of Recognized versions of the list of ‘‘FDA Recognized priorities dictate. A complete meeting Standards, Recognition List Number: Consensus Standards.’’ Both versions agenda of the Subcommittee on 005,’’ to the Division of Small were publicly accessible at the agency’s VaccineSafety and Communications can Manufacturers Assistance, Center for Internet site. The agency maintains the be found on the NationalVaccine Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ– current list in a searchable database Program Office’s web site at 220), Food and Drug Administration, accessible to the public. See section V www.cdc.gov/od/nvpo/calendar. 1350 Piccard Dr., Rockville, MD 20850. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels of this document for electronic access CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: to assist that office in processing your information. Ms. Shaunette Crawford, Associate requests, or fax your request to 301– Director for Health Communications II. Discussion of Modifications to the 443–8818. Submit written comments and Legislation, NVPO, CDC, 1600 List of Recognized Standards, concerning this document to the contact Clifton Road, NE, M/S D–66, Atlanta, Recognition List Number: 005 person (address below). Comments Georgia 30333, telephone 404/687– should be identified with the docket FDA is announcing the addition, 6672. withdrawal, correction, and revision of The Director, Management Analysis number found in brackets in the heading of this document. This certain consensus standards the agency and Services Office, has been delegated will recognize for use in satisfying the authority to sign Federal Register document may also be accessed on FDA’s Internet site at http:// premarket reviews for devices. FDA will Notices pertaining to announcements of incorporate these modifications in the meetings and other committee www.fda.gov/cdrh/fedregin.html. See section V of this document for list of ‘‘FDA Recognized Consensus management activities, for both the Standards’’ in the agency’s searchable Centers for Disease Control and electronic access to the searchable database for the current list of ‘‘FDA database. FDA will use the term Prevention and the Agency for Toxic ‘‘Recognition List Number: 005’’ to Substances and Disease Registry. Recognized Consensus Standards,’’ including Recognition List Number: 005 identify: (1) Supplementary information Dated: May 1, 2001. modifications, and other standards sheets for standards added to the list for John Burckhardt, related information. the first time, (2) standards added to replace withdrawn standards, and (3) Acting Director, Management Analysis and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To still recognized standards for which Services Office, Centers for Disease Control comment on this document and/or to and Prevention. minor revisions are made to clarify the recommend additional standards for application of the standards. [FR Doc. 01–11371 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] recognition: Carol L. Herman, Center for BILLING CODE 4163–18–P At the end of this notice, FDA lists Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ– modifications the agency is making that 84), Food and Drug Administration, involve: (1) The initial addition of 2094 Gaither Rd., Rockville, MD 20850, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND standards not previously recognized by 301–594–4766, ext. 156. HUMAN SERVICES FDA and (2) the addition of standards SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in conjunction with the withdrawal of Food and Drug Administration I. Background other standards that are replaced by [Docket No. 97D–0530] these later, amended, or different Section 204 of the Food and Drug standards. Administration Modernization Act of FDA Modernization Act of 1997: In this section, FDA describes 1997 (FDAMA) (Public Law 105–115) Modifications to the List of Recognized modifications that involve the amended section 514 of the Federal Standards, Recognition List Number: withdrawal of standards and their Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) 005 replacement by others. In this notice, all (21 U.S.C. 360d). Amended section 514 changes of this type are in the sterility AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, allows FDA to recognize consensus category of the complete list of HHS. standards, developed by international recognized standards. ACTION: Notice. and national organizations, for use in 1. ASTM–F1140:1996 is withdrawn satisfying portions of device premarket under previous item 59. ASTM– SUMMARY: The Food and Drug review submissions or other F1140:2000 is added under current item Administration (FDA) is announcing a requirements. 67. publication containing modifications In a notice published in the Federal 2. ASTM–F1585:1995 is withdrawn the agency is making to the list of Register of February 25, 1998 (63 FR under previous item 61. ASTM standards FDA will recognize for use in 9561), FDA announced the availability F1585:2000 is added under current item premarket reviews (FDA Recognized of the guidance entitled ‘‘Recognition 68. Consensus Standards). This publication and Use of Consensus Standards.’’ This 3. ASTM–1608:1995 is withdrawn entitled ‘‘Modifications to the List of notice described how FDA will under previous item 62. ASTM Recognized Standards, Recognition List implement its standards program F1608:2000 is added under current item Number: 005’’ (Recognition List recognizing the use of certain standards 69. Number: 005) will assist manufacturers and provided the initial list of who elect to declare conformity with recognized standards. III. List of Recognized Standards consensus standards to meet certain In Federal Register notices published FDA maintains the agency’s current requirements for medical devices. on October 16, 1998 (63 FR 55617), July list of ‘‘FDA Recognized Consensus DATES: Submit written comments 12, 1999 (64 FR 37546), and November Standards’’ in a searchable database that concerning this document at any time. 15, 2000 (65 FR 69022), FDA modified may be accessed directly at FDA’s See section VI of this document for the its initial list of recognized standards. Intranet site at http://
VerDate 11
www.acessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/ V. Electronic Access be accessed through hyper links at http:/ cfdocs/cfStandards/search.cfm. FDA In order to receive ‘‘Guidance on the /www.fda.gov/cdrh/stdsprog.html. This will incorporate the modifications and Recognition and Use of Consensus Federal Register notice of modifications minor revisions described in this notice Standards’’ via your fax machine, call in FDA’s recognition of consensus into the database and, upon publication the CDRH Facts-On-Demand system at standards will be available, upon in the Federal Register, this recognition 800–899–0381 or 301–827–0111 from a publication, at http://www.fda.gov/ of consensus standards will be effective. cdrh/fedregin.html. FDA will announce additional touch-tone telephone. Press 1 to enter modifications and minor revisions to the system. At the second voice prompt VI. Submission of Comments and the list of recognized consensus press 1 to order a document. Enter the Effective Date standards, as needed, in the Federal document number 321 followed by the Register once a year, or more often, if pound sign (#). Follow the remaining Interested persons may, at any time, necessary. voice prompts to complete your request. submit to the contact person (address Persons interested in obtaining a copy above) written comments regarding this IV. Recommendation of Standards for of ‘‘Guidance on the Recognition and document. Two copies of any comments Recognition by FDA Use of Consensus Standards’’ may also are to be submitted, except that Any person may recommend do so by using the Internet. CDRH individuals may submit one copy. consensus standards as candidates for maintains a site on the Internet for easy Comments are to be identified with the recognition under the new provision of access to information including text, docket number found in brackets in the section 514 of the act by submitting graphics, and files that may be heading of this document. Received such recommendations, with reasons for downloaded to a personal computer comments will be considered in the recommendation, to the contact with access to the Internet. Updated on determining whether to amend the person (address above). To be properly a regular basis, the CDRH home page current listing of ‘‘Modifications to the considered, such recommendations includes this guidance as well as the List of Recognized Standards, should contain, at a minimum, the current list of recognized standards and Recognition List Number: 005.’’ following information: (1) Title of other standards related documents. The recognition of standards standards, (2) any reference number and After publication in the Federal announced in this notice of date, (3) name and address of the Register, this notice announcing national or international standards ‘‘Modifications to the List of Recognized modifications will become effective on development organization, (4) a Standards, Recognition List Number: May 7, 2001. proposed list of devices for which a 005’’ will be available on the CDRH VII. Listing of New Entries declaration of conformity to this home page. The CDRH home page may standard should routinely apply, and (5) be accessed at http://www.fda.gov/cdrh. The listing of new entries and a brief identification of the testing or The ‘‘Guidance on the Recognition and consensus standards added as performance or other characteristics of Use of Consensus Standards,’’ and the ‘‘Modifications to the List of Recognized the device(s) that would be addressed searchable database for ‘‘FDA Standards,’’ under Recognition List by a declaration of conformity. Recognized Consensus Standards,’’ may Number: 005, is as follows:
Item Reference Number Number Title of Standards and Date
Anesthesia
34 Standard Test Method for Evaluation the Ignition Sensitivity and Fault Tolerance of Oxygen Regulators Used ASTM PS127:2000 for Medical and Emergency Applications
Cardiovascular/Neurology
31 Standard Practice for Evaluating and Specifying Implantable Shunt Assemblies for Neurosurgical Applications ASTM F647–94 32 Standard Specification for the Requirements and Disclosure of Self-Closing Aneurysm Clips ASTM F1542–94 (2000) 33 Neurosurgical Implants–Sterile, Single-Use Hydrocephalus Shunts and Components ISO 7197:1997
General
25 Standard for the Development of an Electrostatic Discharge Control Program ANSI/ESD S20.20– 1999 26 Medical Devices–Application of Risk Management to Medical Devices ISO 14971:2000
Sterility
67 Standard Test Methods for Internal Pressurization Failure Resistance of Unrestrained Packages for Medical ASTM F1140:2000 Applications 68 Standard Guide for Integrity Testing of Porous Barrier Medical Packages ASTM F1585:2000 69 Standard Test Method for Microbial Ranking of Porous Packaging Materials (Exposure Chamber Method) ASTM F1608:2000
VerDate 11
Dated: April 24, 2001. of Management and Budget (OMB) a collection. Need and Use of Information David W. Feigal, Jr., request to review and approve the Collection: The Pharmacology Research Director, Center for Devices and Radiological information collection listed below. Associate (PRAT) Program will use the Health. This proposed information collection applicant and referee information to [FR Doc. 01–11329 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] was previously published in the Federal award opportunities for training and BILLING CODE 4160–01–S Register on February 6, 2001, pages experience in laboratory or clinical 9089–9090, and allowed 60 days for investigation to individuals with a PhD. public comment. No public comments degree in pharmacology or a related DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND were received. The purpose of this science, M.D., or other professional HUMAN SERVICES notice is to allow an additional 30 days degree through appointments as PRAT for public comment. The National National Institutes of Health Fellows at the National Institutes of Institutes of Health may not conduct or Health or the Food and Drug Submission for OMB Review; sponsor, and the respondent is not Administration. The goal of the program required to respond to, an information Comment Request; Application for the is to develop leaders in pharmacological collection that has been extended, Pharmacology Research Associate research for key positions in academic, revised, or implemented on or after Program industrial, and Federal research October 1, 1995, unless it displays a laboratories. Frequency of Response: SUMMARY: Under the provisions of currently valid OMB control number. Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Proposed Collection: Title: Once a year. Affected Public: Reduction Act of 1995, the National Application for the Pharmacology Individuals or households; Businesses Institute of General Medical Sciences Research Associate Program. Type of or other for-profit. (NIGMS), the National Institutes of Information Collection Request: The annual reporting burden is as Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office Extension of a currently approved follows:
Estimated Average Estimated total number of Estimated total burden hours annual burden Type and numbers of respondents responses per responses per hours re- respondent responses quested
Applicants—50 ...... 1 50 2.00 100 Referees—150 ...... 1 150 0.167 25
Total Number of Respondents: 200 the item(s) contained in this notice, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Total Number of Responses: 200 especially regarding the estimated HUMAN SERVICES Total Hours: 125 public burden and associated response The annualized cost to respondents is time, should be directed to the: Office National Institutes of Health estimated at: of Management and Budget, Office of Applicants: $5,500.00 Submission for OMB Review; Regulatory Affairs, New Executive Comment Request; Case-Cohort Study Referees: $1,250.00 Office Building, Room 10235, of Cancer and Related Disorders There are no Capital Costs, Operating Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Among Benzene-Exposed Workers in Costs, and/or Maintenance Costs to Desk Officer for NIH. To request more China report. information on the proposed project or SUMMARY: Request for Comments: to obtain a copy of the data collection Under the provisions of plans and instruments, contact: Ms. Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Written comments and/or suggestions Sally Lee, NIGMS, NIH, Natcher Reduction Act of 1995, the National from the public and affected agencies Building, Room 2AN–18H, 45 Center Cancer Institute (NCI), the National should address one or more of the Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted Drive, MSC 6200, Bethesda, MD 20892– following points: (1) Evaluate whether to the Office of Management and Budget 6200. Phone (301) 594–2755, facsimile the proposed collection of information (OMB) a request for review and is necessary for the proper performance (301) 402–0156, or electronic mail: approval of the information collection of the function of the agency, including [email protected]. listed below. This proposed information whether the information will have Comments Due Date: collection was previously published in practical utility; (2) Evaluate the the Federal Register on December 28, accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the Comments regarding this information 2000, pages 82382–82383 and allowed burden of the proposed collection of collection are best assured of having 60 days for public comment. No public information, including the validity of their full effect if received within 30 comments were received. The purpose the methodology and assumptions used; days of the date of this publication. of this notice is to allow an additional (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 30 days for public comment. The Dated: April 30, 2001. clarity of the information to be National Institutes of Health may not collected; and (4) Minimize the burden Martha Pine, conduct or sponsor, and the respondent of the collection of information on those Associated Director for Administration and is not required to respond to, an who are to respond, including the use Operations, National Institute of General information collection that has been of appropriate automated, electronic, Medical Sciences. extended, revised, or implemented on or mechanical or other technological [FR Doc. 01–11392 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] after October 1, 1995, unless it displays collection techniques or other forms of BILLING CODE 4140–01–M a currently valid OMB control number. information technology. Proposed Collection: Title: Case- Direct Comments to OMB: Written Cohort (formerly Case-Control) Study of comments and/or suggestions regarding Cancer and Related Disorders Among
VerDate 11
Benzene-Exposed Workers in China, assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance Name of Committee: National Center for OMB Number 0925–0454, Revised. the quality, utility, and clarity of the Complementary and Alternative Medicine Need and Use of Information Collection: information to be collected; and (4) Special Emphasis Panel NCCAM SEP C–11. A case-cohort study will be performed Ways to minimize the burden of the Date: May 23–25, 2001. Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. to examine the risks of collection of information on those who Agenda: To review and evaluate grant lymphohematopoietic cancers, other are to respond, including the use of applications. lymphohematopoietic disorders, appropriate automated, electronic, Place: Courtyard by Marriott, 805 Russell benzene poisoning, and lung cancer mechanical, or other technological Avenue, Gaithersburg, MD 20879. among workers exposed to benzene. The collection techniques or other forms of Contact Person: John C. Chah, PhD, study will attempt to determine with information technology. Scientific Review Administrator, National greater precision the risks of these Direct Comments to OMB: Written Center for Complementary and Alternative disorders at low levels of benzene Medicine, National Institutes of Health, 6707 comments and/or suggestions regarding Democracy Boulevard, Rm. 106, Bethesda, exposure, and to characterize the dose the item(s) contained in this notice, MD 20892–5495, 301–402–4334, and time-specific relationship between especially regarding the estimated [email protected]. benzene exposure and disease risk. public burden and associated response Dated: April 30, 2001. Cases and controls will be selected from time, should be directed to the: Office LaVerne Y. Stringfield, an existing cohort of 75,000 benzene- of Management and Budget, Office of exposed workers and 36,000 Regulatory Affairs, New Executive Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. comparison workers in 12 Chinese Office Building, Room 10235, cities. There are 3 changes to the 60-day Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk [FR Doc. 01–11393 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Federal Register notice for this study Officer for NIH. To request more BILLING CODE 4140–01–M published on December 28, 2000: (1) information on the proposed project or more subjects will be evaluated in the to obtain a copy of the data collection DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND currently planned case-cohort study plans and instruments, contact: Dr. HUMAN SERVICES (N=1,770, including 225 with benzene Richard Hayes, OEB/EBP/DECEG/NCI poisoning) than in the previously 6120 Executive Blvd., EPS Room 8114, National Institutes of Health described case-control study (N=1,545); Bethesda, MD 20892, or call non-toll- (2) each subject (or their next of kin will free number (301) 435–3973 or E-mail National Center for Research be asked fewer questions (average hours your request, including your address to: Resources; Amended Notice of per response will decrease from 0.42 to [email protected] Meeting 0.3674 hours); and (3) the more efficient Comments Due Date: Comments Notice is hereby given of a change in case-cohort design will be used, rather regarding this information collection are the meeting of the National Advisory than an individually-matched case- best assured of having their full effect if Research Resources Council, May 17, control study design. Frequency of received on or before June 6, 2001. Response: Single-time study. Affected 2001, 9:15 a.m. to May 17, 2001, 5 p.m., Public: Individuals or households. Type Dated: April 27, 2001. National Center for Research Resources, of Respondents: Cases with Reesa Nichols, National Institutes of Health, lymphohematopoietic malignancies and NCI Project Clearance Liaison. Conference Room 10, Building 31, related disorders, benzene poisoning [FR Doc. 01–11401 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Bethesda, MD 20892 which was and lung cancer among Chinese BILLING CODE 4140–01–M published in the Federal Register on benzene-exposed and comparison March 14, 2001, 66 FR 14911. workers; controls consist of a random The meeting of the Executive sample of the Chinese worker cohort DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Subcommittee scheduled for 8 a.m. to 9 without these disorders. The annual HUMAN SERVICES a.m. on May 17, 2001, in Conference reporting burden is as follows: Room 3B13 has been cancelled. The National Institutes of Health Estimated Number of Respondents: 590; meeting is partially Closed to the public. Estimated Number of Respondents per National Center for Complementary & Dated: April 30, 2001. Respondent: 1; Average Burden Hours Alternative Medicine; Notice of Closed LaVerne Y. Stringfield, per Response: 0.3674; and Estimated Meeting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Total Annual Burden Hours Requested: Committee Policy. 216. The annualized cost to respondents Pursuant to section 10(d) of the [FR Doc. 01–11394 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] is estimated at $216. There are no Federal Advisory Committee Act, as BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Capital Costs to report. There are no amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Operating or Maintenance Costs to is hereby given of the following report. meeting. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Request for Comments: Written The meeting will be closed to the HUMAN SERVICES comments and/or suggestions from the public in accordance with the public and affected agencies are invited provisions set forth in sections 552(c)(4) National Institutes of Health on one or more of the following points: and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as National Institute of Child Health and (1) Whether the proposed collection or amended. The grant applications and Human Development; Notice of information is necessary for the proper the discussions could disclose Meeting performance of the function of the confidential trade secrets or commercial agency, including whether the property such as patentable material, Pursuant to section 10(a) of the information will have practical utility; and personal information concerning Federal Advisory Committee Act, as (2) The accuracy of the agency’s individuals associated with the grant amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice estimate of the burden of the proposed applications, the disclosure of which is hereby given of a meeting of the collection of information, including the would constitute a clearly unwarranted National Advisory Board on Medical validity of the methodology and invasion of personal privacy. Rehabilitation Research.
VerDate 11
The meeting will be open to the Name of Committee: National Institute of Scientific Review, National Institute of public, with attendance limited to space General Medical Sciences Initial Review General Medical Sciences, National Institutes available. Individuals who plan to Group Biomedical Research and Research of Health, Natcher Building Room 1AS–13, attend and need special assistance, such Training Review Subcommittee A Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–3663. Date: June 12, 2001. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance as sign language interpretation or other Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. reasonable accommodations, should Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and notify the Contact Person listed below applications. Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, in advance of the meeting. Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Name of Committee: National Advisory Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Research; 93.862, Genetics and Board on Medical Rehabilitation Research. Contract Person: Carole H. Latker, PhD, Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Date: May 24–25, 2001. Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Minority Access to Research Careers; 93,96, Time: May 24, 2001, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Scientific Review, National Institute of Special Minority Initiatives, National Agenda: The agenda will include reports General Medical Sciences, National Institute Institutes of Health, HHS) of Health, Natcher Building, Room 1AS–13, by the Director, NICHD and Director, Dated: April 30, 2001. NCMRR, update on NCMRR Training Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2848, activities, discussion of the future of medical [email protected]. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, rehabilitation, and other business of the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Director, Office of Federal Advisory Board. Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Committee Policy. Place: Holiday Inn, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and [FR Doc. 01–11397 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Silver Spring, MD 20910. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Time: May 25, 2001, 8:30 a.m. to Physiology, and Biological Chemistry adjournment. Research; 93.862, Genetics and Agenda: Same as above. Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Place: Holiday Inn, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Silver Spring, MD 20910. Special Minority Initiatives, National HUMAN SERVICES Contact Person: Ralph M Nitkin, PhD. Institutes of Health, HHS) National Institutes of Health Director, BSCD, National Center for Medical Dated: April 30, 2001. Rehabilitation Research, National Institute of LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Child Health and Human Development, NIH, National Institute of General Medical 6100 Building, Room 2A03, Bethesda, MD Director, Office of Federal Advisory Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting 20892, (301) 402–4206. Committee Policy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance [FR Doc. 01–11396 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Program Nos. 93.209, Contraception and BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Infertility Loan Repayment Program; 93.864, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Population Research; 93.865, Research for is hereby given of the following Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND meeting. Medical Rehabilitation Research, National HUMAN SERVICES The meeting will be closed to the Institutes of Health, HHS) public in accordance with the Dated: April 30, 2001. National Institutes of Health provisions set forth in sections LaVerne Y. Stringfield, 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., National Institute of General Medical as amended. The grant applications and Director, Office of Federal Advisory Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting Committee Policy. the discussions could disclose [FR Doc. 01–11395 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Pursuant to section 10(d) of the confidential trade secrets or commercial BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Federal Advisory Committee Act, as property such as patentable material, amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice and personal information concerning is hereby given of the following individuals associated with the grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND meeting. applications, the disclosure of which HUMAN SERVICES The meeting will be closed to the would constitute a clearly unwarranted public in accordance with the invasion of personal privacy. National Institutes of Health provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: Minority Programs 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., Review Committee, MARC Review National Institute of General Medical as amended. The grant applications and Subcommittee A. Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting the discussions could disclose Date: June 26–27, 2001. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the confidential trade secrets or commercial Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. property such as patentable material, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Federal Advisory Committee Act, as applications. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice and personal information concerning Place: Holiday Inn Bethesda, 8120 is hereby given of the following individuals associated with the grant Wisconsin Avenue, The Delaware Room, meeting. applications, the disclosure of which Bethesda, MD 20814. The meeting will be closed to the would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person: Richard I. Martinez, PhD, public in accordance with the invasion of personal privacy. Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of provisions set forth in sections Name of Committee: National Institute of 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., General Medical Sciences Initial Review General Medical Sciences, National Institutes as amended. The grant applicants and Group, Biomedical Research and Research of Health, Natcher Building, Room 1AS–19G, the discussions could disclose Training Review Subcommittee B. Bethesda, MD 20892–6200, (301) 594–2849. confidential trade secrets or commercial Date: June 13, 2001. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance property such as patentable material, Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and and personal information concerning Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, individuals associated with the grant Place: Holiday Inn Chevy Chase, 5520 Physiology, and Biological Chemistry applications, the disclosure of which Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Research; 93.862, Genetics and would constitute a clearly unwarranted Contact Person: Carole H. Latker, PhD, Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, invasion of personal privacy. Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96,
VerDate 11
Special Minority Initiatives, National DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Dated: April 30, 2001. Institutes of Health, HHS) HUMAN SERVICES LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Dated: April 30, 2001. Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Institutes of Health LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Committee Policy, NIH. [FR Doc. 01–11400 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Director, Office of Federal Advisory National Library of Medicine; Notice of Committee Policy. Meeting BILLING CODE 4140–01–M [FR Doc. 01–11398 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Pursuant to section 10(d) of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Federal Advisory Committee Act, as HUMAN SERVICES amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND is hereby given of the following Public Health Service HUMAN SERVICES meeting. National Toxicology Program; Meeting National Institutes of Health The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with of the NTP Board of Scientific National Institute of General Medical attendance limited to space available. Counselors Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the language interpretation or other notice is hereby given of a meeting of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as reasonable accommodations, should the National Toxicology Program (NTP) amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice notify the Contact Person listed below Board of Scientific Counselors, U.S. is hereby given of the following in advance of the meeting. Public Health Service, in Rooms A & B meeting. of the Rodbell Auditorium, Rall The portions of the meeting devoted Building, South Campus, National The meeting will be closed to the to the review and evaluation of journals Institute of Environmental Health public in accordance with the for potential indexing by the National Sciences (NIEHS), 111 T.W. Alexander provisions set forth in sections Library of Medicine will be closed to the Drive, Research Triangle Park, North 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., public in accordance with the Carolina on May 25, 2001. as amended. The grant applications and provisions set forth in section the discussions could disclose 552b(c)(9)(B), Title 5 U.S.C., as The NTP Board of Scientific confidential trade secrets or commercial amended. Premature disclosure of the Counselors (the Board) is composed of property such as patentable material, titles of the journals as potential titles to scientists from the public and private and personal information concerning be indexed by the National Library of sector and provides primary scientific individuals associated with the grant Medicine, the discussions, and the oversight to the NTP. applications, the disclosure of which presence of individuals associated with Agenda would constitute a clearly unwarranted these publications could significantly invasion of personal privacy. frustrate the review and evaluation of The May 25th meeting is open to the individual journals. public from 8:30 a.m. to adjournment Name of Committee: National Institute of with attendance limited only by the General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Name of Committee: Literature Selection Panel. Technical Review Committee. space available. A draft agenda with Date: June 27–28, 2001. Date: June 21–22, 2001. tentative schedule is provided below. Time: 8 p.m. to 5 p.m. Open: June 21, 2001, 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. Primary agenda topics include: (1) Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Agenda: Administrative reports and Review and discussion of draft applications. program developments. guidelines for the NTP Center for the Place: Holiday Inn Bethesda, 8120 Place: National Library of Medicine, 8600 Evaluation of Risks to Human Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Rockville Pike, Board Room, Bethesda, MD Reproduction’s (CERHR) expert panels, Contact Person: Laura K. Moen, PhD, 20894. (2) the NTP Interagency Committee for Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Closed: June 21, 2001, 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Chemical Evaluation and Coordination’s Scientific Review, National Institute of Agenda: To review and evaluate journals (ICCEC) testing recommendations for General Medical Sciences, National Institutes as potential titles to be indexed by the substances nominated for future NTP of Health, Natcher Building, Room 1AS–13H, National Library of Medicine. studies, (3) the NTP’s tentative study Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594–3998, Place: National Library of Medicine, 8600 plans for hexavalent chromium, and (4) [email protected] Rockville Pike, Board Room, Bldg 38, Rm 2E– 09, Bethesda, MD 20894. presentations about chemical (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Closed: June 22, 2001, 8:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. disposition and toxicokinetic studies of Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Agenda: To review and evaluate journals substances by the NTP and use of this Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and as potential titles to be indexed by the data in pharmacokinetic modeling. Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, National Library of Medicine. There will also be updates on activities Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Place: National Library of Medicine, 8600 of the Board’s Report on Carcinogens Research; 93.862, Genetics and Rockville Pike, Board Room, Bethesda, MD and Technical Reports Review Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, 20894. Subcommittees. The Board will review Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Contact Person: Sheldon Kotzin, BA, Chief, a concept proposal for the continued Special Minority Initiatives, National Bibliographic Services Division, Division of use of a contract mechanism to Institutes of Health, HHS) Library Operations, National Library of investigate the mechanisms of toxicity, Dated: April 30, 2001. Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bldg 38A/ absorption, tissue distribution, Room 4N419, Bethesda, MD 20894. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, metabolism and clearance of substances Director, Office of Federal Advisory (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance under study by the NTP. Time is Committee Policy. Program No. 93.879, Medical Library allotted during the meeting for the [FR Doc. 01–11399 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Assistance, National Institutes of Health, public to present comments to the Board BILLING CODE 4140–01–M HHS) and NTP staff on agenda topics.
VerDate 11
CERHR Draft Guidelines for Expert in drinking water (CAS number 18540– supplement and may expand the oral Panels 29–9) was nominated to the NTP by the presentation. Individuals will also be The Draft Guidelines are posted on California Congressional delegation, the able to register to give oral public the CERHR web site (http:// California Environmental Protection comments on-site at the meeting. cerhr.niehs.nih.gov) or can be obtained Agency, and the California Health and However, if registering on-site and in hard copy from the Executive Human Services Agency. Although reading from written text, please bring Secretary (see below). Written public hexavalent chromium is an established 25 copies of the statement for comments are being solicited on the human lung carcinogen in certain distribution to the Board and NTP staff Draft Guidelines (see the Federal occupational settings, presumably as a and to supplement the record. Register notice posted on the NTP web result of inhalation exposure, there is Persons may also submit written site: http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov, uncertainty regarding long-term comments in lieu of making oral under Announcements or contact the consequences of exposure to hexavalent comments. Written comments should be Executive Secretary). Persons wishing to chromium compounds in the water sent to the Executive Secretary and must provide oral comments to the Board supply. Toxicological data on the be received by May 16, to enable review and/or NTP staff may register to do so chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity of by the Board and NTP staff prior to the as instructed below. However, if the hexavalent chromium after oral meeting as well as to supplement the public submits written comments in exposure are largely inadequate to record. Persons submitting written response to the Federal Register notice establish or characterize the hazard. The comments should include their name, noted above, they are under NTP will present to the Board tentative affiliation, mailing address, phone, fax, consideration and do not need to be study plans for its review and comment. e-mail, and sponsoring organization (if resubmitted or readdressed. This meeting also provides an any) in the document. opportunity for the public to offer Additional Information About Meeting ICCEC Testing Recommendations for comment to the Board and NTP staff on Substances Nominated for Future NTP any issues to be considered in the Prior to the meeting, a copy of the Studies design of the NTP rodent study on the agenda and a roster of the Board’s Information about substances carcinogenic potential of hexavalent members will be available on the NTP nominated to the NTP for toxicology chromium administered in drinking web site at http://ntp- and carcinogenesis studies and the water. Persons may register to provide server.niehs.nih.gov and upon request to ICCEC’s testing recommendations are oral comments or submit written the Executive Secretary (contact provided in the Federal Register notice comments as instructed below. A information provided above). Following dated December 4, 2000 (Vol. 65, No. primary source of background material the meeting, summary minutes will be 233, pages 75727–75730). The Federal on hexavalent chromium is a document prepared and available through the NTP Register notice and supporting prepared by the California web site and upon request to Central documents for each nomination are Environmental Protection Agency’s Data Management, NIEHS, P.O. Box available on the NTP web site at http:/ (EPA) Office of Environmental Health 12233, MD E1–02, Research Triangle /ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htdocs/liason/ Hazard Assessment entitled ‘‘Public Park, NC 27709; telephone 919–541– ICCEC102700finalFR.html or may be Health Goal for Chromium in Drinking 3419; fax 919–541–3687; and e-mail obtained by contacting the Executive Water’’ and is available on the [email protected]. Secretary. Substances under California EPA’s web site http:// NTP Board of Scientific Counselors calepa.ca.gov/. consideration are listed below. The Board is a technical advisory Substances recommended for testing: Public Comment Encouraged body comprised of scientists from the Aluminum complexes found in drinking public and private sectors who provide water (Aluminum fluoride and Public input at the meeting is invited primary scientific oversight to the Aluminum citrate), Bilberry fruit and time is set aside for the presentation overall Program and to the NTP Center extract, Black cohosh, Blue-Green algae of public comments on any agenda (dietary supplement), Cefuroxime, topic. At least seven minutes will be for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Clarithromycin, D&C Red No. 27 and allotted to each speaker, and if time Reproduction. Specifically, the Board D&C Red No. 28, N,N-Dimethyl-p- permits, may be extended to 10 minutes. advises the NTP on matters of scientific toluidine, Lemon Oil and Lime Oil, Persons registering to make oral program content, both present and Local anesthetics that metabolize to 2,6- comments are asked to provide their future, and conducts periodic review of xylidine or o-toluidine (Bupivacaine name, affiliation, mailing address, the Program for the purposes of and Prilocaine), Microcystin-LR, phone, fax, e-mail, and sponsoring determining and advising on the Organotins occurring in drinking water organization (if any). Each organization scientific merit of its activities and their (Monomethyltin trichloride, is allowed one time slot per agenda overall scientific quality. Its members Dimethyltin dichloride, Monobutyltin topic. To facilitate planning for the are selected from recognized authorities trichloride, and Dibutyltin dichloride), meeting, persons interested in providing knowledgeable in fields such as All-trans-retinyl palmitate, S- formal oral comments are asked to toxicology, pharmacology, pathology, Adenosylmethionine, and Senna. notify Dr. Mary Wolfe, NTP Board biochemistry, epidemiology, risk Substances for which a testing Executive Secretary, NIEHS, P.O. Box assessment, carcinogenesis, recommendation is deferred pending 12233, MD A3–07, Research Triangle mutagenesis, molecular biology, receipt and consideration of additional Park, NC 27709 (telephone 919–541– behavioral and neurotoxicology, information: 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2- 3971, fax 919–541–0295, and e-mail immunotoxicology, reproductive Dichloropropane, and 1,1- [email protected]). Persons toxicology or teratology, and Dichloropropene; Hydergine; and registering to make oral comments are biostatistics. The NTP strives for Yohimbe bark extract and Yohimbine. asked, if possible, to provide a copy of equitable geographic distribution and their statement to the Executive minority and female representation on Hexavalent Chromium Secretary by May 16, to enable review the Board. Its members are invited to A study of the carcinogenic potential by the Board and NTP staff prior to the serve overlapping terms of up to four of hexavalent chromium administered meeting. Written statements can years and meetings are held once or
VerDate 11
twice annually for the Board and its two are necessary for the proper providers. Estimates of the numbers of subcommittees (the Report on performance of the functions of the mental health professionals trained and Carcinogens Subcommittee and the agency, including whether the types of training sessions conducted are Technical Reports Review information shall have practical utility; based on the assumption that half (6) of Subcommittee). (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate the funded education sites will be Dated: April 19, 2001. of the burden of the proposed collection existing education programs and the Samuel H. Wilson, of information; (c) ways to enhance the other half will be new education sites. quality, utility, and clarity of the The six new education sites are Deputy Director, National Institute of information to be collected; and (d) expected to train about 300 individuals Environmental Health Sciences. ways to minimize the burden of the annually using the general curriculum Preliminary Agenda —National Toxicology collection of information on (and corresponding form—The Program (NTP),Board of Scientific respondents, including through the use Participant Feedback Form) with their Counselors—May 25, 2001 of automated collection techniques or training sessions being less than 6 hours National Institute of Environmental Health other forms of information technology. long. These sites will conduct, on Sciences, Rall Building, South Campus, Proposed Project: Participant average about 15 training sessions per Rodbell Conference Auditorium, Rooms A & Feedback Forms for Two CMHS Mental year with approximately 20 people BResearch Triangle Park, North Carolina Health Education Training Initiatives— attending each session. 8:30 a.m. New—This project will collect feedback The remaining six sites are expected Welcome and Opening Comments from mental health professionals who to be education sites with existing NTP Update receive training from any of the CMHS- education training programs and are Presentation on NTP Chemical Disposition supported Minority Community Based expected to conduct a total of 25 and Toxicokinetic Studies Presentation on Pharmacokinetic Modeling Organizations or Behavioral Health training sessions each per year with of Compounds Studied by the NTP Professional Association contractors. about 20 individuals attending each Concept Review (ACTION) The forms proposed for use in collecting training session. These six sites should NTP CERHR—Draft Guidelines for Expert the feedback are refined versions of therefore train a total 500 individuals Panels feedback forms required for use by the each per year. The majority of these Public Comments Mental Health Care Provider Education sessions will be less than 6 hours long 12:15 p.m. in HIV/AIDS Program II and approved (about 76% or 19 sessions of the 25 Lunch by OMB under control number 0930– sessions). In contrast to the new 1:15 p.m. 0195. education sites, however, these sites are ICCEC Testing Recommendations for Future NTP Studies The range of mental health issues likely to use all of the following Public Comments covered is broad and, depending on the curricula: General, ethics, Hexavalent Chromium needs of the audiences, the training sites neuropsychiatric, neuropsychiatric Public Comments may use any of the following types of designed for non-psychiatrists, and the NTP Board Subcommittee Reviews— curricula: General, ethics, adherence curriculum. Of the 19 Updates neuropsychiatric, neuropsychiatric training sessions that are shorter than 6 • Report on Carcinogens designed for non-psychiatrists, and an hours, 10 are expected to use the general • Technical Reports adherence curriculum. Education sites curriculum, 3 will use the adherence Public Comments also vary the complexity and intensity curriculum, and 2 sessions each for the 4–4:30 p.m. Adjourn of the training sessions, resulting in ethics, neuropsychiatric, sessions of variable length. Service neuropsychiatric for non-psychiatrists. [FR Doc. 01–11391 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] providers attending sessions shorter Four of the 6 sessions that are longer BILLING CODE 4140–01–P than 6 hours will provide feedback by than 6 hours are expected to use the completing a single form at the end of general curriculum and corresponding the training session. Those attending pre/post participant forms, and 2 will DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND sessions 6 hours or longer will be asked use the neuropsychiatric curriculum HUMAN SERVICES to complete forms both before and after with the accompanying corresponding the training session in order to assess pre/post neuropsychiatric participant Substance Abuse and Mental Health both satisfaction and perceived forms. Burden estimates are presented Services Administration knowledge gain. Education sites funded in Table 1 below. Agency Information Collection under these initiatives will vary The Behavioral Health Professional Activities: Proposed Collection; considerably in their prior experience in Health Association Training Initiative is Comment Request conducting trainings, with some a continuation effort. This initiative will organizations having significant prior consist of three Associations providing In compliance with section experience while others will be training to mental health professionals 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork developing their training programs. The both within and outside of their Reduction Act of 1995 concerning burden estimates below incorporate and disciplines. These Associations are opportunity for public comment on reflect reasonable assumptions required to train a minimum of 1,000 proposed collections of information, the regarding the volume, type and length of mental health professionals per year Substance Abuse and Mental Health training sessions conducted by the using the general, ethics, Services Administration will publish various organizations likely to be neuropsychiatric, neuropsychiatric for periodic summaries of proposed funded under these two initiatives. non-psychiatrists, and adherence projects. To request more information The Minority HIV/AIDS Mental curricula. They all have prior on the proposed projects or to obtain a Health Services Initiative is expected to experience training mental health copy of the information collection be comprised of 12 minority professionals and will conduct sessions plans, call the SAMHSA Reports community-based organizations that are of variable length (i.e., shorter Clearance Officer on (301) 443–7978. providing mental health HIV/AIDS and longer than 6 hours long). Each Comments are invited on: (a) Whether education trainings to traditional and Association will conduct about 57 the proposed collections of information non-traditional mental health service trainings per year, the majority of which
VerDate 11
(about 90% or about 51 training the adherence curriculum and 4 using year; 4 using the neuropsychiatric sessions) will be less than 6 hours long. the neuropsychiatric curriculum for curriculum and 2 using the general Of the shorter trainings, each non-psychiatrists. The appropriate post- curriculum. The corresponding pre/post Association will conduct about 20 using training feedback form will be feedback form will be administered at the general curriculum, 6 using the administered to trainees after each each training session. Table 2 below ethics curriculum, 12 using the session. Each Association will also uses these assumptions to calculate the neuropsychiatric curriculum, 9 using conduct about 6 longer trainings per burden estimate.
TABLE 1.—MINORITY HIV/AIDS MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES INITIATIVE
Estimated Responses Estimated completion Form per number of time Total hours respondent respondents (in hours)
Minority HIV/AIDS Mental Health Services Initiative—12 Sites
All Sessions—One form per session completed by Program staff/trainer
Session Report Form ...... 1 240 0.08 19
Sessions less than 6 hours
Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 3,000 0.167 501 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 240 0.167 40 Ethics Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 240 0.167 40 Adherence Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 360 0.167 60 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form Non-Physicians ...... 1 240 0.167 40
Sessions 6 hours or longer
Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 480 0.167 80 Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 480 0.25 120 Neuropsychiatric Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 240 0.167 40 Neuropsychiatric Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 240 0.25 60
Total ...... 5,760 1,000
TABLE 2.—BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TRAINING INITIATIVE
Estimated Responses Estimated completion Total Form per number of time hours respondent respondents (in hours)
Behavioral Health Professional Association Training Initiative—3 Sites
All Sessions—One form per session completed by Program staff/trainer
Session Report Form ...... 1 171 0.08 14
Sessions less than 6 hours
Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 1,200 0.167 200 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 720 0.167 120 Ethics Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 360 0.167 60 Adherence Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 540 0.167 90 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form Non-Physicians ...... 1 240 0.167 40
Sessions 6 hours or longer
Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 120 0.167 20 Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 120 0.25 30 Neuropsychiatric Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 240 0.167 40 Neuropsychiatric Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 240 0.25 60
Total ...... 3,951 674
VerDate 11
TABLE 3.—COMBINED ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATE
Estimated Responses Estimated completion Form per respond- number of re- time Total hours ent spondents (in hours)
Behavioral Health Professional Association Training Initiative—3 Sites
All Sessions—One form per session completed by Program staff/trainer
Session Report Form ...... 1 411 0.08 33
Sessions less than 6 hours
Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 4,200 0.167 701 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 960 0.167 160 Ethics Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 600 0.167 100 Adherence Participant Feedback Form ...... 1 900 0.167 150 Neuropsychiatric Participant Feedback Form Non-Physicians ...... 1 480 0.167 80
Sessions 6 hours or longer
Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 600 0.167 100 Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 600 0.25 150 Neuropsychiatric Pre-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 480 0.167 80 Neuropsychiatric Post-Training Participant Inventory ...... 1 480 0.25 120
Total ...... 9,711 1,674
Send comments to Nancy Pearce, ADDRESSES: Interested persons are information submission including SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, invited to submit comments regarding number of respondents, frequency of Room 16–105, Parklawn Building, 5600 this proposal. Comments should refer to response, and hours of response; (9) Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. the proposal by name and/or OMB whether the proposal is new, an Written comments should be received approval number (2503–0015) and extension, reinstatement, or revision of within 60 days of this notice. should be sent to: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., an information collection requirement; Dated: April 30, 2001. OMB Desk Officer, Office of and (10) the name and telephone Richard Kopanda. Management and Budget, Room 10235, number of an agency official familiar New Executive Office Building, Executive Officer, Substance Abuse and with the proposal and of the OMB Desk Mental Health Services Administration. Washington, DC 20503. Officer for the Department. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 01–11372 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] This Notice also lists the following Wayne Eddins, Reports Management BILLING CODE 4162–20–P information: Officer, Q, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, Title of Proposal: Issuer’s Monthly SW., Washington, DC 20410; e-mail Remittance Advice and Issuer’s Monthly _ Serial Note Remittance Advice. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Wayne [email protected]; telephone URBAN DEVELOPMENT (202) 708–2374. This is not a toll-free OMB Approval Number: 2503–0015. number. Copies of the proposed forms Form Numbers: HUD–11714, HUD– and other available documents [Docket No. FR–4650–N–31] 11714SN. submitted to OMB may be obtained Description of the Need for the Notice of Submission of Proposed from Mr. Eddins. Information and its Proposed Use: Information Collection to OMB; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Issuer’s Monthly Remittance Advice Department has submitted the proposal Government National Mortgage and Issuer’s Monthly Serial Note for the collection of information, as Associations (GNMA) issuers are Remittance Advice described below, to OMB for review, as required to provide summary required by the Paperwork Reduction information to the holder of each GNMA AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The Notice mortgage-backed security with respect Officer, HUD. lists the following information: (1) The to the current month’s account ACTION: Notice. title of the information collection transaction and calculations of the proposal; (2) the office of the agency to holder’s fractional share of total cash SUMMARY: The proposed information collect the information; (3) the OMB distribution. The Information collected collection requirement described below approval number, if applicable; (4) the is used to advise each security holder of has been submitted to the Office of description of the need for the the current moth’s account transactions Management and Budget (OMB) for information and its proposed use; (5) and calculation of holder’s fractional review, as required by the Paperwork the agency form number, if applicable; share of total cash distribution. Reduction Act. The Department is (6) what members of the public will be Respondents: Business or other for- soliciting public comments on the affected by the proposal; (7) how profit, Federal Government. subject proposal. frequently information submissions will DATES: Comments Due Date: June 6, be required; (8) an estimate of the total Frequency of Submission: Monthly. 2001. number of hours needed to prepare the Reporting Burden:
VerDate 11
Number of × Frequency × Hours per respondents of response response = Burden hours
445 ...... 591 1 2,633
Total Estimated Burden Hours: 2,633. may be found at the following website: wildlife. Four of the islands are Status: Reinstatement, with change. http://lowersuwannee.fws.gov designated wilderness areas. Seahorse Authority: Sec. 3507 of the Paperwork If you wish to comment, you may Key is home to one of the largest Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as submit comments by any one of several colonial wading bird rookeries in North amended. methods. You may mail your comments Florida and contains one of Florida’s Dated: May 1, 2001. to the above address.You may also historic lighthouses, which is used for comment via the Internet to the marine science education and research Wayne Eddins, following address: by the University of Florida. Departmental Reports Management Officer, [email protected]. Please submit Office of the Chief Information Officer. Dated: April 17, 2001. Internet comments as an ASCII file [FR Doc. 01–11435 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Judy L. Pulliam, avoiding the use of special characters Acting Regional Director. BILLING CODE 4210–01–M and any form of encryption. Please also [FR Doc. 01–11358 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] include your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not BILLING CODE 4310–55–M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your Internet Fish and Wildlife Service DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR message, contact Kenneth Litzenberger Notice of Intent To Present for Public directly at the above address. Finally, Fish and Wildlife Service Review and Comment the Draft you may hand-deliver comments to Mr. Comprehensive Conservation Plans Litzenberger at the above address. Our Notice of Intent To Conduct Public for Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys practice is to make comments, including Scoping Meeting To Obtain National Wildlife Refuges, Located in names and home addresses of Suggestions and Information on Dixie and Levy Counties, Florida, and respondents, available for public review Issues to Include in the Preparation of Levy County, Florida, Respectively during regular business hours. a Comprehensive Conservation Plan Individual respondents may request that for Roanoke River National Wildlife SUMMARY: This notice advises the public we withhold their home address from Refuge in North Carolina that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the rulemaking record, which we will SUMMARY: This notice advises the public Southeast Region, has made available honor to the extent allowable by law. that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for public review and comment the There also maybe circumstances in intends to gather information necessary Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan which we would withhold from the to prepare a Comprehensive for each refuge. The Service plans to rulemaking record a respondent’s Conservation Plan and associated conduct a public meeting in the vicinity identity, as allowable by law. If you environmental documents for this of the refuges to solicit public comments wish us to withhold your name and/or refuge in pursuant to the National on the draft plans. The Service is address, you must state this Environmental Policy Act and furnishing this notice in compliance prominently at the beginning of your implementing regulations. with its comprehensive conservation comment. However, we will not The meetings are scheduled as planning policy, the National consider anonymous comments. We follows: Tuesday, May 22, 2001, 6 p.m.– Environmental Policy Act, and will make all submissions from 9 p.m., Bertie County Courthouse, 108 implementing regulations to achieve the organizations or businesses, and from Dundee Street, Windsor, North Carolina following: individuals identifying themselves as 27983; Thursday, May 24, 2001, 6 p.m.– (1) Advise other agencies and the representatives or officials of 9 p.m., Halifax County Agricultural public of our intentions, and organizations or businesses, available Center, 359 Ferrell Lane, Halifax, North (2) obtain comments on the proposed for public inspection in their entirety. Carolina 27839. plans and other alternatives considered SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Lower DATES: in the planning process. Written comments should be Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, received on or before June 6, 2001. DATES: The Service will hold the public consisting of 53,000 acres, was ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for meeting on Tuesday,June 5, 2001, at 7 established in 1979, to protect one of the information concerning this refuge may p.m., at the Tommy Usher Center in largest remaining undeveloped estuaries be addressed to D.A. Brown, M.S., Chiefland, Florida. The Center is located in the country. The refuge encompasses P.W.S., 1106 West Queen Street, P.O. at 506 SW 4th Avenue (County Road 20 miles of habitat flanking both sides box 329, Edenton, North Carolina 345). of the famous Suwannee River and more 27932, 252/482–2364, 252/482–3855 ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for than 20 miles of pristine coastal marsh (fax), 252/337–5283 (cell). copies of the draft plans should be habitat. Lower Suwannee Refuge Information concerning this refuge addressed to Mr. Kenneth Litzenberger, provides important habitat for bald may be found at the following website: Refuge Manager, Lower Suwannee eagles, swallow-tailed kites, gopher http://rtncf.rci.ral.r4.fws.gov National Wildlife Refuge, 16450 NW tortoises, manatees, sea turtles, and If you wish to comment, you may 13th Place, Chiefland, Florida 32626, or migratory birds. submit your comments by any one of by calling (352) 493–0238. Comments Cedar Keys National Wildlife Refuge, several methods. You may mail must be received by Friday, July 6, consisting of 13 islands and more than comments to the above address. You 2001, to be considered in the 800 acres of pristine coastal barrier may also comment via the Internet to development of the final plan. island habitat, was established in 1929, the following address: Information concerning these refuges as a refuge for wading birds and [email protected]. Please submit
VerDate 11
Internet comments as an ASCII file DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR for the purpose of enhancement of the avoiding the use of special characters survival of the species. and any form of encryption. Please also Fish and Wildlife Service Applicant: John Guitar, III, Abilene, include your name and return address TX, PRT–041590. Notice of Receipt of Applications for in your Internet message. If you do not The applicant requests a permit to Permit receive a confirmation from the system import the sport-hunted trophy of one that we have received your Internet Endangered Species male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus message, contact D.A. Brown directly at dorcas) culled from a captive herd The following applicants have the above address. Finally, you may maintained under the management applied for a permit to conduct certain program of the Republic of South Africa, hand-deliver comments to Mr. Brown at activities with endangered species. This for the purpose of enhancement of the 1106 West Queen Street, Edenton, North notice is provided pursuant to Section survival of the species. Carolina. Our practice is to make 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of Applicant: Henry M. Witmyer, III, comments, including names and home 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et Hamburg, PA, PRT–041824. addresses of respondents, available for seq.). Written data or comments should The applicant requests a permit to public review during regular business be submitted to the Director, U.S. Fish import the sport-hunted trophy of one hours. Individual respondents may and Wildlife Service, Division of male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus request that we withhold their home Management Authority, 4401 North dorcas) culled from a captive herd address from the rulemaking record, Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, maintained under the management which we will honor to the extent Virginia 22203 and must be received by program of the Republic of South Africa, allowable by law. There also may be the Director within 30 days of the date for the purpose of enhancement of the circumstances in which we could of this publication. survival of the species. withhold from the rulemaking record a Applicant: The Denver Zoo, Denver, University of California, Berkeley, CA, respondent’s identify, as allowable by CO, PRT–039869. PRT–040159. law. If you wish us to withhold your The applicant request a permit to The applicant requests a permit to name and/or address, you must state import 2.1 African wild dogs (Lycaon import samples of hair, saliva swabs, this prominently at the beginning of pictus) from South Africa for the and tissue samples from wild Amur your comment. However, we will not purpose of enhancement of the survival leopards (Panthera pardus orientalis) consider anonymous comments. We of the species through captive and Amur tigers (Panthera tigris altaica) collected in Primorie Krai, Far East will make all submissions from propagation. Russia for the purpose of scientific organizations or businesses, and from Applicant: Robert Thuman, Lancaster, NY, PRT–041545. research. This notification covers individuals identifying themselves as activities conducted by the applicant representatives or officials of The applicant requests a permit to import the sport-hunted trophy of one over a five year period. organizations or businesses, available Applicant: Sedgwick County Zoo, for public inspection in their entirety. male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus dorcas) culled from a captive herd Wichita, KS, PRT–037732. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: It is the maintained under the management The applicant requests a permit to policy of the Fish and Wildlife Service program of the Republic of South Africa, import one captive born male Sumatran to have all lands within the National for the purpose of enhancement of the orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus abelii) from Wildlife Refuge System managed in survival of the species. the Calgary Zoo, Alberta, Canada, for the purpose of enhancement of the survival accordance with an approved Applicant: Steven Leinberger, of the species through captive Comprehensive Conservation Plan. The Saginaw, MI, PRT–041670. propagation. plan guides management decisions and The applicant requests a permit to Applicant: Jay E. Wagner, Columbus, identifies the goals, objectives, and import the sport-hunted trophy of one OH, PRT–035482. strategies for achieving refuge purposes. male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus The applicant requests a permit to Public input into this planning process dorcas) culled from a captive herd import three captive-born female is encouraged. The plan will provide maintained under the management Jamaican boas (Epicrates subflavus) other agencies and the public with a program of the Republic of South Africa, from Jacquet Gerald, Blairmont, clear understanding of the desired for the purpose of enhancement of the Belgium, for the purpose of conditions of the refuge and how the survival of the species. enhancement of the survival of the Service will implement management Applicant: Frederick L. McNair, species through captive propagation. strategies. Austin, TX, PRT–041580. The applicant requests a permit to Marine Mammals Roanoke River National Wildlife import the sport-hunted trophy of one The public is invited to comment on Refuge was established in August 1989, male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus the following application(s) for a permit to protect and enhance wooded dorcas) culled from a captive herd to conduct certain activities with marine wetlands consisting of bottomland maintained under the management mammals. The application(s) was hardwoods and swamps with high program of the Republic of South Africa, submitted to satisfy requirements of the waterfowl value along the Roanoke for the purpose of enhancement of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, River. survival of the species. as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and Dated: April 17, 2001. Applicant: Carter Davis, Tyrone, GA, the regulations governing marine Judy L. Pulliam, PRT–041585. mammals (50 CFR 18). The applicant requests a permit to Written data, comments or requests Acting Regional Director. import the sport-hunted trophy of one for copies of these complete [FR Doc. 01–11357 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus applications or requests for a public BILLING CODE 4310–55–M dorcas) culled from a captive herd hearing on these applications should be maintained under the management sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife program of the Republic of South Africa, Service, Division of Management
VerDate 11
Authority, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR for the regulations located at 43 CFR 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203, part 3195. The respondents are Federal telephone 703/358–2104 or fax 703/ Bureau of Land Management agencies and helium suppliers 358–2281. These requests must be [HE–952–9911–EK] (contractors) who purchase major received within 30 days of the date of helium requirements and report to BLM publication of this notice. Anyone OMB Approval Number 1004–0179; the sales information for an accurate requesting a hearing should give Information Collection Submitted to account of helium to Federal agencies specific reasons why a hearing would be the Office of Management and Budget from Federal helium suppliers. appropriate. The holding of such a Under the Paperwork Reduction Act Frequency: Quarterly and annually. hearing is at the discretion of the Description of Respondents: Federal Director. The Bureau of Land Management agencies and helium contractors. Applicant: Karl W. Minor, Rockdale, (BLM) has submitted the proposed Estimated Completion Time: 3 hours IL, PRT–041679. collection of information listed below to (1 hour for the In-Kind Crude Helium The applicant requests a permit to the Office of Management and Budget Sales Contract and 15 minutes to 2 import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) (OMB) for approval under the hours for the required information sport-hunted from the Landcaster Sound provisions of the Paperwork Reduction under 43 CFR part 3195). polar bear population, in Canada for Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). On Annual Responses: 304. personal use, taken in March 2001. November 28, 2000, the BLM published Filing Fee Per Response: 0. Applicant: David W. Dillard, a notice in the Federal Register (65 FR Annual Burden Hours: 912. Fairbanks, AK, PRT–041031. 70932) requesting comment on this Bureau Clearance Officer: Michael The applicant requests a permit to proposed collection. The comment Schwartz, 202–452–5033. import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) period ended on January 29, 2001. The sport-hunted from the Northern BLM received no comments from the Dated: February 15, 2001. Beaufort Sea polar bear population in public in response to that notice. You Michael Schwartz, Canada for personal use taken March may obtain copies of the proposed BLM Information Collection Clearance 2000. collection of information and related Officer. Applicant: Lee R. Anderson, Sr., forms and explanatory material by [FR Doc. 01–11375 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Minneapolis, MN, PRT–042004. contacting the BLM Information BILLING CODE 4310–84–M The applicant requests a permit to Collection Clearance Officer at the import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) telephone number listed below. sport-hunted from the Lancaster Sound The OMB is required to respond to DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR polar bear population in Canada for this request within 60 days but may Bureau of Land Management personal use taken March 2001. respond after O.S.C 30 days directly to Applicant: William Bricker, Antwerp, the Office of Management and Budget, OH, PRT–042025. [OR–958–6310–PF–01–24 1A] Interior Department Desk Officer (1004– The applicant requests a permit to OMB Approval Number 1004–0168; import a polar bear (Ursus maritimus) 0179), Office of Information and Information Collection Submitted to sport-hunted from the Lancaster Sound Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC the Office of Management and Budget polar bear population in Canada for 20503. Please provide a copy of your Under the Paperwork Reduction Act personal use taken March 2001. comments to the Bureau Information The U.S. Fish and Wildlife has Clearance Officer (WO–630), 1849 C St., NW, Mail Stop 401LS, Washington, DC The Bureau of Land Management information collection approval from (BLM) has submitted the proposed OMB through February 28, 2001. OMB 20240. Nature of Comments: We specifically collection of information listed below to Control Number 1018–0093. Federal the Office of Management and Budget Agencies may not conduct or sponsor request your comments on the following: (OMB) for approval under provisions of and a person is not required to respond the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. to a collection of information unless it 1. Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper 3501 et seq.). On December 12, 2000, the displays a current valid OMB control BLM published a notice in the Federal number. functioning of the BLM, including whether the information will have Register (65 FR 77664) requesting Documents and other information comments on this proposed collection. submitted with these applications are practical utility; 2. The accuracy of BLM’s estimate of The comment period ended on February available for review, subject to the 12, 2001. The BLM received no requirements of the Privacy Act and the burden of collecting the information, including the validity of the comments from the public in response Freedom of Information Act, by any to that notice. You may obtain copies of party who submits a written request for methodology and assumptions used; 3. The quality, utility and clarity of the proposed collection of information a copy of such documents to the and related forms and explanatory following office within 30 days of the the information to be collected; and material by contacting the BLM date of publication of this notice: U.S. 4. How to minimize the burden of Information Collection Clearance Officer Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of collecting the information on those who at the telephone number listed below. Management Authority, 4401 North are to respond, including the use of The OMB is required to respond to Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, appropriate automated electronic, this request within 60 days but may Virginia 22203. Phone: (703/358–2104); mechanical, or other forms of respond after 30 days. For maximum FAX: (703/358–2281). information technology. Title: In-Kind Crude Helium Sales consideration your comments and Dated: April 27, 2001. Contract (43 CFR 3195). suggestions on the requirement should Anna Barry, OMB Approval Number: 1004–0179. be made within 30 days directly to the Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Bureau Form Number: None. Office of Management and Budget, Division of Management Authority. Abstract: The Bureau of Land Interior Department Desk Officer, [FR Doc. 01–11379 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Management is proposing to renew the (1004–0168), Office of Information and BILLING CODE 4310–55–P approval of an information collection Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC
VerDate 11
20503. Please provide a copy of your ACTION: Notice. review and clearance in accordance comments to the Bureau Information with the Paperwork Reduction Act of Clearance Officer (WO–630), 1849 C St., SUMMARY: The Wild, Free-Roaming 1995. This proposed information NW., Mail Stop 401 LS, Washington, DC Horse and Burro Act (Pub. L. 92–195), collection is published to obtain 20240. as amended, provides, among other comments from the public and affected Nature of Comments: We specifically things, that excess wild horses shall be agencies. Comments are encouraged and request your comments on the removed from public lands. will be accepted for ‘‘sixty days’’ until following: The Bureau of Land Management July 6, 2001. 1. Whether the collection of plans to complete removal operations in If you have additional comments, information is necessary for the proper August and September, 2001 in the suggestions, or additional information, functioning of the BLM, including West Douglas Herd Area and in the especially regarding the estimated whether the information will have Sand Wash Herd Management Area. public burden and associated response practical utility; Dates are approximate and depend upon time, please write to Lawrence A. 2. The accuracy of the BLM’s estimate whether conditions and factors Greenfeld, Acting Director, Bureau of of the burden of collecting the unforseen at this time. Justice Statistics, 810 Seventh St., NW, The Bureau of Land Management information, including the validity of Washington, DC 20531. If you need a plans to remove approximately 115 wild the methodology and assumptions used; copy of the collection instruments with horses from the West Douglas Herd 3. The quality, utility and clarity of instructions, or have additional Area. The number of horses removed the information to be collected; and information, please contact Christopher 4. How to minimize the burden of from the Sand Wash herd will be Mumola at (202) 307–5995, or via collecting the information on those who determined following establishment in facsimile at 202–514–1757. Request are to respond, including the use of late June, 2001 of a herd appropriate written comments and suggestions from appropriate automated electronic, management level. the public and affected agencies mechanical, or other forms of Pursuant to the requirements noted concerning the proposed collection of information technology. above, the BLM will conduct a public information. Title: Report of Road Use (43 CFR hearing on the use of helicopters in Written comments and suggestions 2812). Colorado for gathering operations from the public and affected agencies OMB Approval Number: 1004–0168. during the calendar year of 2001, and a concerning the proposed collection of Bureau Form Number: OR 2812–6. public hearing addressing the removal information should address one or more Abstract: BLM requires specific of horses from the Oil Spring Mountain of the following four points: information that permittees must Wilderness Study Area, associated with (1) Evaluate whether the collection of furnish to determine road use and the West Douglas Herd Area. A meeting information is necessary for the proper maintenance fees and to monitor and will be held following the hearings to performance of the functions of the verify road use authorizations. BLM discuss the two planned gathers. The agency, including whether the uses this information to calculate road hearings are scheduled to begin at 7 information will have practical utility; use and maintenance fees for use of MST on June 11th, 2001 at the White (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the BLM roads to transport timber and other River Field Office of the BLM located at agency’s estimate of the burden of the forest products. 73544 Highway 64 in Meeker, Colorado. Frequency: Quarterly. For additional information regarding collection of information, including the Description of Respondents: the West Douglas Herd Area contact Jim validity of the methodology and Respondents are road use permit Cagney, White River Field Office; 970– assumptions used; holders (individuals, partnerships, and (3) Enhance the quality, utility and corporations) who wish to use BLM 878–3601. For additional information regarding clarity of the information to be roads to transport timber and other the Sand Wash Herd management Area collected; and forest products. (4) Minimize the burden of the Estimated Completion Time: 1 hour. contact John Husband at the Little Snake Filed Office; 970–826–5000. collection of information on those who Annual Responses: 1,600. are to respond, including through the Filing Fee Per Response: $0. James A. Cagney, use of appropriate automated, Annual Burden Hours: 1,600. White River Field Office Manager. electronic, mechanical, or other Bureau Clearance Officer: Michael Schwartz, (202) 452–5033. [FR Doc. 01–11376 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] technological collection techniques or BILLING CODE 4310–84–M other forms of information technology, Dated: March 20, 2001. e.g., permitting electronic submission of Michael Schwartz, responses. BLM Information Collection Clearance DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Overview of this information Officer. collection: [FR Doc. 01–11377 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Office of Justice Programs (1) Type of information collection: BILLING CODE 4310–84–M Revision of a currently approved Agency Information Collection collection. Activities: Proposed collection, (2) The title of the Form/Collection: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Comment Request; Deaths In Custody, Deaths In Custody, 2000— 2001 Bureau of Land Management Quarterly Summary of Inmate Deaths in State Prison; State Prison Inmate [CO–100–1060–PC; CO–110–1060–PC] ACTION: Notice of information collection under review; revision of a currently Death Report Quarterly Summary of Deaths in State Notice of Public Hearings and the approved collection. Juvenile Residential Facilities; State Intent to Remove Wild Horses on Public Lands in Colorado The Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Residential Death Report Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Quarterly Report on Inmates Under Jail AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Statistics, has submitted the following Jurisdiction; Annual Summary on Interior. information collection request for Inmates Under Jail Jurisdiction;
VerDate 11
Quarterly Report on Inmates in Private of Justice Statistics was directed by the Dated: April 30, 2001. and Multi-Jurisdiction Jails; U.S. Congress ‘‘to implement a Brenda E. Dyer, Annual Summary on Inmates in Private voluntary annual reporting system of all Department Deputy Clearance Officer, and Multi-Jurisdiction Jails. deaths occurring in law enforcement Department of Justice. (3) The agency form number and the custody.’’ BJS received OMB approval to [FR Doc. 01–11353 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] applicable component of the conduct such an annual collection BILLING CODE 4410–18–M Department sponsoring the collection: (OMB No. 1121–0249). In the time since Forms: NPS–4, NPS–4A, NPS–5, NPS– submitting that collection for OMB 5A, CJ–9, CJ–9a, CJ–10 and CJ–10A. aproval, the President signed The DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Corrections Statistics Unit, Bureau of Deaths in Custody Act of 2000 into law Justice Statistics, Office of Justice (PL 106–297). To comply with PL 106– Office of Justice Programs Programs, United States Department of 297’s new requirement for a quarterly Justice. collection of inmate death data from Agency Information Collection (4) Affected public who will be asked local jails, State prisons, juvenile Activities: Proposed Collection; to respond, as well as a brief abstract: facilities and police custody, BJS is now Comment Request; Census of Primary: Local jail administrators, (one submitting for clearance the following Juveniles in Residential Placement reporter from each of the 3,083 local jail series of forms:NPS–4, NPS–4A, NPS–5, ACTION: Notice of information collection jurisdictions in the United States), State NPS–5A, CJ–9, CJ–9a, CJ–10 and CJ– under review; reinstatement, without prison administrators (one reporter from 10A. change, of a previously approved each of the 50 States and the District of This collection will supplement the collection for which approval has Columbia) and State juvenile annual data on prison inmate deaths expired. correctional administrators (one reporter which the Bureau of Justice Statistics from each of the 50 States and the already collects as part of the National The Department of Justice, Office of District of Columbia) responsible for Prisoners Statistics program and the Justice Programs, has submitted the keeping records on inmates will be National Corrections Reporting Program. following information collection request asked to provide information for the The Bureau of Justice Statistics will use for review and clearance in accordance following categories: this new information to publish an with the Paperwork Reduction Act of (a) During each reporting quarter, the annual report on deaths in custody. The 1995. Office of Management and Budget numbers of deaths of persons in their report will be made available to the U.S. approval is being sought for the custody; and Congress, Executive Office of the information collection listed below. (b) As of January 1 and December 31 President, practitioners, researchers, This proposed information collection of each reporting year, the number of students, the media, and other was previously published in the Federal male and female inmates in their interested in criminal justice statistics Register on February 20, 2001, allowing custody (local jails only); and and data. for a 60-day public comment period (c) Between January 1 and December (5) An estimate of the total number of office of Management and Budget 31 of each reporting year, the number of respondents and the amount of time (OMB) approval is being sought for the male and female inmates admitted to needed for an average respondent to information collection listed below. their custody (local jails only); and respond is broken down as follows: This proposed information collection (d) The name, date of birth, gender, The total number of respondents for was previously published in the Federal race/ethnic origin, and date of death for this information collection is 3,185 and Register and allowed 60 days for public each inmate who died in their custody the time per survey is as follows: comment. during each reporting quarter; and Local jails/quarterly—3,083 respondents The purpose of this notice is to allow (e) The admission date, legal status, (average response time=5 minutes+30 an additional 30 days for public and current offenses for each inmate minutes per reported death) comments form the date listed at the top who died in their custody during the Local jails/annual—3,083 respondents of this page in the Federal Register. reporting quarter; and (average response time=15 minutes) This process is conducted in accordance (f) Whether or not an autopsy was State prisons/quarterly—51 respondents with 5 Code of Federal Regulation, conducted by a medical examiner or (average response time=5 minutes) § 1320.10. coroner to determine the cause of each State prisons addendum/quarterly—51 Written comments and/or suggestions inmate death that took place in their respondents (average response regarding the item(s) contained in this custody during the reporter quarter; and time=30 minutes per reported death) notice, especially regarding the (g) The location and cause of each State juvenile corrections/quarterly—51 estimated public burden and associated inmate death that took place in their respondents (average response time=5 response time, should be directed to the custody during the reporting quarter; minutes) Office of Management and Budget, and State juvenile corrections addendum/ Office of Information and Regulatory (h) In cases where the cause of death quarterly—51 respondents (average Affairs, Attention: Department of Justice was illness/natural causes (including response time=30 minutes per Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. AIDS), whether or not the cause of each reported death) Additionally, comments may be inmate death was the result of a pre- (6) An estimate of the total public submitted to OMB via facsimile to 202– existing medical condition, and whether burden (in hours) associated with the 395–7285. Comments may also be or not the inmate had been receiving collection: 3,802 burden hours. submitted to the Department of Justice treatment for that medical condition; If additional information is required, (DOJ), Justice Management Division, and contact: Mrs. Brenda E. Dyer, Deputy Information Management and Security (i) In cases where the cause of death Clearance Officer, United States Staff, Attention: Department Deputy was accidental injury, suicide, or Department of Justice, Information Clearance Officer, National Place Suite homicide, when and where the incident Management and Security Staff, Justice 1220, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, causing the inmate’s death took place. Management Division, National Place, Washington, DC 20530. As part of the conference agreement Suite 1220, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, Written comments and suggestions for FY2000 appropriations, the Bureau NW, Washington, DC 20530. from the public and affected agencies
VerDate 11
should address one or more of the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Total Annualized Capital/Startup following points: Costs: $0. Office of the Secretary (1) Evaluate whether the proposed Total Annual Costs (operating/ collection of information is necessary Submission for OMB Review; maintaining systems or purchasing for the proper performance of the Comment Request services): $0. functions of the agency/components, Description: The Federal Contractor including whether the information will April 30, 2001. Veterans’ Employment Report VETS– have practical utility; The Department of Labor (DOL) has 100, administered by the U.S. (2) evaluate the accuracy of the submitted the following public Department of Labor, is used to facilitate Federal contractor and subcontractor agencies/components estimate of the information collection requests (ICRs) to reporting of their employment and new burden of the proposed collection of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in hiring activity. Title 38 U.S.C., section information, including the validity of 4212(d) requires the collection of the methodology and assumptions used; accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, information from entities holding (3) enhance the quality, utility, and 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of this contracts of $25,000 or more with clarity of the information to be ICR, with applicable supporting Federal departments or agencies to collected; and documentation, may be obtained by report annually on (a) the number of (4) minimize the burden of the calling the Department of Labor. To current employees in each job category collection of information on those who obtain documentation contact Darrin and at each hiring location who are are to respond, including through the King at (202) 693–4129 or by E–Mail: special disabled veterans, the number use of appropriate automated, [email protected]. who are veterans of the Vietnam era and the number who are other veterans who electronic, mechanical, or other Comments should be sent to Office of served on active duty during a war or technological collection techniques or Information and Regulatory Affairs, a campaign or expedition for which a other forms of information technology, Attn: OMB Desk Officer VETS, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, campaign badge has been authorized; (b) e.g., permitting electronic submission of the total number of employees hired responses. Washington, DC 20503 ((202) 395– 7316), on or before June 6, 2001. during the report period and of those, Overview of this information The OMB is particularly interested in the number of special disabled, the collection: comments which: number who are veterans of the Vietnam (1) Type of information collection: • Evaluate whether the proposed era, and the number who are other reinstatement, without change, of a collection of information is necessary veterans; and the maximum and previously approved collection for for the proper performance of the minimum number of employees which approval has expired. functions of the agency, including employed by the contractor at each whether the information will have hiring location. (2) The title of the form/collection: practical utility; Ira L. Mills, Census of Juveniles in Residential • Evaluate the accuracy of the Departmental Clearance Officer. Placement. agency’s estimate of the burden of the (3) The agency form number, if any, proposed collection of information, [FR Doc. 01–11406 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] and the applicable component of the including the validity of the BILLING CODE 4510–79–M Department sponsoring the collection. methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and Form: CJ–14, Office of Juvenile Justice DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and Delinquency Prevention, Office of clarity of the information to be Justice Programs, United States collected; and Office of the Secretary • Department of Justice. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who Submission for OMB Review; (4) Affected public who will be asked are to respond, including through the Comment Request or required to respond, as well as a brief use of appropriate automated, abstract. Primary: Public and private electronic, mechanical, or other April 30, 2001. juvenile detention, correctional, shelter, technological collection techniques or The Department of Labor (DOL) has facilities. Other: None. other forms of information technology, submitted the following public e.g., permitting electronic submission of (5) An estimate of the total number of information collection requests (ICRs) to responses. respondents and the amount of time the Office of Management and Budget Type of Review: Extension of a estimated for an average respondent to (OMB) for review and approval in currently approved collection. respond: 3,350 respondents and average accordance with the Paperwork 4 hours to respond. Agency: Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS). Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, (6) An estimate of the total public Title: Federal Contractor Veterans’ 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of each burden (in hours) associated with the Employment Report. individual ICR, with applicable collection: 11,142 biennial burden OMB Number: 1293–0005. supporting documentation, may be hours. Affected Public: Business or other for- obtained by calling the Department of Labor. To obtain documentation contact Dated: April 30, 2001. profit and Not-for-profit institutions. Frequency: Annually. Darrin King at (202) 693–4129 or E-Mail Brenda E. Dyer, Number of Respondents: 194,580. to [email protected]. Department Clearance Officer, Department of Number of Annual Responses: Comments should be sent to Office of Justice. 194,580. Information and Regulatory Affairs, [FR Doc. 01–11352 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Estimated Time Per Response: 30 Attn: OMB Desk Officer for OSHA, BILLING CODE 4410–18–M minutes. Office of Management and Budget, Total Burden Hours: 97,290. Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503
VerDate 11
((202) 395–7316), on or before June 6, Total Burden Hours: 2,928. (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c) (2)(A)). This 2001. Total Annualized Capital/Startup program helps to ensure that requested The OMB is particularly interested in Costs: $0. data can be provided in the desired comments which: Total Annual Costs (operating/ format, reporting burden (time and • Evaluate whether the proposed maintaining systems or purchasing financial resources) is minimized, collection of information is necessary services): $0. collection instruments are clearly for the proper performance of the Description: The Grantee Quarterly understood, and the impact of collection functions of the agency, including Progress Report (OSHA–171) is used to requirements on respondents can be whether the information will have collect information concerning activities properly assessed. The Bureau of Labor practical utility. conducted under OSHA training grant Statistics (BLS) is soliciting comments • Evaluate the accuracy of the programs. The information is used to concerning the proposed revision of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the monitor the use of Federal grant funds. Annual Refiling Survey (ARS). A copy proposed collection of information, Type of Review: Extension of a of the proposed information collection including the validity of the currently approved collection. request (ICR) can be obtained by methodology and assumptions used; Agency: Occupational Safety and contacting the individual listed below • Enhance the quality, utility, and Health Administration (OSHA). in the Addresses section of this notice. clarity of the information to be Title: Procedures for the Handling of DATES: Written comments must be collected; and Discrimination Complaints under submitted to the office listed in the • Minimize the burden of the Federal Employee Protection Statutes. Addresses section below on or before collection of information on those who OMB Number: 1218–0236. July 6, 2001. are to respond, including through the Affected Public: Business or other for- ADDRESSES: use of appropriate automated, profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Farms; Send comments to Amy A. electronic, mechanical, or other Federal Government; and State, Local, Hobby, BLS Clearance Officer, Division technological collection techniques or or Tribal Government. of Management Systems, Bureau of other forms of information technology, Frequency: Once per complaint. Labor Statistics, Room 3255, 2 e.g., permitting electronic submission of Number of Respondents: 200. Massachusetts Avenue, NE., responses. Number of Annual Responses: 200. Washington, DC 20212, telephone Type of Review: Extension of a Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour. number 202–691–7628 (this is not a toll currently approved collection. Total Burden Hours: 200. free number). Agency: Occupational Safety and Total Annualized Capital/Startup FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Health Administration (OSHA). Costs: $0. Amy A. Hobby, BLS Clearance Officer, Title: Application for Training Grant. Total Annual Costs (operating/ telephone number 202–691–7628. (See OMB Number: 1218–0020. maintaining systems or purchasing Addresses section.) Affected Public: Not-for-profit services): $0. Description: 29 CFR Part 24 requires SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: institutions and State, Local, or Tribal employees who believe they have been Government. I. Background discriminated against by employers, in Frequency: Annually. violation of whistleblower provisions in The Standard Industrial Classification Number of Respondents: 200. certain laws for reporting unlawful (SIC) system was replaced by the North Number of Annual Responses: 200. practices that adversely affect the American Industry Classification Estimated time Per Response: 55 environment, to place their allegations System (NAICS) in 1997 as the standard hours. in writing so they may where for industrial classification. As a result Total Burden Hours: 11,050. appropriate be investigated by the of this change, the Bureau of Labor Total Annualized Capital/Startup Department of Labor. Statistics (BLS) has been converting SIC Costs: $0. codes to NAICS codes in the ARS. The Total Annual Costs (operating/ Ira L. Mills, conversion is planned to be completed maintaining systems or purchasing Departmental Clearance Officer. with Fiscal Year 2001 ARS processing, services): $0. [FR Doc. 01–11407 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] at which time industrial classifications Description: The application for BILLING CODE 4510–26–M in the ARS will be based on the 2002 Training Grant is submitted by non- NAICS. profit organizations interested in ARS forms used in the conversion obtaining OSHA training grants. It is DEPARTMENT OF LABOR were designed to gather respondent used by OSHA staff to select information necessary for converting organizations to receive funds. Bureau of Labor Statistics SIC codes to NAICS codes. The BLS Type of Review: Extension of a currently is requesting Office of Proposed Collection; Comment currently approved collection. Management and Budget clearance of Request Agency: Occupational Safety and revised ARS survey forms that will be Health Administration (OSHA). ACTION: Notice. used to verify and update existing 2002 Title: Grantee Quarterly Progress NAICS codes. They also will be used to Report. SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as update employers’ business names and OMB Number: 1218–0100. part of its continuing effort to reduce addresses and other geographical Affected Public: Not-for-profit paperwork and respondent burden, information. The revised ARS forms institutions and State, Local, or Tribal conducts a pre-clearance consultation have been redesigned to be easier to Government. program to provide the general public read and understand. Frequency: Quarterly. and Federal agencies with an II. Desired Focus of Comments Number of Respondents: 61. opportunity to comment on proposed Number of Annual Responses: 244. and/or continuing collections of The Bureau of Labor Statistics is Estimated Time Per Response: 12 information in accordance with the particularly interested in comments hours. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 that:
VerDate 11
• Evaluate whether the proposed are to respond, including through the Type of Review: Revision of a collection of information is necessary use of appropriate automated, currently approved collection. for the proper performance of the electronic, mechanical, or other Agency: Bureau of Labor Statistics. functions of the agency, including technological collection techniques or whether the information will have other forms of information technology, Title: Annual Refiling Survey. practical utility; e.g., permitting electronic submissions OMB Number: 1220–0032. • Evaluate the accuracy of the of responses. Affected Public: Individuals or agency’s estimate of the burden of the III. Current Action households; Business or other for-profit; proposed collection of information, Not-for-profit institutions; Farms; including the validity of the The BLS uses the Annual Refiling methodology and assumptions used; Survey (ARS) forms to gather industrial Federal government; State, local, or • Enhance the quality, utility, and and geographical data on business tribal government. clarity of the information to be establishments. The revised ARS forms Total Respondents: 2,272,998. collected; and are designed to verify and update Frequency: Annually. • Minimize the burden of the NAICS codes, geographical information, collection of information on those who and multiple worksite information. Total Responses: 2,272,998.
Estimated total Form Total Frequency Total Average time burden respondents responses per response (hours)
3023–NVS ...... 2,092,708 Once ...... 2,092,708 .083 173,695 3023–NVM ...... 37,334 Once ...... 37,334 .25 9,334 3023–NCA ...... 142,956 Once ...... 142,956 .167 23,874
Totals ...... 2,272,998 ...... 2,272,998 206,903
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): standard on Powered Platforms for opportunity to comment on proposed $0. Building Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66). and continuing information-collection Total Burden Cost (operating/ DATES: Submit written comments on or requirements in accordance with the maintenance): $0. before July 6, 2001. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Comments submitted in response to ADDRESSES: Submit written comments (PRA–95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This this notice will be summarized and/or to the Docket Office, Docket No. ICR– program ensures that information is in included in the request for Office of 1218–0121(2001), OSHA, U.S. the desired format, reporting burden Management and Budget approval of the Department of Labor, Room N–2625, (time and costs) is minimal, collection information collection request; they also 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., instruments are clearly understood, and will become a matter of public record. Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) OSHA’s estimate of the information- Signed at Washington, DC this 1st day of 693–2350. Commenters may transmit collection burden is correct. May 2001. written comments of 10 pages or less by Paragraph (e)(9) of the § 1910.66 W. Stuart Rust, Jr., facsimile to: (202) 693–1648. (hereafter, the ‘‘Standard’’) requires that Chief, Division of Management Systems, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: employers develop and implement a Bureau of Labor Statistics. Theda Kenney, Directorate of Safety written emergency-action plan for each [FR Doc. 01–11409 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Standards Programs, OSHA, U.S. type of powered-platform operation. BILLING CODE 4510–24–P Department of Labor, Room N–3609, The plan must explain the emergency 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., procedures that employees are to follow Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) if they encounter a disruption of the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 693–2222. A copy of the Agency’s power supply, equipment failure, and Information-Collection Request (ICR) other emergency. Prior to operating a Occupational Safety and Health supporting the need for the information powered platform, employers must Administration collections specified by the standard on notify employees how they can inform Powered Platforms for Building themselves about alarm systems and [Docket No. ICR–1218–0121(2001)] Maintenance is available for inspection emergency-escape routes, and and copying in the Docket Office, or by emergency procedures that pertain to Powered Platforms for Building requesting a copy from Theda Kenney at the building on which they will be Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66); (202) 693–2222 or Todd Owen at (202) working. Employers are to review with Extension of the Office of Management 693–2444. For electronic copies of the each employee those parts of the and Budget’s (OMB) Approval of ICR, contact OSHA on the Internet at emergency-action plan that the Information-Collection (Paperwork) http://www.osha.gov/comp-links.html, employee must know to ensure their Requirements and select ‘‘Information Collection protection during an emergency; these AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Requests.’’ reviews must occur when the employee Administration (OSHA), Labor. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: receives an initial assignment involving a powered-platform operation and after ACTION: Notice of an opportunity for I. Background the employer revises the emergency- public comment. The Department of Labor, as part of its action plan. SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public continuing effort to reduce paperwork According to paragraph (f)(5)(i)(C), comment concerning its request to and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, employers must affix a load-rating plate decrease and extend the information- conducts a preclearance consultation to a conspicuous location and on each collection requirements specified in the program to provide the public with an suspended unit that states the unit’s
VerDate 11
weight and its rated load capacity. signature of the competent person who respond appropriately under emergency Paragraph (f)(5)(ii)(N) requires performed it, and the number/identifier conditions, and maintain and use their employers to mount each emergency of the wire rope inspected. fall-protection arrest system. Training electric-operating device in a secured Paragaraph (i)(1)(iv) requires certification permits employers to compartment and label the device with employers to develop written work review the training provided to their instructions for its use. After installing procedures for the operation, safe use, employees, thereby ensuring that the a suspension wire rope, paragraphs and inspection of powered platforms, employees received the necessary (f)(7)(vi) and (f)(7)(vii) mandate that and to provide these procedures to their training. In addition, the paperwork employers attach a corrosion-resistant employees for training purposes. In requirements specified by the Standard tag with specified information to one of meeting these requirements, an provide the most efficient means for an the wire-rope fastenings if the rope is to employer may use pictorial methods OSHA compliance officer to determine remain at one location. In addition, and operating manuals supplied by the whether or not employers and building paragraph (f)(7)(viii) requires employers manufacturers of the system owners are providing the required who resocket a wire rope to either stamp components. In addition, paragraph notification, certification, and training. specified information on the original tag (i)(1)(ii) mandates that employers train II. Special Issues for Comment or put that information on a employees in: Recognizing safety supplemental tag and attach it to the hazards associated with their work tasks OSHA has a particular interest in fastening. and developing measures to prevent comments on the following issues: Paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) these hazards; general recognition and • Whether the proposed information- require that building owners, at least prevention of safety hazards associated collection requirements are necessary annually, have a competent person: with the operation of powered for the proper performance of the Inspect the supporting structures of platforms, including the powered Agency’s functions, including whether their buildings; inspect and, if platforms they operate; the emergency- the information is useful; • necessary, test the components of the action plan and work procedures The accuracy of OSHA’s estimate of powered platforms, including control developed under paragraphs (e)(9) and the burden (time and costs) of the systems; inspect/test components (i)(1)(iv), respectively; and the information-collection requirements, subject to wear (e.g., wire ropes, inspection, maintenance, use, and including the validity of the bearings, gears, and governors); and performance of their personal fall-arrest methodology and assumptions; used; • certify these inspections and tests. system. On completion of this training, The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and Under paragraph (g)(2)(iii), building paragraph (i)(1)(v) specifies that • owners must maintain and, on request, employers must prepare a written Ways to minimize the burden on disclose to OSHA a written certification certification that includes the identity of employers who must comply; for record of these inspections/tests; this the employee trained, the signature of example, by using automated or other record must include the date of the the employer or the trainer, and the date technological information-collection inspection/test, the signature of the the employee completed the training. In and -transmission techniques. competent person who performed it, addition, the employer must maintain III. Proposed Actions and the number/identifier of the an employee’s training certificate for the OSHA is proposing to decrease the building support structure and duration of their employment and, on existing burden-hour estimate, and to equipment inspected/tested. request, make it available to OSHA. extend OMB approval, of the collection- Paragraph (g)(3)(i) mandates that Emergency-action plans allow of-information requirements specified in building owners use a competent person employers and employees to anticipate, the Standard. In this regard, the Agency to inspect and, if necessary, test each and effectively respond to, emergencies is proposing to decrease the current powered-platform facility according to that may arise during powered-platform burden-hour estimate from 246,498 the manufacture’s recommendations operations. Affixing load-rating plates to hours to 119,497 hours, a total reduction every 30 days, or prior to use if the work suspended units, instructions to of 127,001 hours. OSHA will summarize cycle is less than 30 days. Under emergency electric-operating devices, the comments submitted in response to paragraph (g)(2)(iii), building owners and tags to wire-rope fasteners prevent this notice, and will include this must maintain and, on request, disclose workplace accidents by providing summary in its request to OMB to to the Agency a written certification information to employers and extend the approval of these record of these inspections/tests; this employees regarding the conditions information-collection requirements. record is to include the date of the under which they can safely operate Type of Review: Extension of a inspection/test, the signature of the these system components. Requiring currently-approved information- competent person who performed it, building owners to establish and collection requirement. and the number/identifier of the maintain written certification of Title: Powered Platforms for Building powered-platform facility inspected/ inspections and testing conducted on Maintenance (29 CFR 1910.66). tested. the supporting structures of buildings, OMB Number: 1218–0121. According to paragraph (g)(5)(iii), powered-platform systems, and Affected Public: Business or other for- building owners must have suspension suspension wire ropes provides profit, not-for-profit institutions; Federal wire ropes thoroughly inspected for a employers and employees with government; State, local or tribal number of specified conditions by a assurance that they can operate safely governments. competent person once a month, or from the buildings using equipment that Number of Respondents: 900. before placing the wire ropes into is in safe operating condition. The Frequency of Response: Annually; service if the ropes are inactive for 30 training requirements increase monthly; occasionally. days or longer. Paragraph (g)(5)(v) employee safety by allowing them to Average Time per Response: Varies requires building owners to maintain develop the skills and knowledge from 1 minute (0.02 hour) (to maintain and, on request, disclose to OSHA a necessary to effectively operate, use, a training record) to 10 hours (to written certification record of these and inspect powered platforms, inspect/test building-support structures monthly inspections; this record must recognize and prevent safety hazards and the components of a powered consist of the date of the inspection, the associated with platform operation, platform).
VerDate 11
Estimated Total Burden Hours: following regulations: (1) Appendix G to direct measurement of fracture 119,497 hours. 10 CFR Part 50, which sets forth fracture toughness. Estimated Cost (Operation and toughness requirements for ferritic 3.0 Discussion Maintenance): $0. materials of pressure-retaining 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) enables the IV. Authority and Signature components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary of light water nuclear Commission to grant exemptions from R. Davis Layne, Acting Assistant power reactors to provide adequate the requirements of Part 50 when Secretary of Labor for Occupational margins of safety during any condition special circumstances are present such Safety and Health, directed the of normal operation, including that application of the regulation in the preparation of this notice. The authority anticipated operational occurrences and particular circumstances would not for this notice is the Paperwork system hydrostatic tests, to which the serve the underlying purpose of the Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506) pressure boundary may be subjected rule, or is not necessary to achieve the and Secretary of Labor’s Order No. 3– over its service lifetime; (2) 10 CFR underlying purpose of the rule. 2000 (65 FR 50017). 50.61, which sets forth fracture The underlying purpose of Appendix Signed at Washington, DC on May 1st, toughness requirements for protection G to 10 CFR Part 50 is to set forth 2001. against pressurized thermal shock (PTS) fracture toughness requirements for R. Davis Layne, events; and (3) Appendix H to 10 CFR ferritic materials of pressure-retaining components of the reactor coolant Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor. Part 50, which requires the pressure boundary of light water nuclear [FR Doc. 01–11389 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] establishment of a RPV material surveillance program. power reactors to provide adequate BILLING CODE 4510–26–M margins of safety during any condition The licensee requested an exemption of normal operation, including from Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to anticipated operational occurrences and replace the required use of the existing NUCLEAR REGULATORY system hydrostatic tests, to which the Charpy V-notch and drop weight-based COMMISSION pressure boundary may be subjected methodology and allow the use an [50–305] over its service lifetime. alternate methodology to incorporate The methodology underlying the the use of fracture toughness test data Nuclear Management Company, LLC; requirements of Appendix G to 10 CFR for evaluating the integrity of the KNPP Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant; Part 50 is based on the use of Charpy V- RPV circumferential beltline weld based Exemption notch and drop weight data. The on the use of the 1997 Edition of licensee proposes to replace the use of 1.0 Background American Society for Testing and the existing Charpy V-notch and drop Materials (ASTM) Standard Test Nuclear Management Company, LLC weight-based methodology by a fracture Method E 1921 (E 1921–97) and (the licensee) is the holder of Facility toughness-based methodology to American Society for Mechanical Operating License No. DPR–43, which demonstrate compliance with Appendix Engineering (ASME) Code Case N–629. authorizes operation of the Kewaunee G to 10 CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has The exemption is required since Nuclear Power Plant (KNPP). The concluded that the exemption is Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50, through license provides, among other things, justified based on the licensee utilizing reference to Appendix G to Section XI that the facility is subject to all rules, the fracture toughness methodology of the ASME Code pursuant to 10 CFR regulations, and orders of the U.S. specified in Appendix A of the NRC 50.55(a), requires the use of a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the staff safety evaluation (SE), dated May 1, methodology based on Charpy V-notch Commission) now or hereafter in effect. 2001. The use of the methodology The facility consists of a pressurized and drop weight data. specified in Appendix A of the NRC water reactor located on the licensee’s The licensee requested an exemption staff SE will ensure that P–T limits KNPP site in Kewaunee County, from 10 CFR 50.61 to use an alternate developed for the KNPP RPV will Wisconsin. methodology to allow the use of fracture continue to be based on an adequately toughness test data for evaluating the conservative estimate of RPV material 2.0 Request integrity of the KNPP RPV properties and ensure that the pressure- By letter dated June 7, 1999, as circumferential beltline weld based on retaining components of the reactor supplemented February 4, September the use of the 1997 Edition of ASTM E coolant pressure boundary retain 26, December 18, 2000, and March 12, 1921–97 and ASME Code Case N–629. adequate margins of safety during any 2001, Wisconsin Public Service The exemption is required since the condition of normal operation, Corporation (WPSC) proposed three methodology for evaluating RPV including anticipated operational exemptions and a license amendment material fracture toughness in 10 CFR occurrences. Also, when additional which affect the licensing basis of the 50.61 requires the use of the Charpy V- fracture toughness data relevant to the KNPP reactor pressure vessel (RPV). notch and drop weight data for evaluation of the KNPP RPV Subsequently, WPSC was succeeded by establishing the PTS reference circumferential weld is acquired as part Nuclear Management Company, LLC temperature (RTPTS). of the KNPP surveillance program, this (NMC), as the licensed operator of the The licensee requested an exemption data must be incorporated into the KNPP. By letter dated October 5, 2000, from Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50 to evaluation of the KNPP RPV using the NMC (the licensee) requested the modify the basis for the KNPP RPV methodology of Appendix A of the NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) surveillance program to allow the staff SE. With these conditions, which staff continue to process and disposition acquisition and use of fracture were agreed to by licensee letter, dated licensing actions previously docketed toughness data instead of the Charpy V- March 12, 2001, the licensee’s requested and requested by WPSC. By letter dated notch impact testing required by exemption from the use of the Charpy December 18, 2000, the licensee Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50. The V-notch and drop weight-based withdrew the license amendment. exemption is required since Appendix methodology required by Appendix G to The three exemptions requested by H to 10 CFR Part 50 does not address 10 CFR Part 50 may be granted in the licensee address portions of the the testing of surveillance specimens for accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(ii) in that
VerDate 11
special circumstances are present since not exempt the licensee from meeting (1) The licensee must utilize the application of the regulation in the any other requirement of 10 CFR 50.61. methodology specified in Appendix A particular circumstances is not Appendix H to 10 CFR Part 50 of the NRC staff SE, dated May 1, 2001; necessary to achieve the underlying requires that, ‘‘[f]or each capsule (2) When additional fracture purpose of the rule. The foregoing withdrawal, the test procedures and toughness data relevant to the exemption only modifies the reporting requirements must meet the evaluation of the KNPP RPV methodology to be used by the licensee requirements of ASTM E 185–82 [the circumferential weld is acquired as part for demonstrating compliance with the 1982 edition] to the extent practicable of the KNPP surveillance program, this requirements of Appendix G to 10 CFR for the configuration of the specimens in data must be incorporated into the Part 50, and does not exempt the the capsule.’’ ASTM Standard Practice E evaluation of the KNPP RPV using the licensee from meeting any other 185–82 requires Charpy V-notch impact methodology of Appendix A of the NRC requirement of Appendix G to 10 CFR testing, but does not address the testing staff SE; and Part 50. of surveillance specimens for direct (3) The licensee must obtain the The underlying purpose of 10 CFR measurement of fracture toughness, following regarding the next 50.61 is to establish requirements which either as a requirement or as an optional surveillance capsule: (a) a valid ensure that a licensee’s RPV will be action. The exemption would permit the measurement of the fracture toughness- protected from failure during a PTS licensee to utilize alternative based T0 parameter for the KNPP RPV event by evaluating the fracture surveillance program testing surveillance weld, (b) an estimate of the toughness of RPV materials. requirements and permit the acquisition Charpy V-notch 30 ft-lb transition of fracture toughness data for the temperature shift for the surveillance The licensee seeks an exemption to 10 surveillance weld as the basis for the weld, and (c) an estimate of the upper CFR 50.61 requirement to use a KNPP RPV surveillance program. shelf energy drop for the surveillance methodology for the ‘‘determination of The underlying purpose of Appendix weld. adjusted/indexing reference H to 10 CFR Part 50 is to acquire data Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, an temperatures.’’ The licensee proposes to to, ‘‘* * * monitor changes in the environmental assessment and finding use ASME Code Case N–629 and the fracture toughness properties of ferritic of no significant impact has been methodology outlined in its submittal, materials in the reactor vessel beltline prepared and published in the Federal which are based on the use of fracture region of light water nuclear power Register (66 FR 21787). Accordingly, toughness data, as an alternative to the reactors which result from exposure of based upon the environmental Charpy V-notch and drop weight-based these materials to neutron irradiation assessment, the Commission has methodology required by 10 CFR 50.61 and the thermal environment.’’ As determined that the granting of this for establishing the PTS RTPTS. The NRC discussed in the NRC staff SE, dated exemption will not result in any staff has concluded that the exemption May 1, 2001, the licensee’s alternate significant effect on the quality of the is justified based on the licensee surveillance program requirements and human environment. utilizing the methodology specified in the acquisition of data will adequately This exemption is effective upon Appendix A of the NRC staff SE, dated monitor the change in RPV fracture issuance. May 1, 2001. The use of the toughness and provide input to the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day methodology specified in Appendix A approved fracture toughness-based of May 2001. of the NRC staff SE will ensure the PTS methodology for RPV integrity. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. evaluation developed for the KNPP RPV Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that John A. Zwolinski, will continue to be based on an this exemption may be granted because adequately conservative estimate of RPV Director, Division of Licensing Project the special circumstances required by Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor material properties and ensure the RPV 10 CFR 50.12(a)(ii) are present in that Regulation. will be protected from failure during a application of the regulation [i.e., the [FR Doc. 01–11388 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] PTS event. Also, when additional Charpy V-Notch-based testing practices BILLING CODE 7590–01–P fracture toughness data relevant to the specified by Appendix H to 10 CFR Part evaluation of the KNPP RPV 50] in the particular circumstances is circumferential weld is acquired as part not necessary to achieve the underlying NUCLEAR REGULATORY of the KNPP surveillance program, this purpose of the rule. COMMISSION data must be incorporated into the evaluation of the KNPP RPV using the 4.0 Conclusion Docket No. 72–5 methodology of Appendix A of the NRC Accordingly, the Commission has Nuclear Management Corporation; staff SE. With these conditions, which determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR Issuance of Environmental were as agreed to by licensee letter, 50.12(a), the exemptions are authorized Assessment and Finding of No dated March 12, 2001, the licensee’s by law, will not endanger life or Significant Impact requested exemption from the use of the property or common defense and Charpy V-notch and drop weight-based security, and is, otherwise, in the public The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory methodology required by 10 CFR 50.61 interest. Therefore, the Commission Commission (NRC or the Commission) may be granted in accordance with 10 hereby grants Nuclear Management is considering issuance of an exemption, CFR 50.12(ii) in that special Company, LLC, exemptions from pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the circumstances are present since portions of the requirements of provisions of 10 CFR 72.48 to Nuclear application of the regulation in the Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50; 10 CFR Management Corporation (NMC). The particular circumstances is not 50.61; and, Appendix H to 10 CFR Part requested exemption would allow NMC necessary to achieve the underlying 50, to allow an alternative methodology to implement the amended 10 CFR purpose of the rule. The foregoing that is based on using of fracture 72.48 requirements on September 7, exemption only modifies the toughness test data for evaluating the 2001, for the Independent Spent Fuel methodology to be used by the licensee integrity of the KNPP RPV Storage Installation (ISFSI) at the Point for demonstrating compliance with the circumferential beltline weld with the Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) in requirements of 10 CFR 50.61, and does following conditions: Manitowoc County, Wisconsin.
VerDate 11
Environmental Assessment (EA) the proposed action of granting an Meeting) (Contact: James Johnson, Identification of Proposed Action: By exemption from 10 CFR 72.48, so that 301–415–6802) NMC may implement the amended letter dated March 20, 2001, as Friday, May 11, 2001 supplemented April 6, 2001, NMC requirements on September 7, 2001, will 10:30 a.m. requested a scheduler exemption from not significantly impact the quality of Meeting with Advisory Committee on the implementation date of April 5, human environment. Accordingly, the Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) (Public 2001, for the revised 10 CFR 72.48. Commission has determined that an Meeting) (Contact: John Larkins, NMC plans to implement its revised 10 environmental impact statement for the 301–415–7360) CFR 50.59 and 10 CFR 72.48 programs proposed action is not necessary. The request for exemption was simultaneously. The planned date for Week of May 14, 2001—Tentative docketed under 10 CFR Part 72, Docket implementing the revised 10 CFR 50.59 72–5. For further details with respect to There are no meetings scheduled for requirements is September 7, 2001. the Week of May 14, 2001. Need for Proposed Action: The this action, see the exemption request applicant wants the implementation dated March 20, 2001, as supplemented Week of May 21, 2001—Tentative date of 10 CFR 50.59 and 10 CFR 72.48 April 6, 2001, which is available for public inspection at the Commission’s There are no meetings scheduled for to coincide. The applicant stated in the the Week of May 21, 2001. March 20, 2001, submittal that Public Document Room, One White administering separate programs to Flint North Building, 11555 Rockville Week of May 28, 2001—Tentative Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or satisfy the current 10 CFR 72.48 Wednesday, May 30, 2001 schedule could become burdensome from the publicly available records and create confusion. component of NRC’s agencywide 10:25 a.m. Environmental Impacts of the documents access and management Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) Proposed Action: There are no system (ADAMS). (If needed) ADAMS is accessible from the NRC significant environmental impacts web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ Week of June 4, 2001—Tentative associated with the proposed action. ADAMS/index.html (the Public The new revision of 10 CFR 72.48 is Tuesday, June 5, 2001 Electronic Reading Room). considered less restrictive than the 9:25 a.m. current requirements, with the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) exception of the additional reporting of April 2001. (If needed) requirements. Continued For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2 p.m. implementation of the existing 10 CFR E. William Brach, Discussion of Management Issues 72.48 until September 7, 2001, is Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of (Closed-Ex. 2) acceptable to the NRC as stated in Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Wednesday, June 6, 2001 Regulatory Issues Summary 2001–03 [FR Doc. 01–11386 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] which states that it is the NRC’s view BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 10:30 a.m. that both the old rule and the new rule All Employees Meeting (Public provide an acceptable level of safety. Meeting) Extending the current requirements NUCLEAR REGULATORY 1:30 p.m. until September 7, 2001, has no COMMISSION All Employees Meeting (Public significant impact on the environment. Meeting) Sunshine Act Meeting Alternative to the Proposed Action: Week of June 11, 2001—Tentative Since there are no environmental DATES: Weeks of May 7, 14, 21, 28, June impacts associated with the proposed Thursday, June 14, 2001 4, 11, 2001. action, alternatives are not evaluated 9:25 a.m. PLACE: other than the no-action alternative. The Commissioiners’ Conference Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) alternative to the proposed action would Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, (If needed) be to deny approval of the scheduler Maryland. 9:30 a.m. exemption and, therefore, not allow STATUS: Public and Closed. Meeting with Nuclear Waste NMC to implement the revised 10 CFR MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Technical Review Board (Public 72.48 requirements on the desired date, Week of May 7, 2001 Meeting) September 7, 2001. However, the 1:30 p.m. environmental impacts of the proposed Thursday, May 10, 2001 Briefing on License Renewal Program action and the alternative would be the 10:25 a.m. (Public Meeting) (Contact: David same. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) Solorio, 301–415–1973) Agencies and Persons Consulted: On (Tentative) *The schedule for Commission April 10, 2001, Wisconsin state official, a: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company meetings is subject to change on short Mr. Jeff Kitsembel, Nuclear Engineer, (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, notice. To verify the status of meetings Public Service Commission of Unit No. 3; Facility Operating call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. Wisconsin, was contacted regarding the License NPF–49) Partial Review of Contact person for more information: environmental assessment for the LBP–00–26 (10/26/00), as directed David Louis Gamberoni (301) 415–1651. proposed action and had no comment. by CLI–01–03 (1/17/01) Regarding The NRC Commission Meeting Interpretation of GDC 62, Schedule can be found on the Internet Finding of No Significant Impact Prevention of Criticality in Fuel at: http://www.nrc.gov/SECY/smj/ The environmental impacts of the Storage & Handling schedule.htm proposed action have been reviewed in 10:30 a.m. This notice is distributed by mail to accordance with the requirements set Briefing on Office of Nuclear several hundred subscribers; if you no forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based upon the Regulatory Research (RES) longer wish to receive it, or would like foregoing EA, the Commission finds that Programs and Performance (Public to be added to the distribution, please
VerDate 11
contact the Office of the Secretary, per hour is approximately $101. by the Commission. The average Washington, D.C. 20555 (301–415– Therefore, the total cost of compliance number of hours necessary for 1969). In addition, distribution of this for all respondents is $1,010 ($101 × .5 compliance with the requirements of meeting notice over the Internet system × 20 = $1,010). Rule 17a–1 is 50 hours per year. There is available. If you are interested in Written comments are invited on: (a) are 24 entities required to comply with receiving this Commission meeting Whether the proposed collection of the rule: 9 national securities exchanges, schedule electronically, please send an information is necessary for the proper 1 national securities association, 13 electronic message to [email protected]. performance of the functions of the registered clearing agencies, and the Dated: May 3, 2001. agency, including whether the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. David Louis Gamberoni, information will have practical utility; The total number of hours required for (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate all respondents to comply with the rule Technical Coordinator, Office of the Secretary. of the burden of the collection of is thus 1,200 hours annually. information; (c) ways to enhance the Written comments are invited on: (a) [FR Doc. 01–11513 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am] quality, utility, and clarity of the Whether the proposed collection of BILLING CODE 7590–01–M information to be collected; and (d) information is necessary for the proper ways to minimize the burden of the performance of the functions of the collection of information on agency, including whether the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE respondents, including through the use information shall have practical utility; COMMISSION of automated collection techniques or (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate [Extension: Rule 15Bc3–1 and Form MSDW; other forms of information technology. of the burden of the proposed collection SEC File No. 270–93; OMB Control No. Consideration will be given to of information; (c) ways to enhance the 3235–0087] comments and suggestions submitted in quality, utility, and clarity of the writing within 60 days of this information to be collected; and (d) Proposed Collection; Comment publication. ways to minimize the burden of the Request Direct your written comments to collection of information on Upon Written Request, Copies Michael E. Bartell, Associate Executive respondents, including through the use Available From: Securities and Director, Office of Information of automated collection techniques or Exchange Commission, Office of Filings Technology, Securities and Exchange other forms of information technology. and Information Services, Washington, Commission, 450 5th Street, N.W., Consideration will be given to DC 20549. Washington, DC 20549. comments and suggestions submitted in Notice is hereby given that, pursuant Dated: April 26, 2001. writing within 60 days of this publication. to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Margaret H. McFarland, Direct your written comments to (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities Deputy Secretary. and Exchange Commission Michael E. Bartell, Associate Executive [FR Doc. 01–11334 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Director, Office of Information (‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments BILLING CODE 8010–01–M on the collection of information Technology, Securities and Exchange summarized below. The Commission Commission, 450 5th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549. plans to submit this collection of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE information to the Office of COMMISSION Dated: April 27, 2001. Management and Budget for extension Margaret H. McFarland, [Extension: Rule 17a–1; SEC File No. 270– and approval. Deputy Secretary. 244; OMB Control No. 3235–0208] Rule 15Bc3–1 under the Securities [FR Doc. 01–11385 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Exchange Act of 1934 provides that a Proposed Collection; Comment BILLING CODE 8010–01–M notice of withdrawal from registration Request with the Commission as a bank municipal securities dealer must be Upon Written Request, Copies SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE filed on Form MSDW. Available From: Securities and COMMISSION The Commission uses the information Exchange Commission, Office of Filings [Release No. 35–27389] submitted on Form MSDW in and Information Services, Washington, determining whether it is in the public DC 20549. Filings Under the Public Utility Holding interest to permit a bank municipal Notice is hereby given that pursuant Company Act of 1935, as Amended securities dealer to withdraw its to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (‘‘Act’’) registration. This information is also (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities important to the municipal securities and Exchange Commission April 30, 2001. dealer’s customers and to the public, (‘‘Commission’’) is publishing the Notice is hereby given that the because it provides, among other things, following summary of collection for following filing(s) has/have been made the name and address of a person to public comment. with the Commission pursuant to contact regarding any of the municipal Rule 17a–1 under the Securities provisions of the Act and rules securities dealer’s unfinished business. Exchange Act of 1934 requires that all promulgated under the Act. All The staff estimates that approximately national securities exchanges, national interested persons are referred to the 20 respondents in total will utilize this securities associations, registered application(s) and/or declaration(s) for notice procedure annually, with a total clearing agencies, and the Municipal complete statements of the proposed burden of 10 hours for all respondents, Securities Rulemaking Board keep on transaction(s) summarized below. The based upon past submissions. The staff file for a period of five years, two years application(s) and/or declaration(s) and estimates that the average number of in an accessible place, all documents any amendment(s) is/are available for hours necessary for one respondent to which it makes or receives respecting its public inspection through the comply with the requirements of Rule self-regulatory activities, and that such Commission’s Branch of Public 15Bc3–1 is .5 hours. The average cost documents be available for examination Reference.
VerDate 11
Interested persons wishing to provided that the Applicant’s SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE comment or request a hearing on the Investments in LIHTC properties would COMMISSION application(s) and/or declaration(s) be undertaken for the sole purpose of should submit their views in writing by obtaining the related tax credits and that Sunshine Act Meeting May 25, 2001, to the Secretary, all Investments would be self- Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission, 3 liquidating as the LIHTCs expired. As the provisions of the Government in the Washington, D.C. 20549–0609, and of December 31, 2000, Heartland had serve a copy on the relevant applicant(s) Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94–409, that the invested approximately $15.5 million of Securities and Exchange Commission and/or declarant(s) at the address(es) the amount authorized in the 1999 specified below. Proof of service (by will hold the following meeting during Order. affidavit or, in the case of an attorney at the week of May 7, 2001. law, by certificate) should be filed with The Applicants now request that the A closed meeting will be held on the request. Any request for hearing Commission modify the authority Thursday, May 10, 2001, at 11 a.m. should identify specifically the issues of granted in the 1999 Order. In particular, Commissioners, Counsel to the facts or law that are disputed. A person Applicants request that the Commission Commissioners, the Secretary to the who so requests will be notified of any eliminate the restriction in the 1999 Commission, and recording secretaries hearing, if ordered, and will receive a Order limiting new LIHTC investments will attend the closed meeting. Certain copy of any notice or order issued in the to properties located in Alliant Energy’s staff members who have an interest in matter. After May 25, 2001, the service territory,4 and permit the the matters may also be present. application(s) and/or declaration(s), as Applicants to acquire membership units The General Counsel of the filed or as amended, may be granted in limited liability companies (‘‘LLCs’’) Commission, or his designee, has and/or permitted to become effective. formed to invest in LIHTC properties.5 certified that, in his opinion, one or Alliant Energy Corporation, et al. (70– The Applicants state that each LLC will more of the exemptions set forth in 5 9323) be managed by an unaffiliated manager U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (9)(A), (9)(B), and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), Alliant Energy Corporation (‘‘Alliant and that the rights of an Applicant as a member of the LLC will be equivalent to (7), (9)(i), (9)(ii) and (10), permit Energy’’), a registered holding company, consideration of the scheduled matters and its subsidiary nonutility holding those of a limited partner in a limited partnership. The Applicants are not at the closed meeting. company, Alliant Energy Corporation The subject matters of the closed (‘‘AER’’), both located at 222 West requesting any other modifications to the authority granted in, or the meeting scheduled for Thursday, May Washington Avenue, Madison, 10, 2001 will be: Wisconsin 53703, and AER’s indirect limitations imposed by, the 1999 Order. nonutility subsidiary, Heartland institution and settlement of injunctive For the Commission, by the Division of actions; and Properties, Inc. (‘‘Heartland’’) (together, Investment Management, pursuant to ‘‘Applicants’’), 122 West Washington delegated authority. institution and settlement of Avenue, 6th Floor, Madison, Wisconsin administrative proceedings of an Margaret H. McFarland, 53703 have filed a post-effective enforcement nature. Deputy Secretary. amendment to their application under At times, changes in Commission section 9(c)(3) of the Act and rule 54 [FR Doc. 01–11335 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] priorities require alterations in the under the Act. BILLING CODE 8010–01–M scheduling of meeting items. For further By Commission order dated April 14, information and to ascertain what, if 1998 (HCAR No. 26856) (‘‘1998 Order’’), any, matters have been added, deleted the Applicants, through Heartland, were or postponed, please contact: authorized to retain passive, limited Nine of the LIHTC properties held in that fund were located outside of the Alliant Energy service The Office of the Secretary at (202) partnership interest (‘‘Investments’’) in 942–7070. 84 in low-income, multi-family housing territory. projects that were located primarily in 3 LIHTCs are available in the form of equal annual Dated: May 3, 2001. Alliant Energy’s service territory and tax credits that are earned over a ten-year period in Margaret H. McFarland, the first eleven years of the project, with the first Deputy Secretary. qualified for Low Income Housing Tax and last years prorated. However, in order for the Credits (‘‘LIHCT’’) under section 42 of tax credits to vest, the term of the investment must [FR Doc. 01–11516 Filed 5–3–01; 12:05 pm] 1 the Internal Revenue Code (‘‘Code’’). be for at least fifteen years. Once the credits are BILLING CODE 8010–01–M By subsequent order dated August 13, vested, an investments is fully recovered; that is, 1999 (HCAR No. 27060) (‘‘1999 Order’’), the Applicants’ economic return is not dependent the Applicants were authorized to make upon cash flow from the project or any residual SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE additional Investments in LIHTC value of the asset. COMMISSION properties in the Alliant Energy service 4 See Exelon Corp., (HCAR No. 27256; October 19, territory in an aggregate amount of up to 2000) (The Commission allowed a registered public utility holding company to retain limited [Release No. 34–44236; File No. SR–CBOE– $50 million from time to time, through partnership interests in nine different LIHTC funds 00–22] 2 August 13, 2004. The 1999 Order holding properties in housing projects located throughout the United States. The Commission Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice 1 Specifically, the Commission determined that concluded that these investments were retainable of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by the Investments were retainable under section under the standards of section 11(b)(1) of the Act, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, 9(c)(3) of the Act, because the interests were because they were passive in nature, made solely Inc., Relating to Automatic Execution acquired to generate tax credits under the Code and for the purpose of obtaining tax credits and would they were being converted into passive investments, of Certain Orders on the Electronic self-liquidate when the terms of the tax credit which would wind down as the credits expired. expired). Limit Order Book 2 An intervening order dated July 10, 1999 (HCAR 5 No. 27198) authorized the Applicants to reacquire See NiSource, Inc., (HCAR No. 27263; October April 30, 2001. the limited partnership interest in a fund holding 30, 2000) (The Commission allowed a registered seventeen LIHTC properties, which the Commission public utility holding company to retain passive Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the determined to be retainable under the 1998 Order. investments in LIHTC ventures organized as LLCs). Securities Exchange Act of 1934
VerDate 11
(‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 sell for a higher price or buy for a lower [or locks] the Exchange’s best bid or notice is hereby given that on June 1, price. However, if the order’s limit price offer as established by an order in the 2000, the Chicago Board Options is under $3, RAES will execute the Exchange’s [customer] limit order book, Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’ or order only if the necessary bid or offer orders in the book for options of that ‘‘Exchange’’), filed with the Securities is 1⁄2 point or less from the limit price. series will be automatically executed and Exchange Commission If the order’s limit price is $3 or more, against participants on RAES up to the (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed RAES will execute the order only if the number of contracts equal to the rule change as described in Items, I, II, necessary bid or offer is one dollar or applicable maximum size of RAES- and III below, which Items have been less from the limit price. eligible orders for that series of options (ii) A Market-Maker logged on to prepared by the CBOE. On February 23, (‘‘Trigger’’). In the event the order in the 2001, the Exchange filed Amendment participate in RAES (a ‘‘Participating Market-Maker’’) will be designated as book is for a larger number of contracts No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On than the applicable RAES contract limit, April 10, 2001, the Exchange filed contra-broker on the trade. the balance of the book order will be Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule (iii) A trade executed on RAES at an executed manually by the trading change.3 The Commission is publishing erroneous quote should be treated as a this notice to solicit comments on the trade reported at an erroneous price and crowd. In the limited circumstance proposed rule change from interested adjusted to reflect the accurate market where contracts remain in the book after persons. after receiving a Floor Official’s an automatic execution of a book order approval. up to the applicable RAES contract I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s (iv) When the best bid or offer on the limit, and the disseminated quote Statement of the Terms of Substance of Exchange’s book constitutes the best bid remains crossed or locked with the the Proposed Rule Change or offer on the Exchange and is for a size Autoquote bid or offer, or for any series The Exchange hereby proposes to less than the RAES order eligibility size where Trigger has not yet been amend its rules to provide for the for that class, such fact shall be denoted implemented by the appropriate Floor automatic execution of certain orders in the Exchange’s disseminated quote by Procedure Committee, orders in RAES resting in the Exchange’s electronic a ‘‘Book Indicator’’. It is possible that for options of that series will not be the best bid or offer on the Exchange’s limit order book when they become automatically executed but instead will book constitutes the prevailing market marketable. Below is the text of the be rerouted on ORS to the crowd PAR proposed rule change. Proposed new bid or offer. In those instances, a RAES order will be executed against the order terminal or to another location in the language is italicized. Proposed event of system problems or contrary deletions are in [brackets]. in the book. In the event, the order in the book is for a smaller number of firm routing instructions. * * * * * contracts than the RAES order, the (e)–(g) No change. Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., balance of the RAES order will be . . . Interpretations and Policies: Rules assigned to participating market-makers at the same price at which the initial .01–.08 No change. * * * * * portion of the order was executed up to * * * * * Chapter VI—Doing Business on the an amount prescribed by the Chapter VII—Order Book Officials and Exchange Floor, Section A: General, appropriate Floor Procedure Committee RAES Operations on a class-by-class basis (the ‘‘Book Board Brokers, Section A: General Price Commitment Quantity’’). Any * * * * * RULE 7.4 (a)–(g) No change. remaining balance thereafter shall be (i) Rule 6.8. . . . Interpretations and Policies (a)–(c) No change. routed to the crowd PAR terminal if (d) Execution on RAES. Autoquote is not in effect for that series; .01–.06 No change. (i) When RAES receives an order, the (ii) assigned to participating market- .07 Electronic execution of certain system automatically will attach to the makers at the Autoquote price if orders on the Exchange’s electronic Autoquote constitutes the new order its execution price, determined by limit order book is provided for under prevailing market bid or offer; or (iii) the prevailing market quote at the time sub-paragraphs (d) (iv) and (v) of Rule executed against any order in the book of the order’s entry to the system, except 6.8. as otherwise provided in this Rule 6.8 that constitutes the new prevailing * * * * * and the Interpretations to this Rule. A market bid or offer with the balance of buy order will pay the offer, a sell order the RAES order being assigned to II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s participating market-makers at that will sell at the bid. Marketable limit Statement of the Purpose of, and price up to the Book Price Commitment orders will not be executed to sell for Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Quantity. Any additional remaining less or buy for more than the specified Change price, but the order can be executed to balance of a RAES order shall be handled in accordance with (ii) or (iii) In its filing with the Commission, the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). of this paragraph. CBOE included statements concerning 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. (v) Notwithstanding sub-paragraph the purpose of and basis for the 3 (d)(iv), [for a six month pilot program In Amendment No. 1, the CBOE modified the proposed rule change and discussed any proposed rule change to provide that the ending August 21, 2001,] for classes of comments it received on the proposed appropriate Floor Procedure Committee would options as determined by the determine its application to a particular option appropriate Floor Procedure Committee, rule change. The text of these statements class. In Amendment No. 2, the CBOE modified the may be examined at the places specified proposed rule change to reflect recent changes for any series of options where the bid relating to the recent re-organization and re- or offer generated by the Exchange’s in Item IV below. The CBOE has numbering of certain provisions of CBOE Rule 6.8 Autoquote system (or any Exchange prepared summaries, set forth in See letters from Jaime Galvin, Attorney, CBOE, to approved proprietary quote generation sections A, B, and C below, of the most Andrew Shipe, Attorney, Division of Market significant aspects of such statements. Regulation, SEC, dated February 22 and April 10, system used in lieu of the Exchange’s 2001. Autoquote system) is equal to or crosses
VerDate 11
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s clerk that a trade has been executed and the following sequence of events will Statement of the Purpose of, and an endorsement is required. After the occur. Trigger will automatically Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule book clerk verifies with the DPM that execute the book order up to 50 Change the trade is valid based on movements contracts, the RAES contract limit. in the underlying security, the trade will CBOE’s disseminated quote will still be 1. Purpose be endorsed by the book clerk.5 In most 5–51⁄8, because of the remaining 50 The Exchange is developing a system instances, the trade will be endorsed to contracts in the book. A ticket will be enhancement to its electronic limit the RAES ‘‘wheel’’ up to the applicable printed on the book printer notifying the order book (‘‘EBook’’), called AutoQuote RAES contract limit, however, the clerk that 50 contracts were executed at Triggered EBook Execution (‘‘Trigger’’), Trigger system will have the $5 and that 50 contracts remain in the that will allow certain orders resting in functionality to allow the trade to be book. The remaining 50 contracts will the book to be automatically executed in endorsed manually (as is done today) be handled manually by the crowd. the limited situation where the bid or when appropriate. Once the remaining 50 contracts are offer for a series of options generated by The Trigger will execute, at most, a executed, the quote will change to 47⁄8– the Exchange’s Autoquote system (or quantity equal to the applicable RAES 5, if that is still the current quote from any Exchange approved proprietary contract limit. If a number of contracts AutoQuote. If prior to execution of the quote generation system used in lieu of greater than the applicable RAES remaining contracts, the AutoQuote the Exchange’s AutoQuote system) is contract limit exist in the book, the subsequently ticks back to 5–51⁄8, the equal to or crosses the Exchange’s best crowd will manually execute the Trigger will be re-set and the remaining bid or offer for that series as established remaining contracts in the book. In the 50 contracts will be automatically by a booked order. limited circumstance where contracts executed if the AutoQuote returns to The Trigger enhancement to EBook 7 remain in the book after a Trigger 4 ⁄8–5. If prior to the execution of the will provide for more timely and execution and the out-of-line remaining contracts, orders are entered efficient execution of book orders. disseminated quote has not changed, into RAES for the particular series of Currently, when the AutoQuote bid or orders in RAES for options of that series options, and AutoQuote remains offer crosses a booked order, the 7 will be ‘‘kicked-out’’ of RAES and will unchanged at 4 ⁄8–5 (i.e., AutoQuote disseminated quote is changed to reflect be immediately and automatically remains out-of-line with CBOE’s the order in the book, due to book routed to a broker’s PAR terminal in the disseminated quote), the RAES orders priority, and will not change unless the trading crowd (absent contrary will be kicked-out of RAES and booked order is traded. A ticket is instructions of the firm), where they automatically routed to the trading printed which alerts the book staff and will be represented by the broker and, crowd. the crowd that one or more orders in the if executable, will ordinarily be The Exchange believes that by book are inverted with the quote and executed in seconds. Because these providing for orders resting in the book that a trade should take place to take the orders remain RAES eligible, they will to be automatically executed in the order out of the book. This situation can be entitled to receive firm quote limited situation where the AutoQuote occur for several series within the same treatment when they are represented in bid or offer touches or crosses the bid class and can continue undetected for or offer of a booked order, customer some time, particularly since many the crowd. The following examples illustrate the orders in the book will be executed in classes are on call-up displays which operation of the Trigger process. a more timely manner. Eliminating can make it difficult for the Designated Assume that there is a 10 contract buy manual execution of these orders will Primary Market Maker (‘‘DPM’’) staff to order in the book for $5. Assume that also significantly reduce the burden on identify such situations. By providing the disseminated quote for the DPMs to execute book orders, for the automatic execution of book 1 particularly in fast moving markets. The orders in this situation, Trigger will particular series is 5–5 ⁄8 and the RAES limit is 50 contracts. When the number of book trade-throughs should significantly reduce the burden on also be reduced. It should be noted that DPMs to execute book orders, underlying moves, the Exchange’s AutoQuote system will also update the the Exchange expects that Trigger will particularly in fast markets.4 eliminate the vast majority of RAES Only series in which AutoQuote (or quotes for the options overlying that stock. Now assume that the underlying kick-outs currently provided for in any Exchange approved quote paragraph (c) of Exchange Rule 6.8. To generation system) is employed are stock ticks down, causing AutoQuote to 7 protect the integrity of the Trigger eligible for Trigger. If Trigger has been go down to 4 ⁄8–5. In this instance, the Trigger process will initiate and the system, the Exchange will gradually roll activated for a particular class of out the Trigger enhancement to all options, as Autoquote changes and the following sequence of events will occur. The CBOE’s disseminated quote will options classes throughout the floor. quote either touches or crosses an order The Exchange also proposes to add an remain 5–51⁄8 because of the order in the in the book, the Trigger process will be interpretation .08 to Exchange Rule 7.4, book. Trigger will be activated and the initiated and the book order(s) will be that references the electronic execution book order will be automatically automatically traded up to the RAES of certain orders on the electronic limit executed for 10 contracts. The quote contract limit applicable for that order book that is provided for by will change to 47⁄8–5, if that is still the particular class of options. The booked paragraphs (b) and (c) of Exchange Rule current quote from AutoQuote. order will be immediately taken out of 6.8. the book and a last sale will be Normally, the Trigger process will disseminated. A ticket will be printed involve the execution of small orders, 2. Statutory Basis on the book printer notifying the book such as in the above example. If in the The proposed rule change is above example, the order in the book is consistent with and furthers the 4 It is expected that the implementation of Trigger 100 contracts instead of 10 contracts, objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,6 will also eliminate the vast majority of orders in that it is designed to remove ‘‘kicked-out’’ of RAES in the situation where firms 5 If the DPM determines that the trade is not valid, seeking out pricing anomalies detect the skewed such as if the trade was based on an erroneous print impediments to a free and open market quote and submit a RAES eligible order(s) to trade in the underlying, the order will be re-booked and at the book price. the last sale will be canceled. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
VerDate 11
and to protect investors and the public For the Commission, by the Division of (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s interest. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Statement of the Purpose of, and authority.7 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Margaret H. McFarland, Change Statement on Burden on Competition Deputy Secretary. GSCC introduced its auction The CBOE does not believe that the [FR Doc. 01–11336 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] takedown service in 1994.3 The service proposed rule change will impose any BILLING CODE 8010–01–M enables GSCC to accept data on a burden on competition. locked-in basis with respect to proprietary purchases of Treasury notes, C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION bills, and bonds made at auction by Statement on Comments on the members of GSCC’s netting system; to Proposed Rule Change Received From [Release No. 34–44226; File No. SR–GSCC– net the purchases with when-issued Members, Participants or Others 2001–02] trades of such members in these No written comments were solicited securities; and to deliver the purchased Self-Regulatory Organizations; The securities through GSCC’s settlement or received with respect to the proposed Government Securities Clearing rule change. mechanism. In its approval of GSCC’s Corporation; Notice of Filing and rule filing, the Commission noted, ‘‘By III. Date of Effectiveness of the Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed including auction securities in GSCC’s Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Rule Change Relating to the Inclusion netting system, the level of potential Commission Action of Netting-Eligible Federal Home Loan netting is increased and the number of Mortgage Corporation Securities in required movements of securities are Within 35 days of the date of Auction Takedown Service reduced. Netting of auction securities publication of this notice in the Federal April 26, 2001. also may have the effect of increasing a Register or within such longer period (i) Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the member’s liquidity. Previously, a GSCC as the Commission may designate up to Securities Exchange Act of 1934 member with a short position would 90 days of such date if it finds such (‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on have its required margin payments longer period to be appropriate and February 5, 2001, the Government calculated based on its short position, publishes its reasons for so finding or Securities Clearing Corporation even if it had an offsetting long position (ii) as to which the self-regulatory (‘‘GSCC’’) filed with the Securities and in auction purchases. Once the organization consents, the Commission Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) positions are netted, the member’s will: and on March 12, 2001, amended the margin payments will be calculated (A) By order approve such proposed proposed rule change as described in based on the position after taking into rule change, or Items I, II, and III below, which items account the auction purchases, perhaps creating a lower margin payment. the (B) institute proceedings to determine have been prepared primarily by GSCC. The Commission is publishing this additional liquidity may assist in the whether the proposed rule change prompt and accurate clearance and should be disapproved. notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested settlement of securities transactions. In IV. Solicitation of Comments parties. this manner, the proposal removes impediments to the national system for Interested persons are invited to I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the prompt and accurate clearance and submit written data, views and Statement of the Terms of Substance of settlement of securities transactions, arguments concerning the foregoing, the Proposed Rule Change and fosters cooperation and including whether the proposal is The proposed rule change would coordination with persons engaged in consistent with the Act. Persons making allow GSCC to expand its auction clearance and settlement of securities 4 written submissions should file six takedown service to include netting- transactions.’’ The auction takedown copies thereof with the Secretary, eligible Federal Home Loan Mortgage service also reduces the counterparty Securities and Exchange Commission, Corporation (‘‘Freedie Mac’’) securities. risk to the Department of the Treasury 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC and makes the information that GSCC 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s maintains on the net settlement position all subsequent amendments, all written Statement of the Purpose of, and of its members more complete for risk statements with respect to the proposed Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule management purposes. rule change that are filed with the Change GSCC has recently been approached Commission, and all written In its filing with the Commission, by Freddie Mac to extend GSCC’s communications relating to the GSCC included statements concerning comparison and netting services to proposed rule change between the the purpose of and basis for the include netting-eligible Freddie Mac Commission and any person, other than proposed rule change and discussed any securities purchased at auction those that may be withheld from the comments it received on the proposed commencing in February 2001. Agency public in accordance with the rule change. The text of these statements securities are steadily constituting an provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be may be examined at the places specified increasing portion of GSCC’s processing 5 available for inspection and copying in in Item IV below. GSCC has prepared activity. Including Freddie Mac the Commission’s Public Reference summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), 3 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33984 (May Room. Copies of such filing will also be and (C) below, of the most significant 2 2, 1994), 59 FR 24491 (order authorizing GSCC to available for inspection and copying at aspects of these statements. include in its comparison and netting services U.S. the principal office of CBOE. All Treasury securities purchases at auction). submissions should refer to File No. 7 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). 4 Id. 1 5 CBOE–00–22 and should be submitted 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). In 2000, GSCC processed 88 percent more 2 The Commission has modified the text of the agency security transactions than in 1999, and, in by May 29, 2001. summaries prepared by GSCC. 2000, the par value of agency security transactions
VerDate 11
securities in GSCC’s auction takedown Freddie Mac. GSCC has also added the purposes of the Securities Exchange Act service would provide GSCC and its right to delete or modify trade data with of 1934. members that trade these securities with respect to when-issued trades if any IV. Solicitation of Comments all the benefits described above. event occurs that gives rise to the In order to meet the February obligation to substitute securities under Interested persons are invited to deadline, it is necessary for GSCC to guidelines published by The Bond submit written data, views, and apply its current auction takedown Market Association. arguments concerning the foregoing, procedures without any material The Department of the Treasury is not including whether the proposed rule alteration to the Freddie Mac auctions. a member of GSCC and is therefore not change is consistent with the Act. Only minor changes to GSCC’s rules are required to make any clearing fund Persons making written submissions necessary. Such changes include the deposits or funds settlement payments should file six copies thereof with the following: to GSCC. Since Freddie Mac is a GSCC Secretary, Securities and Exchange The Department of the Treasury netting member and would otherwise be Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., utilizes the Federal Reserve Banks, its responsible for these deposits and Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of fiscal agents, to furnish details of its payments, GSCC has exempted Freddie the submission, all subsequent auction awards to GSCC. GSCC Mac from these requirements but only amendments, all written statements therefore designated both the Treasury in connection with its auction with respect to the proposed rule Department and the Federal Reserve deliveries. change that are filed with the Commission, and all written Banks as locked-in trade sources when The proposed rule change is it instituted the auction takedown communications relating to the consistent with the requirements of proposed rule change between the service. GSCC will now add Freddie Section 17A of the Act and the rules and Mac as a locked-in trade source. The Commission and any person, other than regulations thereunder because it will those that may be withheld from the Commission has already given GSCC enhance GSCC’s auction takedown permission to designate locked-in trade public in accordance with the service by making it more responsive to provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be sources on an as-needed basis. It should the needs of GSCC’s members. be noted that Freddie Mac will furnish available for inspection and copying in details of its auction awards directly to (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Commission’s Public Reference GSCC without the involvement of its Statement on Burden on Competition Section, 450 Fifth Street, NW., fiscal agent, the Federal Reserve Bank of Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such GSCC does not believe that the filing also will be available for New York. proposed rule change will have an Various definitions will be expanded inspection and copying at the principal impact or impose a burden on to include Freddie Mac and its office of GSCC. All submissions should competition. securities in the rules referencing the refer to File No. SR–GSCC–2001–02 and auction takedown service. (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s should be submitted by May 29, 2001. Freddie Mac has indicated that, Statement on Comments on the For the Commission by the Division of unlike the Department of the Treasury, Proposed Rule Change Received From Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated it desires that awards made to non- Members, Participants or Others authority. netting members also be handled by Margaret H. McFarland, Written comments relating to the GSCC to the extent possible. GSCC thus Deputy Secretary. will make changes to its existing rules, proposed rule change have not yet been solicited or received. Members will be [FR Doc. 01–11338 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] which already allow for secondary BILLING CODE 8010–01–M market trades executed by non-members notified of the rule change filing and to be submitted by members for the net, comments will be solicited by an Important Notice. GSCC will notify the to specify that it will process auction SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE purchases made by its netting members Commission of any written comments COMMISSION for their customers as well as for their received by GSCC. [Release No. 34–44234; File No. SR–PCX– proprietary accounts. The netting III. Date of Effectiveness of the 00–03] members will remain liable to GSCC as Proposed Rule Change and Timing for principals with respect to all auction Commission Action Self-Regulatory Organizations Notice purchase awarded to them whether the of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by The foregoing rule change has become purchase is for their own accounts or for the Pacific Exchange, Inc. effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3) of customers. Implementing a One-Year Pilot the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(4) thereunder, Unlike the Treasury Department, Program Relating to Its Automatic because the proposed rule is effecting a Freddie Mac does not require the Executive System clearing banks to effectively guarantee change in an existing service that does payment in advance for any newly not adversely affect the safeguarding of April 30, 2001. issued securities. thus, there will be no securities or funds in the custody or Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the need for the execution of autocharge control of the clearing agency and does Securities Exchange Act of 1934 agreements by the clearing banks. not significantly affect the respective (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 Freddie Mac retains the right to rights or obligations of the clearing notice is hereby given that on February cancel auctions. GSCC has made it clear agency or person using the service. At 15, 2000, the Pacific Exchange, Inc. in its rules what has always been any time within 60 days of the filing of (‘‘PCX’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the implicit for an issuer of auction awards such proposed rule change, the Securities and Exchange Commission that GSCC will have no obligation with Commission may summarily abrogate (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) the proposed respect to any when-issued trades if such rule change if it appears to the rule change as described in Items I, II securities are not ultimately issued by Commission that such action is and III below, which Items have been necessary or appropriate in the public increased 131 percent over the par value of these interest, for the protection of investors, 1 15 U.S.C. 78S(b)(1). transactions in 1999. or otherwise in furtherance of the 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
VerDate 11
prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange’s Options Limit Order Book 3 March 30 calls); (3) enter either the buy Commission is publishing this notice to either electronically (via POETS 4) or key or the sell key; (4) enter either the solicit comments on the proposed rule manually, by an options floor broker. At put key or the call key; (5) type in the change from interested persons. this time, only limit orders of ‘‘public number of contracts to be purchased or customers’’ are eligible to be placed in sold; (6) enter the floor member’s I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Limit Order Book.5 Orders not acronym (e.g., MO1) and; (7) press the Statement of the Terms of Substance of eligible to be placed in the Limit Order ‘‘enter’’ key to execute at the limit price the Proposed Rule Change Book must be manually represented by or, alternatively, to improve the limit The Exchange proposes to amend its a floor broker at the trading post. price, enter the better price (e.g., 47⁄8) rules to allow automatic executions of Currently, orders in the Limit Order and press the ‘‘enter’’ key. orders in its Limit Order Book (‘‘Limit Book can be executed in two ways. The current manual process for Order Book’’ or ‘‘Book’’) when those First, they can be executed executing orders in the Book is used orders become marketable. Below is the electronically against incoming market when an order in the Book becomes text of the proposed rule change. or limit orders that a member firm has marketable and a trade occurs.10 For Proposed new language is italicized. entered through POETS. For example, if example, assume that the PCX market is * * * * * a customer order to buy 20 option 5 bid, 51⁄8 asked, with 20 contracts in contracts at $5 is being represented in the Book to buy at 5. Next, assume that ¶5231 Automatic Execution System the Book, an incoming market order to the underlying stock ticks down 1⁄8 of a Rule 6.87(a)–(k)—No change. sell 20 contracts (or limit order to sell point, and the new market in the option (1) Auto-Ex Book Function 20 contracts at $5) entered electronically becomes 47⁄8 bid, 5 asked. As long as the (A) The Auto-Ex Book function of will execute against that order in the order to buy at 5 remains in the Book, POETS will permit orders in the Limit Book.6 the market will be locked at 5 bid, 5 Order Book to be executed via the Auto- Second, orders in the Book can be asked.11 To unlock the market, the order Ex system when those orders become executed manually. To execute an order in the Book, which is now marketable, marketable, subject to the following in the Book manually, a floor member 7 must be traded—but to do so will procedures: must vocalize a bid or offer for the require a member of the trading crowd (i) When one or more orders in the option contracts being represented in to obtain the OBO’s attention, vocalize Limit Order Book become marketable, the Book. This requires that the floor an offer for some or all of the contracts as indicated by a locked or crossed member gain the attention of the Order available at 5, and wait for the OBO to market being displayed on the trading Book Official (‘‘OBO’’ 8) and make an type in the information on the trade. floor, the LMM may direct the OBO to appropriate vocalization, e.g., ‘‘sell 20 The Exchange believes that the initiate the Auto-Ex Book function, XYZ calls to the Book at $5.’’ 9 To current manual process for executing which will cause marketable orders in consummate the trade, the OBO must orders in the Book is inefficient. During the Limit Order Book to be perform the following actions: (1) call times of heavy trading, it can be difficult automatically executed against the up the appropriate page for that for the OBO to type in specific trade accounts of market makers who are particular option on the class display; details when that OBO may be involved participating on the Auto-Ex system at (2) highlight the appropriate series (e.g., in trades in other option series or other the time. option issues. The inefficiencies of the (B) The Auto-Ex Book function is 3 The rules applicable to the Limit Order Book are current process have also become subject to a one-year pilot program set forth in PCX Rules 6.51–6.58. exacerbated due to rapid swings in which is set to expire [insert date one 4 Pacific Options Exchange Trading System. See prices that have been occurring recently Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28633 (January in the marketplace, particularly in year from date of SEC approval]. 18, 2990), 55 FR 2466 (January 24, 1990). * * * * * 5 See PCX Rule 6.87. options overlying so-called ‘‘internet 6 If there were no orders in the Book to buy at $5, stocks.’’ II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s and a bid of $5 was being disseminated by the PCX, Accordingly, the Exchange is Statement of the Purpose of, and then an incoming market order to sell (or a limit proposing to effect a system change that Statutory basis for, the Proposed Rule order to sell at $5) would be automatically executed will cause orders in the Book to be Change by the Auto-Ex feature of POETS, with PCX market makers as the contra side to the trade. See note 14, executed more efficiently when they In its filing with the Commission, the infra. become marketable. Specifically, Exchange included statements 7 Floor members include market makers and floor concerning the purpose of and basis for brokers. Only members and Exchange employees 10 A limit order to buy is marketable when the who have been approved to perform a floor function order’s limit price is equal to or greater than the the proposed rule change and discussed may consummate transactions on the trading floor. current offering price and a limit order to sell is any comments its received on the See PCX Rule 6.2, Commentary .01. marketable when the order’s limit price is equal to proposed rule change. The text of these 8 See generally PCX Rules 6.51–6.58 (rules or less than the current bid price. At the PCX, when statements may be examined at the relating to Order Book Officials (‘‘OBOs’’)). The the market on the screen on the trading floor is Exchange notes that currently, all OBOs are locked or crossed, the prices in the affected series places specified in Item IV below. The employed by the PCX. However, the Commission are displayed in the purple, which alerts the Exchange has prepared summaries, set recently approved an Exchange proposal to permit members on the floor that there are buyers and forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of LMMs to use their own employees to operate the sellers who are ready and willing to trade. the most significant aspects of such Book, which would include performing the 11 A similar result would occur if a market maker function of the OBO. See Securities Exchange Act in the trading crowd offered to sell options at 5, or statements. Release No. 41595 (July 2, 1999), 64 FR 38064 (July a floor broker in the crowd representing an order A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 14, 1999) (order approving SR–PCX–98–02). made an offer to sell at 5, while concurrently there Therefore, the term ‘‘OBO’’ as used in this proposal was an existing bid in the Book at the same price, Statement of the Purpose of, and includes OBOs currently employed by the Exchange i.e., in theory, there would be a locked market. In Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule and any employees of LMMs who are performing practice, however, the market maker or floor broker Change the function of the OBO. willing to sell at 5 would vocalize an acceptance of 9 Floor members must trade against orders in the the bid in the Book to trade at 5. If the size of the 1. Purpose Book ahead of orders then being manually market maker’s or floor broker’s offer was greater represented in the trading crowd at the same price, than the size of the order in the Book, the offer at At the PCX, limit orders of public because orders in the Book have priority over orders 5 would continue in effect until it was satisfied or customers may be placed in the in the trading crowd. See PCX Rule 6.75(a)–(b). withdrawn.
VerDate 11
marketable orders in the Book will be function on a one-year pilot program C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s executed via the Auto-Ex system when basis. This will allow the Exchange to Statement on Comments on the the Lead Market Maker (‘‘LMM’’) directs study the operation of the system and to Proposed Rule Change Received From the OBO to operate the Auto-Ex Book report back to the Commission at least Members, Participants, or Others Function. For example, if there are 30 sixty days prior to seeking permanent contracts in the Book to buy at $5 and approval of the system change. Written comments on the proposed the trading crowd’s offer to sell changes The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change were neither solicited nor to a price of $5,12 rather than locking the Auto-Ex Book feature will operate in a received. market (5 bid, 5 asked), the system will, manner that is similar to the Exchange’s III. Date of Effectiveness of the upon the instruction of the LMM, Automated Opening Rotation (‘‘AOR’’) Proposed Rule Change and Timing for execute the orders in the Book via the system, which automates the execution Commission Action Auto-Ex System.13 The 30 contracts to of orders in the Book at the opening of buy in the Book at $5 will then be trading.14 Specifically, the AOR system Within 35 days of the date of executed against the accounts of market permits the OBO to establish a single publication of this notice in the Federal makers who are logged on to Auto-Ex at price opening for executing market and Register or within such longer period (i) that time. marketable limit orders in the POETS as the Commission may designate up to The function will also permit orders system. It executes any imbalance of 90 days of such date if it finds such in the Book at various prices to be orders that existed at the opening at a executed almost simultaneously. For longer period to be appropriate and single price, against the accounts of publishes its reasons for so finding or example, assume that there are multiple market makers who are participating on orders in the Book, including orders to (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, the Auto-Ex System at the time. The the Commission will: buy 50 contracts at $5, 50 contracts to Exchange believes that approval of the 3 buy at 4 ⁄4 and 50 contracts to buy at Auto-Ex Book proposal, like the (A) by order approve such proposed 1 4 ⁄2. If the underlying stock price moves Commission’s approval of the AOR rule change, or significantly, resulting in the PCX system, will facilitate execution of (B) institute proceedings to determine offering price of the overlying option orders in POETS, eliminate problems whether the proposed rule change price moving from 51⁄4 down to 4;1⁄2, the and inefficiencies associated with should be disapproved. LMM may direct the OBO to initiate the manual trading, eliminate backlogs of Auto-Ex Book feature so that all of the unexecuted orders, promote fair IV. Solicitation of Comments buy orders in the Book referred to above participation in trading against orders in Interested persons are invited to will be automatically executed at their the Book by all participants, and in submit written data, views and limit prices. This result simply speeds general, improve market efficiency on arguments concerning the foregoing, up the process for what currently may the PCX. occur manually, with individual including whether the proposal is In conclusion, the Exchange believes members of the trading crowd selling that use of the proposed feature will consistent with the Act. Persons making options against the buy orders in the help to assure that customers’ orders in written submissions should file six book at their limit prices. Alternatively, the Book are filled more promptly. It copies thereof with the Secretary, however, the LMM or members of the will also help to prevent delays in Securities and Exchange Commission, trading crowd may determine to provide trading and prompt resolution of 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. price improvement to the customer problems in the crowd, because OBO’s 20549–0609. Copies of the submission, orders in the book, and may direct that will not have to take as much time to all subsequent amendments, all written all of those buy orders in the example respond to requests to execute statements with respect to the proposed (including those with limit prices of $5, rule change that are filed with the 3 1 1 marketable orders in the Book. 4 ⁄4 and 4 ⁄2) be filled at 4 ⁄2. In this Commission, and all written instance, of course, the Auto-Ex Book 2. Basis communications relating to the feature would not be used. proposed rule change between the The Exchange is proposing to The Exchange believes that this Commission and any person, other than implement the use of the Auto-Ex Book proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,15 in general, and furthers the those that may be withheld from the 16 12 As noted above, this offer may be generated objectives of Section 6(b)(5) in public in accordance with the automatically by Auto-Quote, as a result of a change particular, in that it is designed to provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be in the market in the underlying stock, or it may be facilitate transactions in securities, available for inspection and copying in generated manually by a member of the crowd promote just and equitable principles of the Commission’s Public Reference vocalizing an offer, which is entered into POETS by the Market Quote Terminal Operator and trade, and to protect investors and the Room. Copies of such filing will also be subsequently disseminated. public interest. available for inspection and copying at 13 The Auto-Ex feature of POETS permit eligible B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the principal office of the PCX. All market or marketable limit orders sent from member submissions should refer to File No. firms to be executed automatically at the displayed Statement on Burden on Competition bid or offering price. Participating market makers SR–PCX–00–03 and should be are designated as the contra side to each Auto-Ex The Exchange does not believe that submitted by [May 29, 2001.] order. Participating market makers are assigned by the proposed rule change will impose Auto-Ex on a rotating basis, with the first market any burden on competition that is not For the Commission, by the Division of maker selected at random from the list of signed- necessary or appropriate in furtherance Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated on market makers. Auto-Ex preserves book priority authority.17 in all options. See PCX Rule 6.87; see also of the purposes of the Act. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 41823 Margaret H. McFarland, (September 1, 1999), 64 FR 49265 (September 10, 14 Deputy Secretary. 1999) (order approving PXC proposal to increase See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43187 the size of orders that may be automatically (August 21, 2000), 65 FR 54264 (August 29, 2000) [FR Doc. 01–11337 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] (order approving one year extension of pilot executed via Auto-Ex). The Auto-Ex system is also BILLING CODE 8010–01–M used to execute any imbalance of orders that there program). may be at the opening via the Automated Opening 15 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). Rotation System. See Note 14, infra. 16 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 17 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF STATE Department Desk Officer, Office of SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Information and Regulatory Affairs, the United States Trade Representative Bureau of Oceans and International Office of Management and Budget (‘‘USTR’’) has submitted the annual Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OMB), Washington, DC 20530, (202) report on discrimination in foreign [Public Notice 3656] 395–3897. government procurement, published Dated: April 10, 2001. herein, to the Committees on Finance 30-Day Notice of Information David A. Balton, and on Governmental Affairs of the United States Senate and the Collection; Form DS–2031, Shrimp Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Exporter’s/Importer’s Declaration; Fisheries and Oceans, Department of State. Committees on Ways and Means and on Government Reform and Oversight of OMB #1405–0095 [FR Doc. 01–11416 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] the United States House of ACTION: Notice. BILLING CODE 4710–09–U Representatives, pursuant to Executive Order No. 13116 of March 31, 1999. SUMMARY: The Department of State has DATES: The report was submitted on submitted the following information DEPARTMENT OF STATE April 30, 2001. collection request to the Office of [Public Notice 3655] Management and Budget (OMB) for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: approval in accordance with the Culturally Significant Objects Imported Me´lida Hodgson, Associate General Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. for Exhibition Determinations: Counsel, Office of the US Trade Comments should be submitted to OMB ‘‘Rediscovering Caesarea Philippi, the Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W., within 30 days of the publication of this Ancient City of Pan or The Banias’’ Washington, DC 20508, 202–395–3582. notice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of The following summarizes the AGENCY: Department of State. the USTR report is as follows: information collection proposal ACTION: Notice; correction. Annual Report on Discrimination in Foreign submitted to OMB: Government Procurement SUMMARY: On December 26, 2000, Notice Type of Request: Collection approval. April 30, 2001. Originating Office: OES/OMC. was published on page 81555 of the Title of Information Collection: Federal Register (Volume 65, Number I. Introduction Shrimp Importer’s/Exporter’s 248) by the Department of State A longstanding objective of U.S. trade Declaration. pursuant to Pub. L. 89–259 relating to policy has been to open opportunities for Frequency: 10,000. the exhibit ‘‘Rediscovering Caesarea U.S. suppliers to compete on a level playing Form Number: DS–2031. Philippi, the Ancient City of Pan or The field for foreign government contracts. The Banias.’’ The referenced Notice is first major breakthrough in this area was the Respondents: Shrimp exporters and 1979 conclusion of the Government importers. corrected as follows: In the SUMMARY after ‘‘May 5, 2001,’’ add the following Procurement Agreement (GPA), followed by Estimated Number of Respondents: the ten-fold expansion of that Agreement 3,000. additional venue: ‘‘and at the Averett during the Uruguay Round negotiations that Average Hours Per Response: 10 College, Danville, Virginia, from on or led to the creation of the World Trade minutes. about August 15, 2001, to on or about Organization (WTO). The WTO estimates Total Estimated Burden: 1,667 hours. December 31, 2001, is in the national that, under the GPA, the United States and interest.’’ the 26 other GPA Parties provide their Comments suppliers with non-discriminatory access to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Public comments are being solicited government tendering procedures worth further information, including a list of more that $300 billion annually. In 1995, to permit the agency to: exhibit objects, contact Carol Epstein, Mexico agreed to provide comparable access • Evaluate whether the proposed Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal to its government procurement markets collection of information is necessary Adviser, U.S. Department of State under the North American Free Trade for the proper performance of the (telephone: 202/619–6981). The address Agreement (NAFTA). functions of the agency, including is U.S. Department of State, SA–44; 301 The Administration continues to push for whether the information will have the reciprocal removal of discriminatory 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, government procurement practices in a wide practical utility. DC 20547–0001. • Evaluate the accuracy of the range of multilateral, regional and bilateral Dated: April 30, 2001. fora. As a result of our efforts, the 34 agency’s estimate of the burden of the countries of North, South and Central Helena Kane Finn, collection, including the validity of the America that are participating in negotiations methodology and assumptions used. Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational to create a Free Trade Area of the Americas • Enhance the quality, utility, and and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. (FTAA) have agreed that the FTAA will clarity of the information to be [FR Doc. 01–11415 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] provide for openness and transparency of collected. BILLING CODE 4710–08–U government procurement processes and non- • Minimize the reporting burden on discrimination in tendering procedures those who are to respond, including within a scope to be negotiated. The Administration is also urging the early through the use of automated collection OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES conclusion of an Agreement on Transparency techniques or other forms of technology. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE in Government Procurement that would FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: apply to all 140 Members of the WTO. Copies of the proposed information Annual Report on Discrimination in Within the Asia-Pacific Economic collection and supporting documents Foreign Government Procurement Cooperation (APEC) forum, the United States may be obtained from David Hogan, Pursuant to Executive Order 13116 and other economies in the region are Office of Marine Conservation, rm. (‘‘Title VII’’) pushing for concrete steps that will build on the progress APEC has made in developing 5806, U.S. Department of State, AGENCY: Office of the United States non-binding principles on government Washington, DC 20520, ph 202–647– Trade Representative. procurement. 2335. Public comments and questions ACTION: Notice. The ‘‘Title VII’’ process, initially should be directed to the State established under Title VII of the Omnibus
VerDate 11
Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 determines that the rights of the United practices of concern which the (‘‘Title VII’’), as amended, provides a vehicle States under an international procurement Administration is pursuing in bilateral and for identifying priorities for international agreement are being violated or that a multilateral fora, or that require continued negotiations that may address discriminatory significant pattern or practice of monitoring and study. foreign government procurement practices discrimination exists, the Executive Order and for monitoring and enforcing existing permits USTR, inter alia, to initiate formal V. Other Foreign Government Procurement international agreements. After the Title VII dispute settlement proceedings under Practices of Concern to the United States legislation expired in 1996, the process was relevant international agreements or Japan—Public Works re-instituted by Executive Order 13116 on withdraw any waivers of U.S. purchasing March 31, 1999. requirements that have been granted to the U.S. companies are well-known around the discriminating foreign country. world for their excellence in design/ II. Summary International dispute settlement consulting and construction. Yet the U.S. The Executive Order mandates that the procedures are available to address share of Japan’s $300 billion public works United States Trade Representative (‘‘USTR’’) discriminatory government procurement market was only $50 million in 1999 (the submit a report to the Congressional practices covered by the WTO Government most recent year for which data are committees of jurisdiction within 30 days of Procurement Agreement (GPA) and the North available). the submission of the National Trade American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The United States has repeatedly expressed Estimate Report for the years 1999, 2000, and Under authority provided in the Trade concern to Japan that Japanese procuring 2001, and publish these reports in the Agreements Act of 1979, as amended, the entities continue to engage in discriminatory Federal Register. This is the third of the United States waives domestic purchasing procurement practices that impede American three annual reports required by the requirements for countries that are Parties to design/consulting and construction Executive Order. the GPA and the NAFTA, for certain companies from participating in Japan’s USTR’s 1992 identification of the European Caribbean Basin Initiative countries; and for public works sector. These practices include: Union (‘‘EU’’) for discriminatory countries included on the United Nations’ failure to address rampant bid-rigging; procurement practices applied by list of ‘‘least developed countries.’’ unreasonable restrictions on the formation of government-owned telecommunications joint ventures, including the three-company entities in certain member states, as well as IV. Identification of Specific Discriminatory joint venture rule; the use of discriminatory the resulting sanctions, remains outstanding. Foreign Procurement Practices qualification and evaluation criteria; and the There are no other outstanding Title VII EU—Telecommunications: In 1992, USTR structuring of individual procurements so identifications. identified EU telecommunications entities they fall below thresholds established in As in previous years, however, this report that have ‘‘special and exclusive rights’’ in international agreements. describes a number of foreign procurement certain member state markets as engaging in The United States is seriously practices that are of significant concern to discriminatory procurement practices. Those disappointed by the lack of progress in U.S. exporters and that the United States is entities were required to apply addressing these practices, and also is monitoring closely. Those practices, discriminatory practices under the 1990 EU concerned that Japan has repeatedly refused discussed in detail below, are: ‘‘Utilities Directive.’’ After bilateral the U.S.’s request to continue regular • Japan: Various discriminatory practices negotiations did not resolve this issue, the bilateral consultations since the consultative relating to procurement for public works. United States imposed sanctions in May mechanism set forth in the 1994 U.S.-Japan • Taiwan: Certain discriminatory practices 1993. Those sanctions remain in place today. Public Works Agreement expired last year. and procedural barriers. In 1999, the European Commission The United States will continue to monitor • Canada: Provincial governments’ informed the United States that it considered Japan’s public works sector and urges Japan discriminatory procurement practices. telecommunications operators in most EU to take immediate, concrete steps to address • Germany: Exclusion of certain suppliers member states to be no longer bound by the these concerns, strengthen the integrity of its affected by discriminatory ‘‘sect filters.’’ procurement requirements in the Utilities system for procurement of public works, and The United States is working actively in a Directive, and requested that the United eliminate discriminatory practices which range of bilateral and multilateral fora to States remove the sanctions imposed in 1993. prevent U.S. suppliers and workers from resolve these issues. As a result of recent The Administration has asked the participating in this market. bilateral consultations with Germany, this Commission for clarification of the legal Taiwan—Discriminatory Practices and report announces that our concerns relating requirements currently in effect in the EU Procedural Barriers: Taiwan is in the process to the use of ‘‘sect filters’’ appear to have and what further steps the Commission is of acceding to the World Trade Organization been resolved. taking to revise Utilities Directive (WTO), and has committed to join the WTO requirements. Once agencies have evaluated Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) III. Provisions of the Executive Order the information received from the as soon as it enters the WTO. Taiwan’s Under Executive Order 13116, USTR is Commission, the Administration will review accession to the GPA will allow U.S. required to submit to the Congress each year the overall market access conditions in the exporters to compete on a level playing field a report identifying foreign countries that: EU telecommunications market, with a view for major projects worth billions of dollars, (1) have failed to comply with their toward deciding whether the 1993 sanctions including in the power generation, transport, obligations under the WTO Agreement on are still warranted. environmental, and other infrastructure Government Procurement (‘‘GPA’’), Chapter In developing this report, USTR has given sectors. 10 of the North American Free Trade careful consideration to a wide range of The 2000 Title VII report noted a number Agreement, or other agreements relating to views and information, including the of U.S. concerns with existing discriminatory government procurement to which that recommendations of other executive agencies practices and other barriers to Taiwan’s country and the United States are parties; or and U.S. embassies and consulates overseas, government procurement market. As a result (2) maintain, in government procurement, private sector responses to USTR’s request of ongoing bilateral consultations intended to a significant pattern or practice of for comments for this year’s Title VII report clarify the terms of Taiwan’s GPA accession discrimination against U.S. products or (published in the Federal Register on and address other bilateral concerns, services which results in identifiable harm to February 28, 2001), and information on significant progress has been made on these U.S. businesses, when those countries’ foreign government procurement practices issues. However, the United States continues products or services are acquired in reported in the 2001 National Trade to have serious concerns relating to the significant amounts by the U.S. Government. Estimates Report. following: If any country is identified under one or On the basis of this information, and after • restrictions on the ability of suppliers to both of these criteria, the Executive Order consultation with other agencies, USTR has joint tender, based on market considerations; requires USTR to initiate an investigation determined that no practices meet the criteria • the need for appropriate and predictable under section 302 of the Trade Act of 1974. for Title VII identification this year. As in contract provisions relating to contingent If the matter is not resolved within 90 days previous years, however, there remain a liabilities, consistent with international of the submission of the report and USTR number of foreign government procurement norms.
VerDate 11
The Administration continues to urge the OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES And open trade reinforces the habit of liberty Taiwan authorities to take concrete steps to TRADE REPRESENTATIVE that sustains democracy over the long haul.’’ bring these practices into conformity with Trade policy is the bridge between the GPA requirements and ensure that they do Report on Trade Expansion Priorities President’s international and domestic not constitute an unnecessary barrier to fair Pursuant to Executive Order 13116 agendas. As the former governor of a major border state, President Bush has seen that the and open competition in Taiwan’s (‘‘Super 301’’) free exchange of goods and services sparks government procurement market. economic growth, opportunity, dynamism, Canada—Provincial Government AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. fresh ideas, and democratic values. Restrictions: A number of Canadian To fulfill the President’s vision, the Office provinces apply price preferences and other ACTION: Notice. of the U.S. Trade Representative sets forth significant restrictions that discriminate the following two trade expansion priorities SUMMARY: The United States Trade against U.S. suppliers interested in bidding for 2001: (1) Reestablish a bipartisan Representative (USTR) is providing on provincial government procurement consensus on free trade and (2) move on notice that it submitted the report on contracts. To date, the Administration has multiple fronts to expand trade. U.S. trade expansion priorities identified particular concerns with respect to published herein to the Committee on A. Reestablishing a Bipartisan Consensus on procurement restrictions applied by the Free Trade provinces of Ontario, Quebec and British Finance of the United States Senate and Committee on Ways and Means of the The United States faces key decisions Colombia. The Administration is concerned about the future course of our trade policy. that the application of such restrictions may United States House of Representatives pursuant to the provisions (commonly Just as the World War II generation forged a result in a significant imbalance of bilateral bipartisan consensus that sustained market access opportunities in government referred to as ‘‘Super 301’’) set forth in successful trade expansion throughout the procurement. Canada is the only GPA Party Executive Order No. 13116 of March 31, Cold War, we must build a new consensus that has yet to open its sub-Federal 1999. to promote open markets for trade in the procurement markets. Working closely with DATES: The report was submitted on decades to come. interested U.S. states, the Administration April 30, 2001. There have been some encouraging developments in the area of open trade in the continues to urge Canada to bring provincial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: past year. Congress enhanced the Caribbean governments and other government-owned Demetrios Marantis, Associate General Basin Initiative, passed the African Growth entities within the scope of NAFTA and GPA Counsel, Office of the U.S. Trade and Opportunity Act, and enacted legislation procurement rules. Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., to grant permanent normal trading relations Germany—‘‘Sect Filters’’: In September Washington, DC 20508, 202–395–9626. to China. More recently, the United States 1998, the German Ministry of Economics SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of and the European Union (EU) have reached promulgated a ‘‘protection clause’’ the USTR report is as follows. an agreement to resolve the long-standing (commonly referred to as a ‘‘sect filter’’) dispute over bananas, and the United States meant to be incorporated into government Identification of Trade Expansion Priorities and Chile have pledged to complete contracts for certain training and Pursuant to Executive Order 13116: April 30, negotiations on a free trade agreement by the 2001 consultation services. Among other elements, end of the year. On April 22, President Bush the clause would have prohibited firms from The Bush Administration has an ambitious and the leaders of 33 other nations in the bidding on German government contracts if trade agenda, reflecting the importance Western Hemisphere signed a declaration at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City they have employees that attend or President Bush assigns to trade. This is an opportune moment to reassert America’s pledging their support for completing the participate in Scientology seminars. leadership in setting trade policy and to negotiations on a Free Trade Area of the Following the promulgation of this build a post-Cold War world on the Americas (FTAA) no later than January 2005. ‘‘protection clause,’’ the United States cornerstones of freedom, security, democratic The FTAA will be the world’s largest free expressed concern in bilateral consultations values, open trade, and free markets. trade area, representing 800 million people. and in the 2000 Title VII report about the The Office of the United States Trade There has also been encouraging progress clause’s potentially discriminatory effects on Representative (USTR) submits this ‘‘Super recently on resolving a number of trade government procurement. In subsequent 301’’ report pursuant to Executive Order disputes through the World Trade consultations with German government and 13116 of March 31, 1999. This report sets Organization (WTO) and the North American industry representatives, the Administration forth U.S. trade expansion priorities for 2001. Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Greece has urged Germany to rescind the sect filter The Administration intends to expand trade moved to counter the piracy of U.S. films and requirements. on multiple fronts, through negotiation of television programs, Mexico has agreed to In response, the German government has new agreements and by ensuring that existing allow dry beans from the United States to be imported in a more timely and predictable revised its ‘‘protection clause’’ in a manner agreements are fully implemented by U.S. trading partners. At the same time, the manner, and India has lifted its restrictions that no longer prohibits firms from Administration intends to ensure that on U.S. agricultural, textile, and industrial competing for government contracts on the Americans are able to reap the benefits of products. basis of the affiliation of its management or market-opening agreements by resolving But there also have been setbacks. When employees with the Church of Scientology. problems that confront U.S. exporters. The the House of Representatives voted in 1998 This decision represents significant progress USTR prepared this report in close to deny the President trade negotiation in addressing U.S. concerns relating to the consultation with U.S. Government agencies authority, it marked the first time the use of ‘‘sect filters.’’ The Administration will on the basis of the 2001 Trade Policy Agenda, Congress had ever rejected granting this continue to monitor the implementation of the 2001 NTE Report, public comments authority. And the failure to launch the the revised policy to ensure that U.S. firms submitted to USTR, and information received global trade talks in Seattle in December 1999 and workers are not discriminated against in from U.S. Embassies abroad. handed a high-profile victory to the opponents of free trade, global competition, procurement by German Federal and sub- I. Trade Expansion Priorities for 2001 Federal governments. and economic opportunity. President Bush spoke at the recent Summit The history books recount the economic, A. Jane Bradley, of the Americas in Quebec City about the political, and indeed national dangers of a benefits of trade: ‘‘Free and open trade breakdown in America’s trade policy. For the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for creates new jobs and new income. It lifts the first 150 years of the United States, there Monitoring and Enforcement. lives of all our people, applying the power were contentious Congressional debates over [FR Doc. 01–11354 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] of markets to the needs of the poor. It spurs tariff bills, some even leading to movements BILLING CODE 3190–01–P the process of economic and legal reform. for Nullification and Secession. Then the
VerDate 11
disastrous experience of setting protectionist not an accident that after Mexico embraced these issues today, we can help shape the tariffs for over 20,000 individual items in the the opening of its economic system, as thinking about how to address them. Smoot-Hawley bill of 1930 led the Congress embodied in NAFTA, it was drawn to a Getting Back in the Trading Game four years later to try a different approach: a democratic opening as well. partnership with the Executive to negotiate Free trade reduces government barriers and To strengthen and speed America’s trade lower barriers to trade around the world. encourages vibrant private and civic societies and economic policy, we will need to Launched by strong and innovative leaders, governed by the rule of law. It opens societies reestablish the bipartisan Congressional- Franklin D. Roosevelt and Cordell Hull, this to people, to ideas, to debate, to competition, Executive negotiating partnership that has effort between the Congress and the and also to impartial transparent rules. That delivered so much. In President Bush’s Executive became a bipartisan partnership, freedom creates openings for the free press address at the Summit of the Americas, he and eventually produced prosperity, and for NGOs, not just for businesses and made clear that achieving U.S. Trade opportunity, and liberty beyond the greatest entrepreneurs. And it creates openings to the Promotion Authority was one of his top expectations of its supporters. outside world through the Internet, books, priorities. This authority, as he has pointed Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and a whole series of new networks. out, has been granted to each of the previous has put this success in historical perspective Third, expanded trade affects our nation’s five presidents. The Bush Administration is by pointing out that the growth in trade as security. The crises of the first 45 years of the committed to attaining U.S. Trade Promotion a share of the world economy over the past last century—the economic retrogression Authority before the end of the year, and will 50 years has finally managed to reverse the referred to by Chairman Greenspan—were be working with the Congress to build the losses from the calamities of the early 20th inextricably linked with hostile broadest possible support. century, and now approximates the degree of protectionism and national socialism. In the absence of this authority, other globalization around 1900. So today, just like Communism could not compete with countries have been moving forward with Americans at the turn of the last century, we democratic capitalism, because economic trade agreements while America has stalled. face critical decisions about the future course and political freedom creates energy, We are in danger of being left behind. There for our country, trade, and the world. competition, opportunity, and independent was a time when U.S. involvement in international trade negotiations was a The Benefits of Trade thinking. Take an example from today. Colombia is prerequisite for them to succeed. That is no There are three principal reasons why waging a battle to defend the rule of law longer true. Other countries are writing the further trade liberalization is important to the against those who finance their terror rules of the international trading system as American people. First, expanded trade— through complicity in drug trafficking. they negotiate without us. imports as well as exports—improves the President Pastrana has said that one way to The EU has free trade or customs well being of Americans. It leads to better counter this threat would be for Congress to agreements with 27 countries, and 20 of these jobs, with bigger paychecks, in more renew the Andean Trade Preferences Act agreements have been signed since 1990. The competitive businesses—as well as to more (ATPA), which expires in December. EU is in the process of negotiating 15 more. choices of goods and inputs, with lower Renewal, he says, would stimulate job Last year, the European Union and Mexico— prices, for hard-working families and hard- creation, strengthen the democratically the second-largest market for American driving entrepreneurs. elected government, and diminish the appeal exports—entered into a free trade agreement. Exports accounted for over one-quarter of of the drug trade. With a renewed and robust The EU is also negotiating free-trade U.S. economic growth over the last decade ATPA, the United States and Colombia can agreements with the Mercosur nations and and support an estimated 12 million jobs. In broaden our efforts on behalf of freedom— the countries of the Gulf Cooperation the American agricultural sector, one in three from aid to trade. Council. Japan is negotiating a free trade acres are planted for export purposes, and agreement with Singapore, and is exploring last year American farmers sold more than Building Public Support for Trade free trade agreements with Mexico, Korea, $50 billion worth of agricultural products in These benefits of open trade can only be and Chile. There are approximately 130 free foreign markets. Imports helped keep prices achieved if we build public support for trade trade agreements in force globally, but the down as jobs, compensation, and at home. To do so, the Administration must United States has only two agreements in productivity increased. enforce, vigorously and with dispatch, our force: one is with Canada and Mexico Votes for agreements like NAFTA and the trade laws against unfair practices. In the (NAFTA), and the other with Israel. Uruguay Round may not have been easy to world of global economics, justice delayed In the long run, our deadlock hurts cast. Yet those agreements contributed to the can become justice lost. American businesses, workers, and farmers. longest period of economic growth in U.S. For the United States to maintain an They will find themselves shut out of the history, with levels of full employment, and effective trade policy and an open many preferential trade and investment without inflationary pressures, beyond the international trading system, Americans must agreements negotiated by our trading forecasts of any economist. Conservative have confidence that trade is fair and works partners. To cite one example, while U.S. estimates of the higher income and lower for their benefit. That means ensuring that exports to Chile face an eight percent tariff, prices stemming from the Uruguay Round other countries live up to their obligations the Canada-Chile trade agreement will free and NAFTA indicate an annual benefit of under the trade agreements they sign. Canadian imports of this duty. As a result, between $1,260 and $2,040 for an average Change, particularly rapid adjustments, U.S. wheat farmers are losing markets in American family of four. can be very difficult—even frightening—for Chile to Canadian exports. To correct the The expanding global trade and the many hard-working people. We need to help disparity in tariffs, USTR is pursuing expanding economic growth in the United people adapt and benefit from change— negotiations with Chile on a free trade States are not coincidental; they are achieved whether prompted by trade, technology, e- agreement. in concert. One strengthens and reinforces commerce, new business models, or other We cannot afford to stand still—or be the other. Moreover, restrictions on trade causes. Therefore, a successful trade policy mired in partisan division—while other have victims: farmers, school teachers, over the long term should be accompanied by nations seize the mantle of leadership on factory and office workers, small business better schools, worker adjustment assistance, trade from the United States. This would be people, and many others who have to pay tax policies that enable people to keep and a huge missed opportunity, indeed an more for clothing or food or homes or save more of their paychecks, and reforms of historic mistake. equipment because of visible and invisible Social Security and Medicare so older taxes on trade. Americans have a safer retirement. B. Moving on Multiple Fronts To Expand Second, as President Bush has stated, free In order to build continued support for free Trade trade is about freedom: ‘‘Economic freedom trade, the United States, and all nations, will In the 21st century, the economic and creates habits of liberty. And habits of liberty need to be more adroit in aligning trade with political future of the United States will be create expectations of democracy.’’ During our values. That means responding to increasingly linked to those of our the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City, concerns that trade undermines hemispheric neighbors. U.S. trade and President Bush met with Mexico’s President environmental protection and labor investment with the hemisphere is projected Fox, the first president elected from the standards—while not permitting these issues to exceed that with Europe by the end of this opposition since the Mexican revolution. It is to be used for protectionist ends. By tackling decade. U.S. shipments to Latin America
VerDate 11
have increased by 137% in the past decade, Now that there is a fragile peace in the Administration will seek to prevent or reduce compared to a 96% increase for exports to Balkans, we must secure it by pointing problems facing U.S. exporters by working the rest of the world. people toward economic hope and regional with U.S. trading partners, including through As Latin America grows, the United States integration. Therefore, we would like to work technical assistance where appropriate, so benefits. In recent years, every one percent with the Congress to follow through on the that consultation and training will help head expansion in Latin America’s GDP was prior administration’s proposal to offer trade off problems before they arise. Likewise, associated with an additional $1.6 billion preferences to countries in Southeast Europe. together with the Departments of Agriculture, worth of U.S. exports to the region. In the As we move on multiple fronts to expand Commerce and State, and other agencies, months and years ahead, the Bush trade, we will continue to emphasize WTO USTR will continue to work bilaterally with Administration will be negotiating the FTAA. accessions. The accession process is an our trading partners to resolve disputes A free trade area linking the Americas will opportunity for reforming economies to quickly and expeditiously before these issues provide incentives and rewards for adopt trade liberalizing policies and practices become serious problems. governments pursuing difficult economic within the framework of WTO obligations. It To ensure the enforcement of WTO reforms. A hemispheric free trade agreement also provides a context for the United States agreements, the United States has been one would also send a valuable signal—a signal to expand market access opportunities for its of the world’s most frequent users of WTO of confidence—to potential investors that exports of goods and services and to address dispute settlement procedures. In enforcing Latin American and Caribbean nations have outstanding trade issues. WTO accessions are the WTO agreements, the United States has agreed to abide by common rules governing based on full implementation of WTO focused in particular on foreign practices that trade, to create a truly hemispheric obligations and the establishment of could pose serious problems to the marketplace, and that this mutual effort commercially meaningful market access for international trading system if they offers not just stability, but opportunity. Even other Members’ exports. This strengthens the proliferated in many markets. Therefore, as we negotiate the FTAA, we are open to international trading system. USTR aims not only at challenging existing pursuing other complementary opportunities These principles have formed the basis for barriers but also at preventing the future to foster free trade with our neighbors, for the completion of WTO accession adoption of similar barriers around the example, through bilateral free trade negotiations with a number of countries, world. negotiations, such as the current negotiations including Albania, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, with Chile. the Kyrgyz Republic, Jordan, and Oman. In A. Ensuring Compliance Of course, America’s trade and economic other ongoing negotiations with countries Efforts to promote compliance with trade interests extend far beyond this hemisphere. such as Russia, Ukraine, and Saudi Arabia, agreements have used three principal tools: At the core of the WTO’s agenda this year U.S. participation in the accession process (1) the WTO and NAFTA dispute settlement will be negotiations mandated by the will enhance the rule of law in trade and mechanisms; (2) the various WTO oversight Uruguay Round agreements to pursue further enhanced market access, while bodies; and (3) enforcement of U.S. trade law. agricultural reform and liberalization in demonstrating support for the reform agendas Vigorous enforcement enhances the ability of services. We also want to launch a new of these countries. the United States to reap the benefits of trade round of global trade negotiations in the The Administration will also continue agreements that USTR negotiates, ensures WTO, emphasizing a key role for agriculture. efforts to complete China’s accession to the that we can continue to open markets, and We will also seek to negotiate regional and WTO. Completing this process will provide builds confidence in the trading system. bilateral agreements to open markets around substantially greater market access for the world. There are opportunities in the 1. WTO and NAFTA Dispute Settlement industrial goods, services, and agricultural Results Asia Pacific and with APEC. We will start products. It will require China to comply with a free trade agreement with Singapore with specific rules on import surges, anti- WTO and NAFTA dispute settlement and will work with the Congress to pass the dumping and subsidies practices, while procedures have enabled the United States to basic trade agreement with Vietnam eliminating many of the conditions China resolve problems arising from the failure of negotiated by the Clinton Administration. We requires for the approval of imports and trading partners to implement their will urge Japan to deregulate, restructure and investment. We will also work to ensure that international obligations, and to resolve open its economy, which is long overdue. Taiwan’s accession to the WTO is approved disputes over interpretation of various Further reforms in the Middle East and at the same session of the WTO General provisions in the WTO or NAFTA Africa need our encouragement. We are Council. agreements. Our hope in filing cases is, of committed to working with the Congress to course, to secure U.S. benefits rather than to enact legislation for a free trade agreement The Opportunity Ahead engage in prolonged litigation. Therefore, with Jordan, and to implement the provisions The United States has an unparalleled whenever possible we have sought to reach of laws to help Africa and the Caribbean. opportunity to shape the international favorable settlements that address U.S. Providing technical assistance to African and trading order. But we have to get back into concerns without having to resort to panel Caribbean countries will be a key part of the this game and take the lead. We are certainly proceedings. We have been able to achieve implementation process. in a position to do so. The United States is this preferred result in 14 of the 32 cases As India reforms its economy and taps its prepared to pursue a number of bilateral and concluded so far, and have prevailed through great potential, we should explore ways to regional free trade agreements in the years litigation in 15 cases. During the past year, achieve mutual benefits. To help developing ahead, as well as the global trade negotiations we have achieved the following results: nations appreciate that globalization and in the WTO. By moving on multiple fronts, • Argentina-Patents: In May 1999, the open markets can assist their own efforts to we hope we can create a competition in trade United States requested WTO consultations reform and grow, we will need to extend the liberalization. The message we are sending to with Argentina regarding its failure to legislation authorizing the Generalized other countries is that the United States is provide a system of exclusive marketing System of Preferences program. willing to negotiate. We are willing to open rights for pharmaceutical products and other Of vital importance, we will seek to work if they open. But if some countries are slow, issues relating to Argentina’s obligations closely with the EU and its candidate we will move without them. under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related members in Central and Eastern Europe, both Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights to fulfill the promise of a trans-Atlantic II. Monitoring Trade Agreements and (‘‘TRIPS Agreement’’). The United States marketplace already being created by Resolving Disputes expanded its claims last year to address business investment and trade, as well as to The Bush Administration will continue to Argentina’s failure to fully implement its reinvigorate, improve, and strengthen the work with Congress and American remaining TRIPS obligations that came due WTO processes. The total amount of two-way businesses, farmers, workers and consumers on January 1, 2000, such as Argentina’s investment in the EU and the United States to ensure effective monitoring of U.S. trade failure to protect confidential test data amounts to over $1.1 trillion, with each agreements and quick responses to non- submitted to government regulatory partner employing about 3 million people in compliance—including through the use of authorities for pharmaceuticals and the other. We would be remiss to neglect our WTO and other dispute settlement agricultural chemicals and its denial of common interests while working to resolve procedures, WTO oversight committees, and certain exclusive rights for patents. We are more immediate disputes. U.S. trade laws. At the same time, the pleased that recent consultations with the
VerDate 11
Argentina have been constructive and are effective remedies against such copyright cost-oriented interconnection rates, (3) encouraged by the dialogue that has infringements were not provided. Following require Telmex to interconnect with developed to possibly resolve certain claims WTO consultations, the Greek government competitors at the local level, and (4) permit in the case. However, there are still some enacted new legislation to crack down on competitive international traffic outstanding issues that must be addressed pirate stations. In addition, the rate of arrangements at cost-oriented rates. Thus far, before the dispute settlement case can be television piracy in Greece fell significantly. Mexico has taken positive steps to address fully concluded. On March 22, 2001, in a notification to the the first three issues. The Government has • Australia-Prohibited Export Subsidies on WTO regarding the settlement of this dispute, issued dominant carrier rules to regulate Leather: On June 21, 2000, the United States Greece committed to provide effective Telmex; encouraged carriers to agree to resolved its dispute with Australia regarding deterrence against any increase in the level substantial interconnection rate cuts for subsidization of Australia’s sole exporter of of television piracy, to continue its efforts in 2001; and ensured that competitors obtain automotive leather. Under a bilateral enforcing its intellectual property laws, and local interconnection from Telmex. However, settlement agreement, the subsidy recipient to prevent any recurrence of the television Mexico has not yet addressed the key issue agreed to a partial repayment of the piracy problem. of international traffic or enforced its prohibited export subsidy it received, and the • India-Import Quotas on Agricultural, dominant carrier rules. Absent progress on Australian Government committed that it Textile and Industrial Products: On April 1, these issues by June 1, the United States will will exclude this industry from current and 2001, India completed its compliance with a determine whether additional action is future subsidy programs and provide no WTO ruling obtained by the United States necessary, including moving the pending other direct or indirect subsidies. This regarding India’s import restrictions on over WTO case forward. agreement resulted from a WTO case brought 2,700 tariff items. The United States and • Mexico—Beans: For several years, by the United States in 1998. India agreed that India would implement the Mexico had not permitted U.S. dry beans to • Canada-Patent Protection Term: The WTO rulings and recommendations by April enter Mexico in a timely and predictable United States prevailed in its WTO challenge 1, 2000 for approximately 73 percent of the manner under the NAFTA duty-free tariff- of Canada’s failure to provide patent tariff items at issue, and by April 1, 2001 for rate quota (TRQ). On November 30, 2000, the protection consistent with its obligations the remaining items. In announcing India’s United States requested NAFTA under the TRIPS Agreement. The United new export-import policy on March 31, 2001, consultations on this matter. As a result, on States initiated this dispute in its 1999 Indian Commerce and Industry Minister April 18, 2001, USTR reached an ‘‘Special 301’’ review of intellectual property Maran explicitly cited the WTO ruling as the understanding with Mexico’s Secretary of protection abroad. On September 18, 2000, reason for removing these quantitative Economy on Mexico’s allocation of the TRQ. the WTO Appellate Body upheld a WTO restrictions. Mexico will now allocate the NAFTA TRQ panel ruling that Canada had not complied • Ireland—Copyright and Neighboring for beans on a regular schedule, with with its TRIPS obligation to provide to all Rights. The United States used WTO dispute auctions to be held each March and June. In Canadian patents in existence since January settlement consultations to encourage Ireland addition, Mexico has agreed to modify 1, 1996, a term of protection of at least to take further steps to implement its TRIPS several administrative provisions that twenty years from the date of filing the patent obligations. As a result of these prevented effective use of the TRQ. Under application. Canada is to comply with this consultations, Ireland committed in February the NAFTA, exports of dry beans to Mexico— ruling by August 12, 2001. 1998 to accelerate its implementation of one of our largest export markets—will be • Denmark-Enforcement of Intellectual comprehensive copyright reform legislation, free of all duties in 2008. • Property Rights: The United States used the and agreed to pass a separate bill, on an Romania—Customs Valuation: Last May, dispute settlement procedures in this case to expedited basis, to address certain the United States requested WTO encourage legislative action by Denmark to particularly pressing enforcement issues. consultations with Romania concerning its implement its TRIPS obligations, particularly Consistent with this agreement, Ireland customs valuation regime, which established the requirement that WTO members make enacted legislation in July 1998 raising arbitrary minimum and maximum import available ex parte search and seizure criminal penalties for copyright prices for products such as meat, eggs, fruits remedies to authorize ex parte searches and infringement. On July 10, 2000, Ireland and vegetables, clothing, footwear, and seizures in civil intellectual property rights passed its comprehensive copyright certain distilled spirits, as referenced in a enforcement proceedings. On March 28, legislation, and implemented this legislation database. Romania’s customs valuation 2001, the Danish Government enacted on January 1, 2001. Based on these regime appeared to violate its obligations legislation that provides this provisional developments, the parties notified the WTO under the WTO Customs Valuation remedy. that a mutually satisfactory solution had been Agreement, the GATT, and the WTO • European Union (EU)-Banana Regime: reached. Agreement on Agriculture. After fruitful On April 11, 2001, the United States and the • Korea—Beef Imports: The United States consultations in July, Romania modified its EU reached an Understanding on a way to prevailed through litigation in this dispute, customs valuation procedures so that, in resolve the bananas dispute, which which challenged Korea’s regulatory scheme practice, it no longer imposes minimum originated in the early 1990s. Beginning in that discriminates against imported beef by reference prices on most U.S. exports. USTR is working with Romania on the amendments 1997, the United States obtained various confining sales of imported beef to to its laws and regulations necessary to WTO rulings against the EU’s banana regime specialized stores, limiting the manner of its finally bring its customs valuation regime as well as the right to impose retaliatory display, and otherwise constraining into compliance with its WTO obligations. duties on $191.4 million of EU trade due to opportunities for the sale of imported beef. the EU’s failure to comply with WTO rulings. Korea is to comply with the adverse WTO 2. WTO Oversight Bodies In 1999, the EU finally sought to change its rulings by September 10, 2001, and the Through WTO oversight bodies, the United regime in a way that would be consistent United States will monitor Korea’s States works to secure implementation of with WTO provisions and to consult actively implementation to ensure that it is consistent WTO commitments. These oversight bodies with the United States on ways to construct with these WTO rulings. monitor implementation of the various WTO a WTO-consistent regime. The U.S.-EU • Mexico—Basic Telecommunications agreements, review WTO Members’ laws and Understanding achieves fundamental U.S. Services: The United States used WTO regulations, identify potential problems, and objectives of reducing discrimination against consultations to encourage Mexico to ensure offer technical assistance or other expertise U.S. companies, increasing market access for competition in its $12 billion when necessary to help ensure compliance Latin American bananas, and securing telecommunications market. The United and implementation of commitments. The Caribbean banana exports to the EU. States held two rounds of WTO consultations United States actively asserts its rights and • Greece-Television Piracy: Prior to with Mexico and requested the establishment pursues its interests through these resolving this dispute, a significant number of a WTO panel on a variety of issues, mechanisms. of television stations in Greece regularly including Mexico’s failure to (1) prevent • The WTO Committee on Agriculture broadcasted copyrighted motion pictures and Telmex (Mexico’s dominant telecom carrier) oversees the implementation of the television programs without the from engaging in anti-competitive practices, Agreement on Agriculture and provides a authorization of the copyright owners, and (2) ensure that Telmex offers its competitors forum for WTO Members to consult on
VerDate 11
matters related to provisions of the Procurement Agreement (GPA) for 3. U.S. Trade Laws Agreement. In many cases, the Committee monitoring individual Parties’ U.S. trade laws are an important means of resolves problems so that Members do not implementation of GPA commitments. In ensuring enforcement of U.S. rights and need to refer them to WTO dispute particular, the Agreement establishes a interests in trade. In the past year, use of settlement. For example, U.S. pressure on process for reviewing how each Party has Section 301, Section 1377, Super 301, Hungary regarding restrictive import policies implemented GPA requirements in its Special 301, and Title VII has enabled the for beef products resulted in Hungary’s national legislation. In 2001, the Committee United States to challenge market access decision to open a special quota for high- will be reviewing the implementing barriers to U.S. goods and services, protect quality North American beef. Questions legislation of Israel, Japan and Korea. U.S. intellectual property rights, ensure • directed to Korea regarding its annual rice The United States has used the Council compliance with telecommunications import requirements led to improvements in for Trade in Services and its subsidiary agreements, and address discriminatory that country’s administration of its tariff rate bodies, especially the Committee on Trade in foreign government procurement practices. quota commitments. The Committee also Financial Services, to help ensure full Through its trade preference programs, the provided a forum for the United States to implementation of obligations under the United States also seeks to ensure that raise questions concerning the agricultural General Agreement on Trade in Services beneficiary countries meet the statutory practices in many of our trading partners, (GATS). The United States has consistently conditions, which can include providing including elements of Canada’s domestic and successfully pressed countries to fulfill internationally recognized worker rights and support programs, the export subsidy their obligations to ratify and implement adequate intellectual property protection. amounts associated with the European their commitments under the Financial • Section 301: Section 301 of the Trade Communities’ inward processing Services and Basic Telecommunications Act of 1974 is the principal U.S. statute for arrangements for dairy products, and the Agreements. As a result, in 2000, three more addressing foreign government practices amount of product entered under tariff-rate countries—Ghana, Nigeria, and Kenya— affecting U.S. exports of goods or services. quotas in Norway. The United States also brought their GATS financial services Section 301 may be used to enforce U.S. raised extensive questions on the EU’s commitments into force under the GATS, and rights under international trade agreements support regime for horticultural products. one more country—Dominica—brought its and may also be used to respond to • The Committee on Customs Valuation basic telecom commitments into force under unreasonable, unjustifiable, or discriminatory has actively considered issues relating to the GATS. In the Council, the United States foreign government practices that burden or individual deadlines of more than 50 also promoted an agreement between the restrict U.S. commerce. In response to a developing country members to implement WTO and the International petition from the North Dakota Wheat the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation. Telecommunications Union (ITU) to help Commission regarding allegedly Some members have requested additional ensure that ITU technical assistance assists in unreasonable trade practices of the time to assume the Agreement’s obligations implementation of countries’ basic telecom Government of Canada and the Canadian in full. The United States and others, obligations, including those related to Wheat Board, the USTR initiated an working through the Committee, have regulation. investigation of such practices on October 23, consulted with these members to craft • The TRIPS Council monitors 2000. This investigation is currently pending. • individualized extension decisions which implementation of the TRIPS Agreement, Special 301: Section 182 of the Trade Act provide for benchmarked work programs provides a forum in which WTO Members of 1974 (commonly known as ‘‘Special 301’’) toward full implementation, along with can consult on intellectual property matters requires USTR to identify annually those progress reporting requirements. and carries out the specific responsibilities countries that deny adequate and effective • The Committee on Technical Barriers to assigned to the Council in the TRIPS intellectual property (IP) protection or that Trade (TBT) has addressed specific technical Agreement. During 2000, the TRIPS Council deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. regulations which might be perceived as monitored the Agreement’s implementation IP products. Implementation of the law creating unnecessary obstacles to trade. For by developing country Members and newly- involves the placement of countries of example, in 2000, the United States acceding Members; provided assistance to concern into three separate categories— continued to express concerns with draft EU developing country Members so they can Priority Foreign Country, Priority Watch List, directives on (1) waste from electrical and fully implement the provisions of TRIPS; and and Watch List. These designations are determined in terms of the seriousness of IP electronic equipment, (2) the restriction of concentrated on institution-building, both problems, with countries having the most the use of certain hazardous substances in internally and with the World Intellectual serious IP problems designated as Priority electrical and electronic equipment, and (3) Property Organization (WIPO). The TRIPS Foreign Countries, which will result in the batteries and accumulators. In this Agreement has yielded significant benefits initiation of a section 301 investigation Committee, the United States and other for U.S. industries and individuals, from within 30 days of designation. On March 13, countries have also expressed concern that those engaged in the pharmaceutical, 2001, the United States self-initiated a EU notifications of draft technical regulations agricultural chemical, and biotechnology section 301 investigation following the are made too late to allow a meaningful industries to those producing motion identification of Ukraine as a Priority Foreign opportunity for comment as foreseen under pictures, sound recordings, software, books, Country under Special 301 for Ukraine’s the TBT Agreement. Finally, the United magazines and consumer goods. persistent failure to take effective action • States has raised questions and alerted other Finally, the Trade Policy Review against significant levels of optical media WTO members to issues relating to restrictive Mechanism has been instrumental in the piracy and to implement adequate and origin requirements in the Protocols to the identification of potentially WTO- effective intellectual property laws. Europe Agreements on Conformity inconsistent practices in members’ regimes, • Super 301: Super 301 (mandated by Assessment under negotiation by the EU. and provides a forum in which pressure can Executive Order 13116 of March 31, 1999) • In the Committee on Balance of be brought to urge reform or elimination of provides a mechanism for the USTR annually Payments (BOP) Restrictions, the effective such practices. The trade policy review of to review U.S. trade expansion priorities and use of consultation procedures resulted in Brazil in November 2000 provided an focus U.S. resources on eliminating the elimination by the end of 2000 of both opportunity for the United States to question significant trade impediments to U.S. Romania’s and the Slovak Republic’s import the Brazilian Government about its lack of exports. In the past year, the United States restrictions based on balance-of-payment notification to the WTO of its current import made important progress on issues raised in concerns. Furthermore, as a result of licensing system and the WTO consistency of past Super 301 reports, including productive consultations, both Pakistan and Bangladesh this system. The United States was joined by discussions with Japan concerning submitted plans to eliminate all of their several other delegations including the EU, deregulation of Japan’s insurance market and balance-of-payments restrictions, which India and Colombia in expressing resolution of an outstanding textiles dispute means that all of the few remaining countries dissatisfaction with the licensing system. In with India concerning the establishment and imposing such restrictions now have response to this criticism Brazil promised to notification to the WTO of India’s tariff liberalization plans in place. review its import licensing system, reduce bindings on a wide range of textile and • The United States actively uses the the products subject to licensing, and notify apparel products of importance to U.S. Committee of the Parties to the Government the revised system to the WTO. exporters.
VerDate 11
• Section 1377: In the past year, use of investigation relating to steel products. In manufacturing firms in the motor vehicle Section 1377 of the Omnibus Trade and addition, the steel industry is currently sector to achieve specified levels of local Competitiveness Act of 1988 has led to the receiving import relief under Section 201 of content, neutralize foreign exchange by successful resolution of a number of key the Trade Act of 1974 for line pipe and steel balancing the value of certain imports with telecommunications trade barriers, including wire rod products. In addition to actively the value of exports of cars and components those in Canada, Germany, Japan, Mexico, enforcing U.S. trade laws, the Administration over a stated period, and limit imports to a and Peru. For instance, high interconnection will engage key steel producing countries to value based on the previous year’s imports. rates in Japan were a subject of last year’s address bilaterally and multilaterally the These measures appear to violate the WTO Section 1377 review. On July 18, 2000, the underlying structural distortions that foster Agreement on Trade Related Investment United States and Japan reached agreement unfair trade in steel. Despite the trade Measures (TRIMs) and GATT. to substantially lower interconnection rates remedies that are currently in place, the • Philippines-Measures Affecting Trade in Japan, saving competitive telecom carriers Administration is very concerned about the and Investment in the Motor Vehicles Sector: more than $2 billion in two years. In health of the steel industry. The On November 17, 2000, a WTO panel was addition, in November 2000, the Canadian Administration is monitoring closely the established to examine a U.S. challenge to telecom regulator reformed Canada’s global steel market and steel trade practices certain measures in the Philippines contribution collection (universal service) and will take additional actions as needed. automotive sector. Among other things, the regime, which was also subject to last year’s measures require producers to incorporate Section 1377 review. These reforms are B. Status of WTO Disputes specified amounts of locally produced expected to save competitive service In the April 2000 Super 301 Report, USTR inputs, precluding the purchase of U.S. parts. providers millions of dollars. announced its intention to resort to WTO There is also a requirement that imports be • Title VII: The Title VII report (mandated dispute settlement procedures as a means of balanced in an amount related to a by Executive Order 13116 of March 31, 1999) resolving concerns in seven instances. This company’s foreign exchange earnings. Under identifies trading partners engaging in section reports on the status of those the WTO TRIMs Agreement, the Philippines discriminatory government procurement disputes. was required to remove these measures by practices. The annual Title VII report • Argentina-Patents: As discussed above, January 1, 2000, unless the Philippines highlights a number of foreign procurement progress has been made toward resolving this received an extension. No such extension has practices that are of significant concern to the dispute. been granted and therefore the Philippines United States and that the Administration is • Brazil-Customs Valuation: U.S. exporters appears to be in violation of its TRIMs obligations. pursuing in a range of international fora. of textile products have reported that Brazil • • U.S. trade preference programs— uses officially-established minimum Romania—Customs Valuation: As including the Generalized System of reference prices as a requirement to obtain discussed above, considerable progress was Preferences (GSP), the African Growth and import licenses and/or as a base requirement made in consultations, and this dispute is Opportunity Act (AGOA), the Caribbean for import. In practice, this system works to close to resolution. Basin Initiative (CBI), and the Andean Trade prohibit the import of products with declared C. New Requests for Consultations Preferences Act (ATPA)—are designed to values below the established minimum In addition to the disputes discussed prices. The Brazilian practice appears stimulate economic growth and alleviate above, the United States has invoked WTO poverty in developing countries through their inconsistent with Brazil’s WTO obligations, dispute settlement procedures in three other integration into the international trading including those under the Agreement on disputes since last year’s Super 301 report: system. To be eligible for these preferences, Customs Valuation. The United States and • Mexico—Measures Affecting Trade in a beneficiary country must meet certain Brazil held WTO consultations on this matter Live Swine: On July 10, 2000, the United statutory requirements. Though the in July 2000. The United States is monitoring States requested consultations with Mexico requirements are not identical in the various the operation of the Brazilian regime and regarding a Mexican antidumping measure programs, they include providing consulting with U.S. exporters on possible on live swine from the United States as well internationally recognized worker rights, next steps. • as sanitary and other restrictions imposed by intellectual property rights, market access, Brazil-Patent Protection: Although Brazil Mexico on imports of live swine weighing and having other laws and practices that will has a largely WTO-consistent patent regime, more than 110 kilograms. Consultations were reinforce the incentives provided. Recently, there remains one provision in Brazil’s patent held September 7, 2000. Following the Swaziland enacted a new labor law providing law that the United States considers consultations, Mexico issued a protocol internationally recognized workers rights in inconsistent with the TRIPS Agreement. This which is designed to allow a resumption of order to retain GSP benefits and to become provision requires all patent owners— U.S. shipments of live swine weighing 110 eligible for AGOA. Likewise, Bangladesh regardless of the subject matter of the kilograms or more into Mexico. At about the agreed to extend national labor laws to its patent—to manufacture their products in same time, Mexico self-initiated a review of export processing zones and establish a Brazil in order to maintain full patent rights. its threat of injury determination based on transition mechanism of worker elected Having been unable to resolve this issue for information, including a shortage of slaughter councils. The Administration is carefully over five years, the United States resorted to hogs, that suggests that market conditions monitoring the situation to ensure full WTO dispute settlement procedures and have changed substantially in Mexico. The implementation of the commitments requested consultations with Brazil in May United States is closely monitoring this undertaken by the Bangladeshi authorities. 2000. The parties held consultations in June situation. Deficiencies in Moldova’s intellectual and December 2000, but failed to reach a • Belgium—Rice Imports: Belgian customs property protection were remedied, and mutually agreed resolution to the dispute. As authorities have disregarded the actual market access improved in India. The a result, the United States requested the transaction values of rice imported from the Administration is continuing to review establishment of a WTO panel to resolve this United States from July 1, 1997 to December Guatemala’s continued eligibility for dispute. This panel was established in 31, 1998, in computing the applicable preferences under both the GSP and CBI February 2001. customs duties. By not using transaction programs based on serious concerns about • Denmark-Enforcement of Intellectual values to compute customs duties, Belgium labor practices in that country. Property Rights: As discussed above, this has assessed duties on rice that are higher While promoting free trade abroad, we dispute has been successfully resolved with than the levels provided for in its WTO vigorously enforce our trade laws in order to the enactment of legislation in 2001 to commitments. Belgium’s administration of its give Americans the confidence needed to implement Denmark’s TRIPS obligations. tariff regime for rice, moreover, has keep markets open. The Administration is • India-Measures Affecting Trade and contributed to substantial uncertainty committed to aggressively enforcing U.S. Investment in the Motor Vehicle Sector: This regarding the rate of duty that will be trade laws to address the adverse impact that dispute, which challenges the WTO applicable to shipments of imported rice. The unfairly traded steel imports have on U.S. consistency of Indian measures that apply to United States requested WTO consultations steel companies and U.S. jobs. There are investment in the automotive industry, is in November 2000 with Belgium on these currently more than 150 anti-dumping and currently before a WTO dispute settlement issues, and on March 12, 2001, a WTO panel countervailing duty actions in effect or under panel. The measures at issue require was established to examine the matter.
VerDate 11
• EU—Import Surcharge on Corn Gluten Dealer Protection Laws: Several Central the effects of the Japanese recession have Feed: This dispute involves a tariff-rate quota American and Carribean countries (e.g., been disproportionately felt by foreign firms. of 5 euros per metric ton imposed by the EU Honduras, Guatemala, Costa Rica, El In addition, the pace of deregulation has on the first 2,730,000 metric tons of corn Salvador, Dominican Republic and Haiti) slowed significantly. Lack of transparency in gluten feed imported into the EU from the have in place laws, regulations and other both procurement and rule-making persists, United States. The EU imposed this import measures which appear to have the objective and keiretsu ties continue to impede full and surcharge in response to the U.S. import of preventing foreign exporters from fair competition in this market. Further, safeguard measure imposed on wheat gluten terminating importation and distribution while investment opportunities in the imported into the United States from the EU. contracts with local companies except under vehicle market have increased notably, The United States considers that the EU very stringent conditions often requiring opportunities for automotive parts makers failed to satisfy the requirements of the WTO payments of large indemnities to the local remain largely unchanged. This situation, Safeguard Agreement for such suspension of company. To the extent that they apply only coupled with recent trends in bilateral concessions, and therefore the United States to imports, such laws may be inconsistent automotive trade, has underscored the need requested consultations with the EU on with GATT national treatment requirements. for further market-opening efforts by Japan. January 25, 2001. Application of these laws can have harmful The United States hopes to work closely and III. Realizing the Benefits of Trade effects on the economy as a whole and on cooperatively with Japan on this issue in the consumers. U.S. exporters report that coming months. The Bush Administration is carefully distributors’ profit margins are extremely monitoring practices a number of foreign high in these countries and that distributors B. Technical Regulations and Rule-Making practices, using all the available tools to often refuse to service certain segments of the WTO Members have developed address the concerns of U.S. exporters. These local market. Faced with such conditions, disciplines—primarily through the include measures that occur in many markets exporters are often prevented from bringing Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade and across many sectors. The barriers their products to the market most effectively, (TBT)—to ensure that standards, testing, discussed below are just some examples of and consumers face high costs and limited conformity assessment procedures, and the practices that the Administration is choice of products. We will address this related measures are developed and applied carefully monitoring. issue in a variety of contexts, notably in in a transparent and non-discriminatory A. Import Policies bilateral discussions with our trading manner. These disciplines have served to partners. prevent trading partners from using such Restrictive or burdensome import policies Motor Vehicle Policies: Certain of our technical requirements for protectionist can undermine the ability of U.S. exporters trading partners maintain restrictive motor purposes. Nevertheless, U.S. exporters to realize the full benefits of market access vehicle policies which limit market access continue to face adverse conditions in several commitments. Such policies occur in many for U.S. exporters. For instance, lack of important markets. Although there are many forms. Provided below are examples of three foreign access to the motor vehicle market of other such barriers around the world, we types of import policies that currently Korea remains of significant concern. The highlight the following two examples: represent serious barriers to U.S. exports. United States and Korea concluded a Technical Regulations: Such regulations Reference Prices: The WTO Customs Valuation Agreement stipulates that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in can impose onerous conditions on U.S. transaction price is the primary basis for October 1998 according to which Korea exports. For instance, in Mexico, certain customs valuation determinations. However, agreed to undertake a number of specific regulations require the inspection and certain countries appear to rely on ‘‘reference actions. Although Korea has taken steps to approval of manufacturing facilities in order prices,’’ which can artificially inflate the implement specific provisions of the MOU, to obtain a sanitary license to sell certain customs value of imported goods. The United foreign access remains severely restricted, as herbal and nutritional products in Mexico. States has actively pursued the issue of evidenced by the tiny foreign share of the However, Mexican authorities refuse to reference prices in the WTO Committee on Korean auto market, which totaled 0.3 inspect U.S.-based manufacturing facilities. Customs Valuation and has engaged in WTO percent in 2000. Korea’s high tariffs and Denying U.S. exporters the ability to have dispute settlement consultations with cascading tax structure on motor vehicles their facilities inspected and approved on the Romania and Brazil regarding such practices. continue to impair the competitiveness of same basis as their Mexican counterparts As discussed above, WTO consultations with imported motor vehicles. Moreover, Korean raises serious concerns about Mexico’s Romania appear to have addressed many consumers continue to believe they will face adherence to its trade agreement obligations. concerns, and the United States remains in public opprobrium for purchasing a foreign The United States has raised these concerns WTO consultations with Brazil in an effort to car, the legacy of years of government- with Mexico. Mexican authorities have resolve similar issues. India continues to sponsored anti-import campaigns. Although advised us that they are looking at ways to maintain a minimum import price system for Korea recently acceded to the 1998 Global address our concerns consistent with NAFTA imports of primary and secondary steel Agreement for the harmonization of world and WTO obligations; however, to date, we products. In early 2000, the Government of automotive standards, it continues to develop have seen no progress. If this problem is not India removed primary steel products from overly-burdensome standards that impede resolved in a timely manner that will allow the regime. This action was challenged in the imports and are contrary to the spirit of U.S. companies without Mexican-based Indian courts, which reapplied the regime to global harmonization and the 1998 MOU. production facilities to resume exporting primary steel products. The United States is The United States will continue to push their products to Mexico, the United States considering appropriate steps to take, which Korea to fulfill the objectives of the 1998 will consider whether to request could include WTO dispute settlement MOU and to develop a package of meaningful consultations under the NAFTA or the WTO action. measures that will result in substantial to resolve this issue. The continued existence of such practices increases in market access for foreign motor Transparency in Rule-Making: An in Mexico remains of serious concern. On vehicles. important aspect in the development of October 1, 2000, Mexico significantly U.S. exporters are experiencing related technical regulations is transparency in the increased the costs associated with its problems in Japan. The 1995 U.S.-Japan regulatory process. Assuring transparency reference price system by imposing a Automotive Agreement, which sought to and effective participation in the rule-making burdensome new cash deposit guarantee eliminate market access barriers and process can be extremely useful in requirement for subject goods. Cash deposits significantly expand sales opportunities in preventing trade problems associated with based on reference prices are not returned for this sector, expired on December 31, 2000. such measures. A growing number of U.S. at least six months, and Mexican banks Although some progress was made under the trade concerns stem from the lack of charge high fees to open and maintain 1995 agreement, the overall objectives of the transparency in the development of the customs accounts. Bilateral discussions with 1995 agreement were not met. There are a technical regulations of the EU. EU Mexico are planned for mid-2001. Based on number of factors contributing to the procedures for the development of EU these consultations, the United States will disappointing results, one of which has been technical regulations appear to undermine consider what additional steps are necessary, the weakness of the domestic Japanese multilateral provisions intended to provide including WTO dispute settlement action. economy over the past three years. However, an opportunity for meaningful comment on
VerDate 11
draft regulations, because the EU notification The United States also has serious family of large civil aircraft. Airbus partner to the WTO is only made after the European concerns regarding the process of import risk governments have borne 75 to 100 percent of Commission has finalized its proposal (and assessment for SPS measures in Australia. the development costs for all major lines of forwarded it to other EU institutions for SPS measures protect against risks associated Airbus aircraft and provided other forms of consideration/approval). As a result, the with plant or animal borne pests and support, including equity infusions, debt United States and other interested parties are diseases, additives, contaminants, toxins, and forgiveness, debt rollovers and marketing unlikely to have a meaningful opportunity to disease-causing organisms in foods, assistance. Some loans for Airbus programs, have any input or concerns addressed or beverages, or feedstuffs. The WTO SPS repayable from royalties on aircraft sold, reflected in a directive’s provisions. Agreement establishes rules and procedures have been effectively forgiven because Furthermore, while European regional to ensure that SPS measures address projected sales did not materialize. The EU standards can be used to meet an EU legitimate human, animal, and plant health also supports Airbus indirectly through directive’s ‘‘essential’’ requirements, EU concerns, do not arbitrarily or unjustifiably government funded research targeted at procedures do not provide a meaningful discriminate between Members’ agricultural specific civil aircraft projects. Government opportunity to provide comments on the or food products, and are not disguised support of Airbus raises serious concerns relationship of these standards to the EU restrictions on international trade. about EU Member State compliance with directive’s requirements. The lack of Transparency is an integral aspect of the their bilateral and multilateral obligations in transparency in EU rulemaking raises serious development of SPS measures and is often this sector. The United States has urged the questions about EU compliance with extremely useful in preventing trade Airbus member governments to ensure that obligations under the WTO TBT Agreement. problems associated with SPS measures. their planned support for the Airbus A380 The United States will closely monitor Although Australia revised and published its aircraft program is on commercial terms, developments and will consider all options import risk assessment procedures in 2000, reflecting the fact that Airbus is now a highly to ensure that these obligations are fully met. the process in Australia remains non- competitive global producer of aircraft. The European Commission recently informed the C. Agricultural Practices and SPS Measures transparent and fraught with delays. Australia’s continued ban on the importation United States that seven EU Member State The WTO Agreement on Agriculture and of California table grapes illustrates problems governments have committed to substantial on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) encountered, and other countries have direct support to develop the A380 aircraft. Measures have been instrumental to the comparable complaints. The United States The United States is examining the ability of the U.S. agricultural sector to take has been seeking entry into Australia’s information that the European Commission advantage of its competitiveness and export market, in some cases for more than a provided and plans to seek further its products abroad. The United States decade, for Florida citrus, pork, poultry, information in future discussions with the continues to be vigilant in its effort to stone fruit, and apples in addition to EU. prevent our trading partners from California table grapes. In addition, the Government of Korea, maintaining trade-distorting practices that through the Korean Development Bank disadvantage U.S. agricultural exports. For D. Government Procurement (KDB), has initiated a program aimed at example, as discussed above, in response to The 2001 ‘‘Title VII’’ report, which USTR providing direct financial support to several a petition filed, the USTR is currently releases simultaneously with the Super 301 large companies that are encountering severe investigating practices of Canada and the report on April 30 (available on the USTR cash flow problems. For example, the KDB Canadian Wheat Board under Section 301 of web site (www.ustr.gov)), addresses a number purchased $200 million worth of newly U.S. trade laws. We also are examining of discriminatory government procurement issued Hyundai Electronics Industries (HEI) information gathered from U.S. agricultural practices, including implementation of the bonds in January 2001. The KDB made exporters to assist us in our negotiations on EU ‘‘Utilities Directive’’ by government similar purchases of the newly issued bonds agriculture in the WTO, the FTAA and telecommunications utilities, various of five other cash-strapped, debt-burdened bilateral negotiations, including public discriminatory practices in the public works Korean companies, three of which are other comments received in preparation for this sector of Japan, discriminatory practices and Hyundai subsidiaries. The KDB reportedly year’s Super 301 report. procedural barriers to trade in Taiwan, plans to provide additional financing in the In addition, the United States has serious discrimination in Canada against U.S. future to HEI and other companies to cover concerns that Japan, in an unprecedented suppliers in provincial government $15–20 billion in bonds coming due in 2001. manner, is taking actions affecting access to procurement procedures, and the potential The Korean Government maintains that only its markets for agricultural products. In early discriminatory effects of ‘‘sect filters’’ in viable companies will benefit from temporary April 2001, Japan implemented a new Germany. The ‘‘Title VII’’ report provides KDB support and that the KDB support will quarantine inspection system for fresh background on these issues and the steps the terminate at the end of 2001. The United vegetables, strawberries and melons, which Administration is taking to address them. States has expressed its concern to Korea limited the number of daily inspections at about the negative implications of this type Japan’s air and seaports. Japan took this E. Subsidy Practices of government-directed lending for Korea’s action without prior consultation with Unfair government subsidies distort the restructuring efforts and the Korean trading partners or adequate explanation of a free flow of goods and adversely affect U.S. economy. The United States also has noted scientific rationale for the new system. Japan business in the global marketplace. Rules that a significant share of the benefits under is also considering taking, for the first time, covering industrial subsidies have evolved this program has been provided thus far to import safeguard actions on a wide range of and are intended to prohibit or discourage companies that are largely export focused agricultural and other products. It has the most distortive kinds of subsidies, and to and has raised with Korea its concerns over announced that it will implement safeguard allow governments to use less distortive the potential inconsistency of this measures on three agricultural products— subsidies in order to achieve the broader intervention with the WTO Agreement on fresh shiitake mushrooms, stone leeks (i.e., social or economic objectives of interest to Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. welsh onions) and tatami mat reeds— them under certain circumstances. Provided beginning April 23, 2001. Among the other below are representative examples of subsidy F. Services and Investment Barriers products Japan is investigating are lumber, practices that the Administration is Services are what most Americans do for onions, and tomatoes, which are of monitoring closely. a living. Service industries account for nearly commercial interest to the United States. U.S. The United States continues to be 80 percent of both U.S. employment and exports (CY 2000) of these products totaled concerned about the prospect of further GDP. U.S. cross-border exports of commercial over $240 million. The U.S. Government, at subsidization of the Airbus consortium by services (i.e., excluding military and senior levels, has raised with the Japanese Member State governments of the EU. Since government) were $255 billion in 1999, Government its serious concerns about these the inception of Airbus in 1967, Airbus supporting over 4 million services and measures affecting imports. The United member governments have provided massive manufacturing jobs in the United States. U.S. States will closely monitor Japan’s import subsidies to their respective member services exports have more than doubled measures to ensure they comply with WTO companies to aid in the development, over the last 10 years, increasing from $118 obligations. production and marketing of the Airbus billion in 1989 to $255 billion last year.
VerDate 11
Likewise, foreign investment provides capital develop programs that favor the purchase or failure by Argentina, Hungary and Israel, that fuels economic expansion, increases use of goods produced locally. Such among others, to provide adequate protection productivity, improves living standards, and measures often reduce the export of U.S.- for the confidential test data of provides links to the international manufactured goods and also impede a pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical marketplace. Access to overseas investment company that operates in a market with companies; (4) the insufficient term of markets allows U.S. companies to remain TRIMs from acting in an economically protection for patents in trading partners competitive in a world of new and changing efficient manner. The maintenance of TRIMs such as the Dominican Republic and India; opportunities. U.S.-owned companies with has been a particular problem in the motor (5) the inadequate protection for pre-existing affiliates abroad accounted for 64% of total vehicle sector. As discussed above, the works in numerous trading partners, U.S. goods exports in 1998. United States currently has two pending particularly in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, These statistics reveal the importance of WTO cases on this issue, challenging the Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and services and investment in promoting open maintenance by India and the Philippines of Uzbekistan; (6) the failure of the Philippines markets. Continued liberalization in this area measures affecting trade and investment in to provide adequate enforcement, including represents a ‘‘force multiplier’’ for structural the motor vehicle sector. making available ex parte search remedies; reforms abroad and for economic growth The United States also has serious and (7) lax border enforcement against pirate domestically. concerns about local content requirements and counterfeit goods in many of our trading Unfortunately, as discussed below, we imposed by Malaysia on the production of partners. continue to encounter barriers to the supply motor vehicles. Under the TRIMs Agreement, of U.S. services and to investment by U.S. Malaysia was required to remove these H. Barriers to Trade in Electronic Commerce businesses, particularly with respect to measures by January 1, 2000 unless Barriers to electronic commerce can occur telecommunications regulations, trade- additional time was granted by the WTO. On at various points in the e-commerce value related investment measures (TRIMs) in the December 29, 1999, Malaysia made a formal chain, such as restrictions on basic automobile sector, and retail store laws. We request for an additional two years to bring telecommunications services, Internet access therefore make it a priority to intensify our these measures into compliance with its services, and services provided through the efforts to promote the dynamism of this obligations under the Agreement. The United Internet. For example, Israel is pursuing a sector and reduce trade barriers. States has noted its willingness to agree to an policy that would disadvantage U.S. Telecommunications Trade Barriers: Since extension, but is concerned by conflicting companies wishing to offer Internet access the WTO Basic Telecommunications statements made by the Government of services over the cable platform and would Agreement came into force in February 1998, Malaysia with regard to its intentions. For favor the state-owned telecommunications telecommunications markets overseas have this reason, the United States will continue company (Bezeq). Although Israel has rapidly opened to competition. U.S. to monitor Malaysia’s compliance with its licensed Bezeq to enter the high-speed companies have invested billions of dollars WTO obligations in the motor vehicle sector. Internet access market without any licensing to build global networks, partner with foreign Retail Store Laws: Retail store laws that fees, it has introduced legislation that will companies, and expand their commercial discriminate with regard to the country of require cable television companies seeking to presence in foreign markets. However, as origin of the goods that a retailer can sell enter this market to pay licensing fees (above discussed in USTR’s review of harm not only the firms operating in this their cable franchise fees). The United States telecommunications trade agreements under sector, but also harm consumers by limiting is seriously concerned that regulatory ‘‘Section 1377’’, released on April 2, 2001 access to products that may be more favoritism undermines the investment (see www.ustr.gov), practices of certain competitive in terms of price and quality. environment in Internet services in Israel. We trading partners raise serious concern about The Philippines requires that certain foreign will closely monitor developments in Israel compliance with their international retailers source at least 30 percent of their as well as in other markets. telecommunications obligations. inventory, by value, in the Philippines. For instance, in Taiwan, Additionally, firms specializing in luxury I. Other Barriers telecommunications regulations impose goods must source at least 10 percent of their Not all trade obstacles fit neatly into one serious limitations on the competitive inventory, by value, in the Philippines. These category. There are many exporters facing offering of telecommunications services and requirements appear to violate the conditions in overlapping categories that undermine the ability of new entrants to Philippines’ commitments under several combine to limit market access to U.S. goods compete in Taiwan’s market. These WTO agreements. The United States will and services, and unfavorable treatment of a restrictions also appear to be inconsistent monitor this issue to determine what action certain foreign industry by any given country with the commitments undertaken by Taiwan should be taken to address these concerns. often involves a multitude of overlapping as part of its bilateral WTO accession barriers. One illustration of how numerous negotiations with the United States to G. Lack of Intellectual Property Protection trade measures can affect the conditions for liberalize its telecommunications market by The USTR is releasing the ‘‘Special 301’’ access to overseas markets can be found in July 1, 2001. USTR welcomes the ongoing report today (see www.ustr.gov), which the textile and apparel industries. U.S. regulatory review of Taiwan’s telecom identifies those countries that deny adequate industry has raised a series of concerns regulations and expects this review to result and effective intellectual property protection regarding a number of measures, often used in the promised liberalization of its market. or that deny fair and equitable market access in combination, that impede access to If Taiwan does not appear to be taking the to U.S. intellectual property products. As overseas markets, including: high tariffs, necessary steps to liberalize its market discussed above, on March 13, 2001, the additional import taxes and charges, some of consistent with its commitments, USTR will United States self-initiated a section 301 which may be forgiven for goods destined for consider appropriate action, including under investigation following the identification of the export market, excessive and impractical Section 1374 of the 1988 Trade Act. In Ukraine as a Priority Foreign Country under marking and labeling requirements, reference addition, as discussed above, the United Special 301 for Ukraine’s persistent failure to pricing and non-automatic licensing, States remains seriously concerned that take effective action against significant levels burdensome certificates of origin Mexico has not yet addressed the key issue of optical media piracy and to implement requirements, lack of intellectual property of ensuring competition in the market for adequate and effective intellectual property protection, and pre-shipment inspection international calls or enforcing certain rules laws. In addition, this year’s Special 301 requirements. Ironically, some of the designed to address anti-competitive conduct report addresses a number of key issues, countries with the most protected internal in telecommunications services. Absent including (1) failure of numerous economies, markets are also the most significant progress on these issues by June 1, the United including Brazil and Taiwan, to take effective beneficiaries of the WTO Agreement on States will determine whether additional enforcement action that provides adequate Textiles and Clothing’s liberalization and action is necessary, including moving the deterrence against commercial piracy and elimination provisions, as applied by the pending WTO case forward. counterfeiting; (2) failure of the European United States. The United States will Auto TRIMS: The WTO Agreement on Union to provide national treatment for the continue its efforts to work within the WTO Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs) protection of geographical indications for and with our trading partners to ensure that limits the ability of foreign governments to agricultural products and foodstuffs; (3) all countries meet their WTO obligations to
VerDate 11
open their market to textile and apparel competition and eliminate unhealthy FY 2002 and FY 2003 solicitations of products. oligopolistic behavior in the flat glass sector. grant applications as well as the The United States has continuing concerns A. Jane Bradley, implementation of the NCPD/CBI about treatment of foreign, research-based program. More information on the type pharmaceuticals under the reimbursement Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. of comments sought by the FHWA is pricing systems in place in Korea and provided in Section III of this notice. Taiwan. These reimbursement pricing [FR Doc. 01–11355 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] systems lack transparency and appear BILLING CODE 3190–01–P ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed arbitrary, raising questions about whether comments on program implementation they are being implemented in a fair and for fiscal year FY 2003 to FHWA Docket non-discriminatory manner. These systems DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION No. FHWA–2000–7392, the Docket also create an uncertain business Clerk, U.S. Dockets, Room PL–401, 400 environment for pharmaceutical Federal Highway Administration Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC manufacturers. In addition, burdensome and [FHWA Docket No. FHWA–2000–7392] 20590–0001. All comments received non-science-based regulatory requirements will be available for examination at the are applied to pharmaceutical products in Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Korea and Taiwan, including requirements above address between 9 a.m. and 5 Century; Implementation Guidance for relating to the acceptance of foreign clinical p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, test data, testing, and approval of new drugs. the National Corridor Planning and except Federal holidays. Those desiring Korea and Taiwan need to undertake Development Program and the notification of receipt of comments significant improvements in their systems to Coordinated Border Infrastructure should include a self-addressed, make them fair, non-discriminatory and Program stamped envelope or postcard. transparent. Finally, while the Korean AGENCY: Federal Highway Intent to make applications for FY Government has been responsive to some Administration (FHWA), DOT. 2002 grants under the NCPD and CBI U.S. concerns in the pharmaceutical sector, programs should be submitted to the serious questions remain regarding the lack ACTION: Notice; request for comments; of IPR protection for these products. In solicitation of intent to apply for fiscal FHWA Division Office in the State particular, the lack of coordination between year (FY) 2002 grants. where the applicant is located. the Korea Food and Drug Administration and SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the Korea Intellectual Property Office This document provides implementation guidance on sections program issues: Mr. Martin Weiss, concerning marketing approval for Office of Intermodal and Statewide pharmaceuticals and inadequate data 1118 and 1119 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA– Programs, HEPS–10, (202) 366–5010; or protection, discourage the introduction of for legal issues: Mr. Robert Black, Office innovative drugs. The U.S. Government will 21). These sections established the of the Chief Counsel, HCC–30, (202) continue to pursue these issues with the National Corridor Planning and Korean Government to ensure that foreign Development Program (NCPD program) 366–1359; Federal Highway pharmaceuticals are provided fair and non- and the Coordinated Border Administration, 400 Seventh Street, discriminatory treatment in the Korean Infrastructure Program (CBI program). SW., Washington D.C. 20590. Office market. The NCPD and the CBI programs are hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Finally, the U.S. flat glass industry discretionary grant programs funded by e.t., Monday through Friday, except continues to experience serious market a single funding source. These programs Federal holidays. access problems in Japan, owing mainly to provide funding for planning, project SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the continued domination of the Japanese flat development, construction and glass market by domestic flat glass operation of projects that serve border Electronic Access manufacturers. Over the past year, U.S. regions near Mexico and Canada and industry has strengthened its business and high priority corridors throughout the Internet users can access all marketing activities in Japan. However, United States. States and metropolitan comments received by the U.S. DOT despite better quality, technology and planning organizations (MPOs) are, Dockets, Room PL–401, by using the competitive prices, U.S. flat glass universal resource locator (URL): http:/ manufacturers have failed to gain access to under the NCPD program, eligible for discretionary grants for: Corridor /dms.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours the Japanese market commensurate with their each day, 365 days each year. Please level of access in the rest of the world. The feasibility; corridor planning; multistate coordination; environmental review; follow the instructions online for more domination by Japanese flat glass information and help. manufacturers of distributors is a key and construction. Border States and problem for U.S. firms. The leading Japanese MPOs are, under the CBI program, An electronic copy of this document flat glass producers exert tight control over eligible for discretionary grants for: may be downloaded using a computer, flat glass distribution by majority ownership, Transportation and safety infrastructure modem and suitable communications equity and financing ties, employee improvements, operation and regulatory software from the Government Printing exchanges, and purchasing quotas. The U.S. improvements, and coordination and Office’s Electronic Bulletin Board Government remains very concerned about safety inspection improvements in a Service at (202) 512–1661. Internet users the closed distribution channels in the border region. may reach the Office of the Federal oligopolistic flat glass sector. To address DATES: Intentions to make grant Register’s home page at: http:// these concerns, the U.S. Government has applications should be received by www.nara.gov/fedreg and the proposed, under the bilateral Enhanced Government Printing Office’s web page Initiative on Deregulation and Competition FHWA Division Offices no later than Policy, that the Japanese Government take July 6, 2001. Specific information at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara. In further steps to promote competition in required for intentions to make grant addition, a number of documents and wholesale and retail distribution channels for applications is provided in Section IV of links concerning the NCPD and the CBI a range of products, including flat glass. The this notice. Comments on program programs are available through the U.S. Government will continue to monitor implementation should be sent as soon home page of the Corridor/Border closely the flat glass industry and urges the as appropriate. The FHWA will consider Programs: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ Japanese Government to promote comments received in developing the hep10/corbor/corbor.html.
VerDate 11
Background FHWA anticipates that between $20 7. Encourage grant applications that Sections 1118 and 1119 of the TEA– million and $130 million will be have realistic objectives and time 21, Public Law 105–178, 112 Stat. 107, available for allocation for projects. horizons. at 161, established the NCPD and CBI The Federal share for these funds is In FY 2000 and FY 2001, the FHWA programs, respectively. These programs set by 23 U.S.C. 120 (generally 80 retained these program implementation goals. However, overarching these respond to substantial interest dating percent plus the sliding scale program goals were FHWA and DOT from 1991. In that year, the Intermodal adjustment in States with substantial strategic goals established in those years Surface Transportation Efficiency Act public lands). The period of availability which resulted in a program emphasis (ISTEA), Public Law 102–240, 105 Stat. for obligation is the fiscal year for which on four specific areas (motor carrier 1914, designated a number of high the funds are authorized and the three safety enforcement facilities, integrated priority corridors. Subsequent years following. States which receive an trade transportation processing systems legislation modified the corridor allocation of funds under these to improve border crossings, multistate descriptions and designated additional programs will, at the same time, receive freight planning efforts, and corridors. Citizen and civic groups an increase in obligation authority equal applications of operational strategies, promoted many of these corridors as, for to the allocation. Under section 1102 of TEA–21, obligation authority for including ITS applications). In FY 2002, example, a means to accommodate as noted below in Section II, Evaluation international trade. Similarly, since discretionary programs that is provided during a fiscal year is extinguished at Considerations for both the NCPD and 1991, a number of studies identified the CBI Program, there may be a goal(s) infrastructure and operational the end of the fiscal year. Funds allocated to projects which, under the added regarding the safety of deficiencies near the U.S. borders with commercial vehicles in the region near Mexico and Canada. Also various NCPD/CBI programs, receive an obligation authority for FY 2002, must the U.S. border with Mexico. Emphasis groups, some international and/or areas are not available for this intergovernmental, studied therefore be obligated during FY 2002 or have the FY 2002 obligation authority solicitation of intent to submit full opportunities to improve infrastructure applications for FY 2002. Emphasis and operations. withdrawn for redistribution. This notice includes four sections: areas may be established for the The NCPD and CBI programs are solicitation of full applications. funded by a single funding source. The Section I—Program Background and combined authorized funding for these Implementation of the NCPD/CBI Summary of Selection Process—FY two programs is $140 million in each discretionary program in FY 2001 2001 Section II—Eligibility and Selection year from FY 1999 to FY 2003 (a total The FHWA received approximately Criteria for FY 2002 grants of $700 million). Program funds are 150 applications for NCPD/CBI funding, limited by the requirements of section Section III—Request for comments on program implementation in FY 2002, all of which were at least partially 1102 (Obligation Ceiling) of the TEA– eligible for consideration (e.g., some 21. Further, projects selected for FY 2003 Section IV—Solicitation of applicants applications included work components funding have been and may again be for FY 2002 grants that were not eligible and also included affected by legislative language, work components that were eligible). colloquially called ‘earmarks’, placed in Section I—Program Background, The requests for funding totaled Federal law or related reports. This Implementation of the NCPD/CBI approximately $2 billion. Both the latter situation was the case in both FY Discretionary Program in FY 2001 and number of applications and requested 2000 and FY 2001. In these situations, changes for FY 2002 funding were about the same as in FY the solicitation was made in August The FHWA implements the NCPD/ 1999 and FY 2000. Approximately 66 1999 and June 2000 respectively and, in CBI programs with specific goals. In percent of the total funds awarded and both cases, Congressional direction a developing the FY 2002 solicitation, the 61 percent of the projects funded for FY few months later established project FHWA will consider the following: 2001 were for projects cited in specific language. As a matter of long Comments received at outreach Congressional language. The legislative standing general policy, the FHWA sessions; information received during language containing these citations for opposes project specific legislative program discussions within the DOT; FY 2001 is available at URL: http:// language. However, subsequent to the and information received during www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/corbor/ inclusion of such language in law or discussions between officials. In FY fy01earmark.html. related reports, the FHWA makes 1999, the FHWA established program As in FY 1999 and FY 2000, the program administration decisions implementation goals. They were: FHWA established an evaluation panel respecting the authority Congress has to 1. Respect both the letter and the comprised of officials from various develop such language. intent of existing statutes. agencies within the DOT (e.g., the Under the NCPD program, funds are 2. Minimize administrative additions Federal Railroad Administration, the available to States and MPOs for to statutory requirements. Maritime Administration, the Federal coordinated planning, design, and 3. Minimize grant application Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the construction of corridors of national paperwork. Office of the Secretary of significance, economic growth, and 4. Maximize administrative control of Transportation, as well as the FHWA). international or interregional trade. grants by FHWA field personnel rather This panel reviewed the FY 2001 Under the CBI program, funds are than FHWA Headquarters personnel. applications and tabulated summaries of available to border States and MPOs for 5. Encourage substantive coordination applications. The evaluation panel projects to improve the safe movement of grant applications and grant identified individual applications that of people and goods at, or across, the administration by State and local were ‘‘well qualified’’ and those which border between the United States and officials. were ‘‘qualified’’ based on summary Canada, and the border between the 6. Encourage appropriate private/ information prepared by the FHWA United States and Mexico. Based on the public, State/local, intermodal, program office (e.g., positive aspects and factors noted above (i.e., obligation interregional, multistate and other aspects of each application). We limitations and legislative language), the multinational coordination. expect to follow a similar process with
VerDate 11
the FY 2002 full grant applications for program, or policy matters. A Eligibility—NCPD Program funds available after legislative language substantial amount of the information Projects eligible for funding include is considered. was received from coordinators, the following: On November 3, 2000, then U.S. evaluators, preparers, reviewers and/or 1. Feasibility studies. Transportation Secretary Rodney E. supporters of specific grant applications 2. Comprehensive corridor planning Slater announced that $123 million in or groups of grant applications. Many and design activities. grants would be provided to 32 states such persons felt time and effort had 3. Location and routing studies. for 50 projects and to the General been wasted, or partially wasted, 4. Multistate and intrastate Services Administration for four other because projects selected which were coordination for corridors. projects as part of the NCPD/CBI cited in legislative language effectively 5. Environmental review or programs for FY 2001. The FY 2001 reduced the consideration provided to construction after review by the NCPD/CBI program grant recipients, by the applications in which they were Secretary of a development and state, project and total allocation, are directly involved. management plan for the corridor or listed at the URL: http:// useable section of the corridor (hence www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/corbor/ Changes in the FY 2002 Process from fy01awards.html. These include both Previous Years called ‘‘corridor plan’’). projects cited in legislative language and Based on consideration of the above, Work in the pre-feasibility stage of a projects not cited in legislative the FHWA is proposing to change the project, e.g., development of language. In addition, section 1311 of solicitation process for FY 2002. A full metropolitan and State plans and the TEA–21, as amended, requires a solicitation for FY 2002 will not occur programs, is not considered eligible for report for the fiscal quarter covering the until after Congress has passed and the support with Federal aid under section FY 2001 selections, containing the President has signed an Appropriations 1118 funds. Project development reasons for selection of projects. At the Act for the Department of planning and multistate planning time of this notice, the report is not Transportation. Instead, at this time, the coordination are eligible for such available. When completed, it will also FHWA is soliciting only statements of support. be available on FHWA’s website: http:/ intent to submit an application. Several The FHWA construes the phrase /www.fhwa.dot.gov/discretionary/ factors contributed to this decision. ‘‘environmental review,’’ as used above, quarterly.html. First, as noted previously, a substantial as being the portion of the number of projects were cited in environmental documentation requiring Summary of Comments to Docket No. legislative language in FY 2000 and FY formal interagency review. Examples of FHWA–2000–7392 2001, restricting the Department’s such documentation are the On June 16, 2000, at 65 FR 37819, the discretion in making selections and environmental assessment/finding of no FHWA published a notice, requesting there is a substantial possibility that this significant impact (EA/FONSI) and the comments on how the NCPD/CBI will occur in FY 2002. Second, without environmental impact statement (EIS). programs implementation could be a realistic idea of the funds available to Thus, even without review of the improved in FY 2002, as well as other support applications State and MPOs corridor plan, work needed to produce aspects of the program. Commenters unnecessarily expend resources the pre-draft EIS and to revise the draft were asked specifically for developing and coordinating detailed would be eligible for support with improvements that could be made at the applications. Third, by soliciting intent Federal aid under section 1118. discretion of the FHWA that would at this time and deferring submission of However, work subsequent to the more effectively meet the seven the complete applications, the FHWA approval of the draft EIS (or implementation goals established for the immediate paperwork burden on States equivalent) would not be eligible for program. and MPOs will likely be reduced while such support until review of the One comment was posted. This was a allowing additional time for corridor plan. Subsequent to review of letter from Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona coordination of projects for which an the corridor plan, work on a final EIS expressing his support for an application is ultimately made. Fourth, and any other necessary environmental application for funding for the Hoover by soliciting intent at this time, the work would be eligible for funding Dam bypass. The FHWA considered FHWA will, if Congress requests under this section. Senator Kyl’s support in the FY 2001 information on interest in the program, Eligibility for funds from the NCPD award process. be able to provide such information to program is limited to high priority Congress contemporaneously with corridors identified in section 1105(c) of Other Program Evaluation Information development of Appropriations the ISTEA, as amended, and any other Received legislation and related reports. Finally, significant regional or multistate The FHWA has received information as noted below in Section IV, States and highway corridors selected by the on program implementation through a MPOs that do not send in a statement Secretary after consideration of the number of instruments. One is by of intent may subsequently respond to criteria listed for selecting projects for reading and analyzing the applications any solicitation for full applications, NCPD funding. Fund allocation to a themselves. Another is through post- assuming there is a reasonable basis for corridor does not constitute designation award feedback from applicants who doing so, i.e., an explanation which sets of the corridor as a high priority have, through the FHWA field division forth the reasons why a statement of corridor. The FHWA has no statutory offices, requested a debriefing from the intent was not submitted. authority to make such a designation. FHWA program office regarding how their application was evaluated. Still Section II—Eligibility and Selection Eligibility—CBI Program another is through NCPD/CBI related Criteria for FY 2002 Grants Projects eligible for funding include discussions between applicants and In general, the eligibility and selection the following: other grant seeking interests, FHWA criteria for FY 2002 grants are expected 1. Improvements to existing division offices and the FHWA program to be the same as those used for FY 2001 transportation and supporting office at a wide variety of meetings that grants with only minor modifications infrastructure that facilitate cross border take place during the year on project, (e.g., possibly different emphasis areas). vehicle and cargo movements.
VerDate 11
2. Construction of highways and congestion impose economic costs on 7. The extent to which the innovative related safety and safety enforcement the Nation’s economy. and problem solving techniques of the facilities that will facilitate vehicle and 7. Encourage or facilitate major proposed project would be applicable to cargo movements related to multistate or regional mobility and other border stations or ports of entry. international trade. economic growth and development in 8. Demonstrated local commitment to 3. Operational improvements, areas underserved by existing highway implement and sustain continuing including improvements relating to infrastructure. comprehensive border or affected port electronic data interchange and use of Specific aspects of the NCPD program of entry planning processes and telecommunications, to expedite cross require the FHWA to interpret these improvements programs. border vehicle and cargo movement. criteria. Based on the goals noted above As in the NCPD program criteria, the 4. Modifications to regulatory in Section I, the FHWA intends to use FHWA intends to use a flexible procedures to expedite cross border a flexible interpretation. For example, interpretation of the CBI program vehicle and cargo movements. while the date of the enactment of selection criteria. For example, because 5. International coordination of NAFTA was December 8, 1993, traffic local agencies and organizations (e.g., planning, programming, and border data which provides an average for the business association, civic, county, operation with Canada and Mexico calendar year 1993 could be used for the municipal, utility) sometimes have very relating to expediting cross border pre-NAFTA information. For another small capital improvement budgets, that vehicle and cargo movements. example, since businesses use both local commitment for continuing 6. Activities of Federal inspection imported and domestically produced planning and improvement will be agencies. materials in a constantly changing considered in the context of local The TEA–21 requires projects to be in component mix to produce higher program cooperation with State projects a border region. The FHWA considers valued products and, because in the border regions, as well as in the projects within 100 km (62 miles) of the interregional trade is noted as part of the context of local financial support for U.S./Canada or U.S./Mexico border to purpose of the section, either interstate such projects. be in a border region. traffic or interregional traffic could be Selection Criteria Common to Both used as a surrogate for ‘‘international Programs Selection Criteria for the NCPD Program truck-borne commodities.’’ Similarly, Funding where determining the value of cargo In addition to the statutory criteria for each program, there are some The TEA–21 provides criteria to be carried by commercial vehicle traffic considerations that apply to both used in identifying corridors, in would be impossible without using programs since both are funded by a addition to those statutorily designated proprietary information, a reasonable single funding source. One such for eligibility. The following criteria will surrogate could be based on the vehicle consideration is that during the be used for selecting projects for traffic multiplied by an imputed value evaluation process, applications for both funding: for various classes of cargo. programs are evaluated by a single 1. The extent to which the annual Selection Criteria for the CBI Program evaluation panel comprised of officials volume of commercial vehicle traffic at Funding from various offices within the DOT, not the border stations or ports of entry of just the FHWA (this process is described each State has increased since the date The selection criteria in the TEA–21 above in more detail in the Summary of of enactment of the North American are as follows: 1. Expected reduction in commercial Selection Process). The use of non- Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and is and other motor vehicle travel time FHWA personnel in evaluating projected to increase in the future. through an international border crossing applications should be understood by 2. The extent to which commercial as a result of the project. applicants as a statement by the FHWA vehicle traffic in each State has 2. Improvements in vehicle and that non-highway issues are an increased since the date of enactment of highway safety and cargo security important project selection the NAFTA, and is projected to increase related to motor vehicles crossing a consideration. Another consideration is in the future. border with Canada or Mexico. that, as the concept of equity and 3. The extent to which international 3. Strategies to increase the use of congressional priority were important in truck-borne commodities move through existing, underutilized border crossing the development of the TEA–21, each State. facilities and approaches. national geographic distribution among 4. The reduction in commercial and 4. Leveraging of Federal funds, all discretionary programs and other travel time through a major including use of innovative financing, congressional direction or guidance will international gateway or affected port of combination of such funds with funding be considered in the selection of entry expected as a result of the provided under other sections of the projects for discretionary funds. proposed project, including the level of TEA–21 and combination with other traffic delays at major highway/rail sources of Federal, State, local or private Evaluation Considerations for both the grade crossings in trade corridors. funding. NCPD and the CBI Program 5. The extent of leveraging of Federal 5. Degree of multinational To adequately evaluate the extent to funds, including use of innovative involvement in the project and which selection criteria noted above are financing; combination with funding demonstrated coordination with other met by individual projects, the FHWA provided under other sections of the Federal agencies responsible for the expects to consider the following in TEA–21 and title 23, U.S.C.; and inspection of vehicles, cargo, and each grant application: combination with other sources of persons crossing international borders 1. Likelihood of expeditious Federal, State, local, or private funding and their counterpart agencies in completion of a useable project or including State, local and private Canada and Mexico. product. matching funds. 6. Improvements in vehicle and 2. Amount of the program grant 6. The value of the cargo carried by highway safety and cargo security in request in comparison to likely commercial vehicle traffic, to the extent and through the gateway or affected port accomplishments (e.g., grant requests that the value of the cargo and of entry concerned. that exceed about 10 percent of the
VerDate 11
available NCPD and CBI program reestablished between the submittal of authorities to make applications for funding in a given year would be intent and the submittal of the participation in the Value Pricing Pilot expected to be subject to extra scrutiny application. In fact, the FHWA expects Program (Pilot Program) authorized by to determine whether the likely project definitions and priorities to section 1012(b) of the Intermodal consequences would be commensurate evolve in complex and/or multistate Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of with that level of funding). projects. Future applications will not be 1991 (ISTEA) (Public Law 102–240, 105 3. Clarity and conciseness of the grant precluded if the State or MPO did not Stat. 1914), as amended by 1216(a) of application in submission of the submit their intent in response to this the Transportation Equity Act for the required information, especially request. However, those States or MPOs 21st Century (TEA–21) (Public Law No. regarding the work to be accomplished must demonstrate a reasonable basis for 105–178, 112 Stat. 107 (1998)) and and the source and amount of the non failing to submit their intent as presents guidelines for program federal share of funds. requested. The FHWA anticipates that applications. This notice updates an 4. State priorities and endorsement of, the actual format for full applications October 5, 1998, notice by providing or opposition to, projects by other will be very similar to that of FY 2001 revised procedures, processes and States, MPOs, and other public and with a decrease in the amount of timelines. This document also describes private agencies or organizations, as narrative requested on some points and the statutory basis for the Pilot Program well as the status of the project on the some additional clarification of and procedures that will be used to State transportation improvement financial information. However, the implement the program. The FHWA program (STIP) and the metropolitan suggested format for the intent to submit will accept comments on these transportation improvement program is as follows: administrative guidelines throughout (TIP). Format for Intention to Submit an the life of the Pilot Program and, as 5. The extent to which the project necessary, will issue additional may be eligible under both the NCPD Application for NCPD or CBI Discretionary Funds guidance in response to public and the CBI program. comments and program experience. 6. Other quantitative information that 1. State (if a multistate or multi MPO DATES: The solicitation for participation relates to the strategic goals of the project, list the lead State/MPO and in the Pilot Program will continue to be FHWA, the other DOT modal agencies participating States/MPO); held open until further notice. To and the DOT as a whole at the time of 2. Work to be funded and location of ensure that all projects receive fair the full solicitation. At the time of this work to be funded. consideration, the FHWA encourages all notice, the FHWA anticipates that a 3. Amount of federal funds to be potential grant applicants to submit goal(s) related to the safety of requested. their proposals no later than October 1, commercial vehicles in the region near 4. State priority, as of time the intent 2001, for fiscal year (FY) 2002 funds and the U.S. border with Mexico will be is established. October 1, 2002, for FY 2003 funds. important at the time full applications Note 1: Please provide 2 copies of intention are evaluated and selected. to submit a grant application. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Note 2: Assuming that funds are available Patrick DeCorla-Souza, Highway Pricing Section III—Request for Comments on for discretionary allocation, the FHWA and System Analysis Team (202) 366– Program Implementation in FY 2002, FY would solicit full applications for such 4076; or Mr. Steven Rochlis, Office of 2003. funds. Awards for the funds available for the Chief Counsel, (202) 366–1395; The FHWA is specifically requesting discretionary allocation should be expected FHWA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., to be announced by late spring calendar Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are comments NCPD/CBI program 2002. implementation. In addition, agencies from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday that wish to reconsider their previous (Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; secs. 1118 and through Friday, except Federal holidays. comment(s) or make additional 1119, Pub. L. 105–178, 112 Stat. 107, at 161 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: comments on other aspects of program (1998); and 49 CFR 1.48) Issued on: April 27, 2001. Electronic Access implementation are invited to do so. Commenters should reference the Vincent F. Schimmoller, You may submit or retrieve comments docket number noted in the beginning Deputy Executive Director, Federal Highway online through the Document of this notice. Administration. Management System (DMS) at: http:// [FR Doc. 01–11402 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] dms.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable formats Section IV—Solicitation of Intent to BILLING CODE 4910–22–P include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97), submit Applications for FY 2002 Grants MS Word for Mac (versions 6 to 8), Rich As explained earlier, the FHWA is Text File (RTF), American Standard requesting only statements of intent to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Code Information Interchange submit grant applications at this time. (ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document Federal Highway Administration Send such statements of intent to Format (PDF), and WordPerfect submit applications for grants to the [FHWA Docket FHWA–98–4300] (versions 7 to 8). The DMS is available division office in the State where the 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. applicant is located. If a project is Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Electronic submission and retrieval help located in more than one State, send the Century; Implementation for and guidelines are available under the application to the division office in the Participation in the Value Pricing Pilot help section of the web site. lead State. The FHWA will not penalize Program An electronic copy of this document a State or MPO that, subsequent to the AGENCY: Federal Highway may be downloaded using a modem and Appropriations Act and subsequent Administration (FHWA), DOT. suitable communications software from solicitation for full applications, ACTION: Notice; solicitation for the Government Printing Office’s chooses not to apply for funding or participation. Electronic Bulletin Board Service at submits an application that is close to (202) 512–1661. Internet users may but not the same as the submittal of SUMMARY: This notice invites State or reach the Federal Register’s home page intent or where priorities are local governments or other public at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the
VerDate 11
Government Printing Office’s database The Value Pricing Pilot Program is a from congested facilities, or by at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara. continuation of the Congestion Pricing encouraging consolidation of trips, Pilot Program authorized by section value pricing charges are intended to Background 1012(b) of the ISTEA. Under this promote economic efficiency both Section 1012(b) of the ISTEA, as program, pricing projects have reached generally and within the commercial amended by section 1216(a) of the TEA– the implementation stage in San Diego, freight sector. They also reduce 21, authorizes the Secretary of California; Lee County, Florida; congestion, improve air quality, Transportation (the Secretary) to create Houston, Texas; and San Francisco, conserve energy, and meet transit a Pilot Program by entering into California. In addition, pre-program productivity goals. cooperative agreements with up to 15 planning activities have been completed A ‘‘value pricing project’’ means any State or local governments or other or are on-going in the following States: implementation of value pricing public authorities, to establish, Oregon, California, Colorado, concepts or techniques meeting the maintain, and monitor local value Minnesota, Washington, Florida, definitions contained in this notice and pricing pilot programs. The statute Maryland, Texas, and New York. Funds included under a ‘‘local value pricing provides that any value pricing project were also used to support the California pilot program’’ under this section, included under these programs may DOT’s monitoring and evaluation study where a local value pricing pilot involve the use of tolls on the Interstate of the private, variable-priced toll lanes program includes one or more value system. This is an exception to the along State Route 91 in Orange County, pricing projects serving a single general provisions concerning tolls on California. geographic area, such as a metropolitan the Interstate system as contained in 23 area. ‘‘Cooperative agreement’’ means U.S.C. 129 and 301. A maximum of $11 Discussion of Comments the agreement signed between the million is authorized for each of the The FHWA received three comments FHWA and a State or local government, fiscal years 2000 through 2003 to be to our previous notice published on or other public authority to implement made available to carry out Pilot October 5, 1998, at 63 FR 53487. One local value pricing pilot programs under Program requirements. The Federal was a comment from a private citizen, this section (See 49 CFR part 18). share payable under the program is 80 one from a metropolitan planning percent of the cost of the project. Funds organization, and one from a national Program Objective allocated by the Secretary to a State trade association. Two of the comments The overall objective of the Pilot under this section shall remain available were favorable. The third commenter, a Program is to support efforts by State for obligation by the State for a period national trade association expressed and local governments or other public of three years after the last day of the support for the value pricing concept. authorities to establish local value fiscal year for which funds are However, as a matter of policy, the pricing pilot programs, to provide for authorized. If, on September 30 of any association opposes new or increased the monitoring and evaluation of value year, the amount of funds made peak period tolls on Interstate highways pricing projects included in such available for the Pilot Program, but not because it does not consider such tolls programs, and to report on their effects. allocated, exceeds $8 million, the excess to be efficient and truckers do not have While the Pilot Program’s primary focus amount will be apportioned to all States the same flexibility with regard to their is on value pricing on roads, for purposes of the Surface schedules as motorists engaged in consideration will also be given to the Transportation Program. personal travel. However, based on the use of other market-based approaches to Funds available for the Pilot Program pilot projects to date that have congestion relief, such as parking can be used to support pre-project study implemented pricing programs on pricing, freight access pricing, electronic activities and to pay for implementation Interstates, tolling has only been payment services linked to value costs of value pricing projects. implemented on special-use lanes, and pricing, or pay-as-you-drive services, Section 1216(a)(5) of the TEA–21 has actually improved traffic flow such as usage based auto insurance, amends section 1012(b) of the ISTEA by slightly in the regular unrestricted use provided the project incorporates adding subsection (6) which provides lanes by shifting some traffic from them significant price variations by time, that a State may permit vehicles with to the tolled lanes. fewer than two occupants to operate in location, and/or level of congestion. Purpose high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes if Potential Project Types the vehicles are part of a local value The purpose of this notice is to pricing pilot program under this section. provide general information about the The FHWA is seeking proposals to This is an exception to the general Pilot Program and the FWHA’s plans for use value pricing projects to reduce provision contained in 23 U.S.C. 102, implementing the program, and to invite congestion, improve system that no fewer than two occupants per State or local governments or other performance, and promote mobility. vehicle are allowed on HOV lanes. public authorities to make applications Value pricing charges are expected to Potential financial effects of value for participation in the Pilot Program. accomplish this purpose by encouraging pricing projects on low-income drivers the use of alternative times, modes, shall be considered and, where such Definitions routes, or trip patterns. To increase the effects are expected to be significant, ‘‘Value pricing,’’ ‘‘congestion likelihood of generating information on possible mitigation measures should be pricing,’’ ‘‘peak-period pricing,’’ a variety of useful value pricing identified, such as providing new or ‘‘variable pricing,’’ or ‘‘variable tolling,’’ strategies, proposed projects having as expanded transit service as an integral are all terms used to refer to direct time- many of the following characteristics as part of the value pricing project. The of-travel charges for road use, possibly possible will receive highest priority for costs of such mitigation measures can be varying by location, time of day, Federal support. Projects of interest included as part of the value pricing severity of congestion, vehicle include: project implementation cost. The occupancy, or type of facility. By 1. Applications of value pricing Secretary is required to report to shifting some trips to off-peak periods, which are comprehensive, such as area Congress every two years on the effects to mass transit or other higher- wide pricing, pricing of multiple of local value pricing pilot programs. occupancy vehicles, or to routes away facilities or corridors, and/or
VerDate 11
combinations of road pricing and 5. Projects with anticipated value Pre-Project Studies parking pricing. pricing charges that have as the key 2. Pricing may be available at key characteristic that they are targeted at A small amount of Pilot Program traffic bottlenecks, single traffic vehicles causing congestion, and are set funds will be used to assist State and corridors, or pricing on single highway at levels significant enough to encourage local governments in carrying out pre- facilities, including bridges and tunnels. drivers to use alternative times, routes, project study activities designed to lead Proposals to shift from a fixed to a modes, or trip patterns during congested to implementation of a value pricing variable toll schedule on existing toll periods, are likely to receive favorable project, including activities such as pre- project planning, public participation, facilities are encouraged (i.e., consideration. Proposed projects that consensus building, modeling, impact combinations of peak-period surcharges contemplate value pricing charges that assessment, financial planning studies, and off-peak discounts). Pricing of are not significant enough to influence and work necessary to meet any Federal queue jumps is also eligible. A queue demand, such as minor increases in fees or State environmental or other jump is defined as a facility that can be during peak-periods, or moderate toll planning requirements that assist in used by certain types of traffic to bypass increases instituted primarily for establishing value pricing projects and points on the transportation network financing purposes, will be given low programs. The intent of the pre-project where congestion is particularly severe priority. and occurs in a predictable pattern study phase of the Pilot Program is to 6. Projects that are likely to add to the support efforts to identify and evaluate (colloquially called ‘‘bottlenecks’’). base of knowledge about the various Queue jumps can be as elaborate as an value pricing project alternatives, and to design, implementation, effectiveness, prepare the necessary groundwork for elevated facility or as simple as an at- operational, and acceptability grade lane addition. possible future implementation. Purely dimensions of value pricing are eligible academic studies of value pricing (not 3. There are other applications of for consideration under the Pilot designed to lead to possible project value pricing that are also acceptable, Program. The FHWA is seeking implementation), or broad, area-wide including pricing on lanes otherwise information related to the impacts of planning studies which incorporate reserved for high occupancy vehicles, value pricing on the following: travel value pricing as an option, will not be known as high occupancy toll (HOT) behavior (mode use, time-of-travel, trip funded under this program. Broad lanes, or pricing on newly constructed destinations, trip generation, etc., by planning studies can be funded with lanes. Highest priority will be given to private and commercial trips); on traffic regular Federal-aid highway or transit lane pricing proposals that cover conditions (trip lengths, speeds, level of planning funds. Proposals for pre- multiple facilities and/or offer service); on implementation issues project studies will be selected based on innovative pricing, enforcement, or (technology, innovative pricing the likelihood that they will lead to operational technologies. In order to techniques, public acceptance, implementation of pilot tests of value protect the integrity of HOV programs, administration, operation, enforcement, pricing meeting the characteristics the FHWA will give priority to those legality, institutional issues, etc.); on described in the previous section. HOT lane proposals where it is clear revenues, their uses and financial plans; that an HOV lane is underutilized and on different types of users and Eligible Costs where local officials can demonstrate businesses; and on measures designed Funds available for the Pilot Program that the pilot project would not to mitigate possible adverse impacts and undermine a long term regional strategy can be used to support pre-project study their effectiveness. These diverse activities and to pay for implementation to increase ridesharing. In addition, information needs mean that the FHWA areas proposing HOT lane projects are costs of value pricing projects. Costs may fund different types of value eligible for reimbursement include costs encouraged to use revenues from the pricing applications in different local project to promote improved transit of planning for, setting up, managing, contexts to maximize the potential of operating, monitoring, evaluating, and service or other programs that will the pilot program. encourage transit use and ridesharing. reporting on local value pricing pilot 4. Innovative time-of-day parking 7. Projects that do not have adverse projects. Examples of specific costs pricing strategies, provided the level effects on alternative routes or modes, or eligible for reimbursement include the and coverage of proposed parking on low-income or other transportation following: charges, is sufficient to reduce disadvantaged groups, are encouraged 1. Pre-Project Study Costs—Pre- congestion. Parking pricing strategies under the Pilot Program. If such effects project study activity costs allowed that are integrated with other market- are anticipated, proposed pricing include: pre-project planning, public based pricing strategies (e.g., value programs should incorporate measures participation, consensus building, pricing) are encouraged. Parking pricing to mitigate any major adverse impacts, marketing, impact assessment, strategies should be designed to including enhancement of modeling, financial planning, influence trip-making behavior, and transportation alternatives for peak- technology assessments and might include peak-period parking period travelers, services such as ‘‘life- specifications, and other pre- surcharges, or policies such as parking line’’ toll rates aimed at low income implementation work that relate to the cash-out, where cash is offered to travelers, and toll credits earned by establishment of the value pricing employees in lieu of subsidized parking. motorists in regular lanes which can be project. Costs of pre-project study Pricing of a single parking facility, used to pay tolls on priced lanes. activities cannot be reimbursed for coverage of a few employee spaces, or While the FHWA is seeking proposals longer than three years. pricing of parking spaces in a small that incorporate some or all of these 2. Implementation Costs— area, for example, are unlikely to receive project characteristics, these guidelines Implementation costs are costs priority treatment, unless they are intended only to illustrate selection necessary for implementation of specific incorporate a truly unique element priorities, not to limit potential program value pricing projects such as costs for which might facilitate broader participants from proposing new and setting up, managing, operating, applications of value pricing across innovative pricing approaches for evaluating, and reporting on a value local areas and States. incorporation in the program. pricing project, including:
VerDate 11
a. Costs associated with Complementary actions such as 1. Congestion problem to be implementation of a value pricing construction of HOV lanes, the addressed. project, including necessary salaries and implementation of traffic control 2. Nature of proposed or potential expenses or other administrative and systems or transit projects can be pricing projects to respond to that operational costs, such as installation of funded through other highway and problem, including overall project goals, equipment necessary for operation of a transit programs eligible under TEA–21 potential facilities to be included, time pilot project (e.g., AVI technology, video and from new revenues raised as a line for study and possible equipment for traffic monitoring, other result of a pilot. Those interested in implementation of value pricing instrumentation), enforcement costs, participating in the Pilot Program are projects. costs of monitoring and evaluating encouraged to explore opportunities for 3. Parties proposed as being project operations, and costs of combining funds from these other signatories to the cooperative agreement continuing public relations activities programs with Pilot Program funds. with the FHWA. At a minimum, by the during the period of implementation. This is not meant to imply that Federal time the refined proposal is submitted, b. Costs of providing transportation funds may be used to match Pilot the local Metropolitan Planning alternatives, such as new or expanded Program funds unless specific statutory Organization (MPO) and the owner/ transit service provided as an integral authority permits such matching. operator of the facility or facilities to be part of the value pricing project. Funds Eligible Uses of Revenue priced should express support for the are not available to replace existing program. Indications of support from sources of support for transit services. The FHWA will provide up to the affected parties, including c. Depending on the availability of legislatively allowable 80 percent share representatives of business, labor, funds, a limited amount of funds may be of the estimated costs of an approved industry, transportation users, and/or made available to toll authorities to project. Any revenues generated by a local residents, or plans for obtaining purchase an insurance policy that will pilot project must be applied first to pay such support should be included. cover unanticipated lost revenue for pilot project implementation costs. 4. Extent of public participation in the resulting from a pilot test of value Any project revenues in excess of pilot development of the proposal, or of plans pricing. This may be necessary to avoid project implementation expenses may for future public participation activities. jeopardizing a toll authority’s bond be used for any programs eligible under Potential equity consequences of any covenants. If an agency decides to title 23, U.S. Code. Uses of revenue are proposed projects should be portrayed purchase an insurance policy to cover encouraged which will support the in general terms, and if adverse impacts anticipated loss of revenue, federal goals of the value pricing program, are anticipated, preliminary plans for participation would be no more than 50 particularly uses designed to provide responding to such problems should be percent of the total cost or a dollar cap. benefits to those traveling in the identified. For example, a toll authority might corridor where the project is being propose a revenue-neutral pricing implemented. 5. Legal and administrative authority strategy with peak-period surcharges needed to carry out a value pricing Applying for Program Participation and off-peak discounts designed to shift project, extent to which these have been demand patterns and improve customer Qualified applicants include local, obtained, and further steps needed to service, or to reduce the need for future regional and State government agencies, obtain necessary authority. capacity expansion. Even though no as well as public tolling authorities. 6. Plans for pre-project study, or reduction in toll revenues is intended, Although project agreements must be findings from complete pre-project the FHWA recognizes that forecasting with public authorities, a local value studies. The sketch plan should be traffic and revenue changes is pricing program partnership may also submitted through the State Department inherently uncertain, and that an include private tolling authorities and of Transportation to the appropriate insurance policy to offset any non-profit organizations. To streamline FHWA Division Administrator, who unintended toll revenue losses would be the process of applying for program will forward the plan to FHWA’s designed to help overcome institutional participation as much as possible, it is Director, Office of Transportation Policy barriers to the testing and use of value suggested that, prior to submitting a Studies. To expedite the review, the pricing by existing toll authorities. formal application for program applicant should concurrently send a Project implementation costs can be participation, potential applicants copy directly to the FHWA Highway supported for a period of at least one contact their State FHWA Division Pricing and System Analysis Team at year, and thereafter until such time that Office and/or the FHWA Highway 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, the project generates sufficient revenues Pricing and Systems Analysis Team in D.C. 20590. to fund its implementation costs the Office of Transportation Policy Based on initial review of the sketch without Federal support, except that Studies to discuss their interest in the plan, the FHWA will work with the implementation costs for a pilot project Pilot Program and the general nature of proposing authority to develop a refined cannot be reimbursed for longer than the proposed local value pricing Pilot proposal for review by the Federal three years. Each implementation Program or pre-project study. The Interagency Review Group which project included in a local value pricing FHWA will then be able to provide provides support to the FHWA in pilot program will be considered materials and technical support to assist evaluating program applications (see the separately for this purpose. Funds may in the development of the application. caption ‘‘Review Process,’’ in this not be used to pay for activities Following this initial contact, potential preamble below). Ideally, the refined conducted prior to approval of Pilot applicants should submit a sketch plan proposal will include: Program participation. Funds may not for the proposed pricing program before 1. A description of the congestion be used to construct new highway developing a full-scale proposal. To problem being addressed (current and through lanes, bridges, etc., even if facilitate a streamlined application projected); those facilities are to be priced, but toll process, the sketch plan need not 2. A description of the proposed ramps or minor pavement additions exceed 15 pages. The sketch plan pricing program and its goals, including needed to facilitate toll collection or should provide a brief description of the description of facilities included, and, enforcement are eligible. following: for implementation projects, expected
VerDate 11
pricing schedules, technology to be preamble under the caption ‘‘Potential then be invited to enter into used, enforcement programs, and so on; Project Types,’’ and include some of the negotiations with the FHWA to develop 3. Preliminary estimates of the social proposal characteristics described in a cooperative agreement to define the and economic effects of the pricing this section, and there is a strong scope of work for the value pricing program, including potential equity indication that these items will be program. The cooperative agreement impacts, and a plan or methodology for completed within a short time. will be governed by the Federal statutes further refining these estimates for all Review Process and regulations cited in the agreement pricing project(s) included in the and 49 CFR part 18, Uniform program; Upon receipt of the detailed proposal, Administrative Requirements for Grants 4. The role of alternative the FHWA’s Highway Pricing and transportation modes in the project, and Systems Analysis Team will arrange for and Cooperative Agreements to State anticipated enhancements proposed to a review of the proposal by the Federal and Local Governments, as they relate to be included in the pricing program; Interagency Review Group established the acceptance and use of Federal funds 5. A time line for the pre-project study to assist the FHWA in assessing the for this program. and implementation phases of the likelihood that proposed local value Prior to the FHWA approval of pricing project (proposals indicating early pricing programs will provide valid and project implementation, value pricing implementation of pricing projects that useful tests of value pricing concepts. programs must be shown to be will allow evaluation during the life of The Review Group is composed of consistent with Federal metropolitan TEA–21 will receive priority); representatives of several concerned and statewide planning requirements. 6. A description of tasks to be carried offices in the U.S. DOT, including out as part of each phase of the project, offices in the FHWA, the Federal Transit Implementation projects outside and an estimate of costs associated with Administration, the Office of the metropolitan areas must be included in each; Secretary of Transportation, and the the approved statewide transportation 7. Plans for monitoring and evaluating Office of Intermodalism. The U.S. improvement program and be selected value pricing implementation projects, Environmental Protection Agency and in accordance with the requirements set including plans for data collection and the U.S. Department of Energy are also forth in section 1204(f)(3) of the TEA– analysis, before and after assessment, represented on the Review Group. To 21. and long term monitoring and facilitate review, applicants should Implementation projects in documenting of project effects; submit an electronic copy of their metropolitan areas must be: (a) Included 8. A detailed finance and revenue application, plus an unbound in, or consistent with, the approved plan, including for implementation reproducible hard copy of the proposal. metropolitan transportation plan (if the projects a budget for capital and As with the sketch plan, detailed area is in nonattainment for a operating costs; a description of all proposals should be submitted through transportation related pollutant, the funding sources, planned expenditures, the MPO and/or State DOT to the proposed uses of revenues, and a plan appropriate FHWA Division metropolitan plan must be in for projects to become financially self- Administrator, who will forward the conformance with the State air quality sustaining (without Federal support) plan to the FHWA’s Director, Office of implementation plan); (b) included in within three years of implementation; Transportation Policy Studies. The the approved metropolitan and 9. Plans for involving key affected FHWA will review applications statewide transportation improvement parties, coalition building, media received and make program participant programs (if the metropolitan area is in relations, etc., including either selections based on the criteria a nonattainment area for a demonstration of previous public contained in this notice. transportation related pollutant, the involvement in the development of the To ensure that all projects receive fair metropolitan transportation proposed pricing program, or plans to consideration, the FHWA encourages all improvement program must be in ensure adequate public involvement potential grant applicants to submit conformance with the State air quality prior to implementation; their proposals no later than October 1, implementation plan); (c) selected in 10. Plans for meeting all Federal, State 2001, for FY 2002 funds and October 1, accordance with the requirements in and local legal and administrative 2002, for FY 2003 funds. This timeline Public Law No. 105–178, section requirements for project will allow for a fair comparison among 1203(h)(5) or (i)(2); and (d) consistent implementation, including necessary proposals received and will also allow with any existing congestion Federal-aid planning and environmental the FHWA to make timely management system in transportation requirements. The FHWA will give recommendations to the Secretary management areas, developed pursuant priority to proposals where projects are regarding how to expend available to 23 U.S.C. 134(i)(3). included as a part of (or are consistent funds in accordance with the criteria with) a broad program addressing discussed in this preamble. Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; sec. 1216(a), Pub. congestion, mobility, air quality and L. 105–178, 112 Stat. 107; 49 CFR 1.48 Cooperative Agreement energy conservation, where an area has Issued on: April 27, 2001. congestion management systems (CMS) Based on the recommendations of the Vincent F. Schimmoller, for Transportation Management Areas Review Group, the FHWA will identify (urbanized areas over 200,000 those Pilot Program proposals which Deputy Executive Director. population or those designated by the have the greatest potential for promoting [FR Doc. 01–11403 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Secretary) and the congestion mitigation the objectives of the Pilot Program, BILLING CODE 4910–22–P and air quality (CMAQ) program. including demonstrating the effects of If some of these items are not value pricing on driver behavior, traffic available or fully developed at the time volume, ridesharing, transit ridership, the proposal is submitted, proposals air quality, availability of funds for will still be considered for support if transportation programs, and other they meet some of the priority interests measures of the effects of value pricing. of the FHWA as described in this Those Pilot Program candidates will
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Background: In 1986, Congress Commercial Driver’s License enacted the Commercial Motor Vehicle Information System (CDLIS). Federal Motor Carrier Safety Safety Act (CMVSA), Pub. L. 99–570, Respondents: Motor carriers, CMV Administration Title XII, among other things, to drivers, and State government. establish minimum standards for testing Estimated Total Annual Burden: [Docket No. FMCSA–2000–8210] and licensing persons who want to 938,995 hours. The information operate a commercial motor vehicle collection is comprised of four Notice of Request To Renew Approval (CMV) by weight or use category, and components: of an Information Collection: OMB No. requiring drivers to have a single (1) Notification of convictions: 2126–0011 (Commercial Driver commercial driver’s license (CDL) and Estimated number of annual responses = Licensing and Test Standards) driving history record. Under 49 CFR 3,333,333 (10 million CDL drivers/3 = 3,333,333). It takes approximately 10 AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 383.5, a CMV is defined as a motor minutes to notify a motor carrier Administration (FMCSA), DOT. vehicle or combination of motor vehicles which: (a) has a gross concerning convictions. Each driver ACTION: Notice and request for combination weight rating of 11,794 or averages approximately 1 conviction comments. more kilograms (kg) (26,001 or more every 3 years. The notification requirement has an estimated annual SUMMARY: This notice announces that pounds (lbs)) inclusive of a towed unit with a gross vehicle weight rating burden of 555,556 burden hours. (10 FMCSA intends to submit a request to × the Office of Management and Budget (GVWR) of more than 4,536 kg (10,000 million /3 10/60 = 555,556 hours); (2) Employment history: Estimated (OMB) for renewed approval of the lbs); (b) has a GVWR of 11,794 kg or annual turnover rate = 14%. There are information collection described below. more (26,001 or more lbs); (c) is an estimated 1,400,000 annual This information collection is needed to designed to transport 16 or more responses to this requirement (10 ensure that motor carriers and the States passengers, including the driver; or (d) million × .14 = 1,400,000). It takes are complying with notification is of any size and is used to transport approximately 15 minutes to complete requirements for information about hazardous materials which require the this requirement. The employment licensing, violations, convictions, and motor vehicle to be placarded under the history requirement has an estimated disqualifications within certain time Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 CFR part 172, subpart F. annual burden of 350,000 hours (10 periods as required by the Commercial × × The CMVSA requires a driver to million .25 .14 = 350,000 hours); Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (3) State compliance and certification: notify both their employer and the (CMVSA), as amended. This notice is There are 51 responses to this licensing official in the driver’s State of required by the Paperwork Reduction requirement (50 States and the District licensure of all violations of any State or Act. of Columbia). The compliance and local laws relating to traffic control DATES: Your comments must be certification requirement has an (except parking violations). A person submitted by July 6, 2001. estimated annual burden of 1,632 hours whose CDL is suspended, revoked, or (51 × 32 hours = 1,632 hours); and ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver canceled by a State, or who is (4) CDLIS Recordkeeping: 50 States comments to the U.S. Department of disqualified from operating a CMV for and the District of Columbia are Transportation, Dockets Management any period, also must notify their required to enter data into CDLIS and to Facility, Room PL–401, 400 Seventh employer of such actions. A person perform record checks before issuing, Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or applying for employment as a CMV renewing or upgrading a CDL or submit electronically at http:// driver also must notify prospective allowing a CDL transfer. We estimate dmses.dot.gov/submit. Be sure to employers of their employment history that the average amount of time for each include the docket number appearing in as a CMV driver for the previous ten CDLIS inquiry is 2 minutes. The total the heading of this document on your years. comment. All comments received will burden hours is 31,807 for these Under section 31309, Title 49, U.S.C. combined activities: 10, 761 hours for be available for examination and (49 U.S.C. 31309), the Secretary of copying at the above address from 9 all States to create a new driver; 3,560 Transportation must maintain an hours for all States to change the state a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through information clearinghouse and Friday, except Federal holidays. If you of record; and 17,486 hours for all States depository of information about the to change data. would like to be notified when your issuance of license, identification, and comment is received, you must include disqualification of CMV operators, in Public Comments Invited a self-addressed, stamped postcard or conjunction with § 31106. The Secretary you may print the acknowledgment We invite you to comment on any must consult with the States in carrying aspect of this information collection, page that appears after submitting out this section. States must certify that comments electronically. including, but not limited to (1) whether they are in compliance with the CDL the collection of information is FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. program. If a State does not necessary for the proper performance of Larry Slade, (202) 366–5721, Office of substantially comply with these the functions of the FMCSA, including Safety Programs, State Programs requirements, the FMCSA may penalize whether the information is practical and Division (MC–ESS), Federal Motor the State until compliance is achieved. useful; (2) the accuracy of the estimated Carrier Safety Administration, 400 The information required to be collected burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, by the States will be used to determine usefulness, and clarity of the collected 20590. Office hours are from 7:30 a.m. whether the States are in substantial information; and (4) ways to minimize to 4 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, compliance with these requirements. the collection burden without reducing except Federal holidays. This request for renewed approval the quality of the information collected. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: includes additional burdens for Commercial Driver Licensing and Test recordkeeping requirements under 49 Electronic Access and Filing Standards. CFR 384.231(d) concerning retention You may submit or retrieve comments OMB Number: 2126–0011. and updating of driver records on the online through the Docket Management
VerDate 11
System (DMS) at http://dmses.dot.gov/ The transaction was scheduled to be collection of information should be submit. Acceptable formats include: MS consummated no earlier than April 30, received on or before July 6, 2001. Word (versions 95 to 97), MS Word for 2001, the effective date of the exemption ADDRESSES: Submit written comments Mac (versions 6 to 8), Rich Text File (7 days after the exemption was filed). on the collection of information to (RTF), American Standard Code If the verified notice contains false or Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits Information Interchange (ASCII)(TXT), misleading information, the exemption Administration (20S52), Department of Portable Document Format (PDF), and is void ab initio. Petitions to reopen the Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, WordPerfect (versions 7 to 8). The DMS proceeding to revoke the exemption NW., Washington, DC 20420 or is available 24 hours each day, 365 days under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed [email protected]. Please refer to ‘‘OMB each year. Electronic submission and at any time. The filing of a petition to Control No. 2900–0144’’ in any retrieval help and guidelines are revoke will not automatically stay the correspondence. available under the help section of the transaction. web site. You may also download an An original and 10 copies of all FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: electronic copy of this document from pleadings, referring to STB Finance Nancy J. Kessinger at (202) 273–7079 or the DOT Docket Management System on Docket No. 34035, must be filed with FAX (202) 275–5947. the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov/ the Surface Transportation Board, Office SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the search.htm. Please include the docket of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 PRA of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13; 44 U.S.C., number appearing in the heading of this K Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423– 3501–3520), Federal agencies must document. 0001. In addition, a copy of each obtain approval from the Office of pleading must be served on Thomas F. Management and Budget (OMB) for each Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act McFarland, Jr., Esq., McFarland & collection of information they conduct of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; Herman, 20 North Wacker Drive, Suite and 49 CFR 1.73. or sponsor. This request for comment is 1330, Chicago, IL 60606–2902. being made pursuant to Section Issued on: May 2, 2001. Board decisions and notices are 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. Brian M. McLaughlin, available on our website at With respect to the following Acting Deputy Administrator. www.stb.dot.gov. collection of information, VBA invites [FR Doc. 01–11417 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Decided: May 1, 2001. comments on: (1) Whether the proposed BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P By the Board, David M. Konschnik, collection of information is necessary Director, Office of Proceedings. for the proper performance of VBA’s Vernon A. Williams, functions, including whether the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Secretary. information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the Surface Transportation Board [FR Doc. 01–11367 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] burden of the proposed collection of BILLING CODE 4915–00–P [STB Finance Docket No. 34035] information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the The Central Illinois Railroad Company– information to be collected; and (4) Acquisition and Operation Exemption– DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS ways to minimize the burden of the Rail Lines of Union Pacific Railroad AFFAIRS collection of information on Company and Canadian Pacific Rail [OMB Control No. 2900–0144] respondents, including through the use System at Elk Grove Village, Cook and of automated collection techniques or DuPage Counties, IL Proposed Information Collection the use of other forms of information Activity: Proposed Collection; technology. The Central Illinois Railroad Comment Request Title: HUD/VA Addendum to Uniform Company (CIRY), a Class III rail carrier, Residential Loan Application, VA Form AGENCY: Veterans Benefits has filed a verified notice of exemption 26–1802a, and Freddie Mac 65/Fannie Administration, Department of Veterans under 49 CFR 1150.41 to acquire by Mae Form 1003, Uniform Residential Affairs. lease and operate rail lines owned by Loan Application. the Union Pacific Railroad Company ACTION: Notice. OMB Control Number: 2900–0144. (UP) and the Canadian Pacific Rail System (CP). CIRY describes the track in SUMMARY: The Veterans Benefits Type of Review: Extension of a greater detail as follows: the Centex Administration (VBA), Department of currently approved collection. Industrial Park Trackage owned by UP, Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an Abstract: VA Form 26–1802a serves as or jointly by UP and CP, beginning at opportunity for public comment on the a joint loan application for both VA and the west edge of York Road, which is proposed collection of certain the Department of Housing and Urban the west end of UP’s approximately 800- information by the agency. Under the Development (HUD). Lenders and foot Elk Grove lead track that extends Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of veterans use the form to apply for from UP’s Milwaukee Subdivision, at 1995, Federal agencies are required to guaranty of home loans. milepost 7.8, consisting of publish notice in the Federal Register Affected Public: Individuals or approximately 25 miles of tracks.1 concerning each proposed collection of households and Business or other for- information, including each proposed profit. 1 On April 25, 2001, a petition to stay the effective extension of a currently approved Estimated Annual Burden: 20,000 date of the exemption was filed by Joseph C. Szabo, collection, and allow 60 days for public hours. for and on behalf of United Transportation Union- comment in response to the notice. This Estimated Average Burden Per Illinois Legislative Board. The petition for stay was Respondent: 6 minutes. denied in The Central Illinois Railroad Company– notice solicits comments on information Acquisition and Operation Exemption–Rail Lines of needed on the residential loan Frequency of Response: On occasion. Union Pacific Railroad Company and Canadian application. Estimated Number of Respondents: Pacific Rail System at Elk Grove Village, Cook and 200,000. DuPage Counties, IL, STB Finance Docket No. DATES: Written comments and 34035 (STB served Apr. 27, 2001). recommendations on the proposed Dated: March 30, 2001.
VerDate 11
By direction of the Secretary. DATES: Written comments and ways to minimize the burden of the Barbara H. Epps, recommendations on the proposed collection of information on Management Analyst, Information collection of information should be respondents, including through the use Management Service. received on or before July 6, 2001. of automated collection techniques or [FR Doc. 01–11431 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: Submit written comments the use of other forms of information BILLING CODE 8320–01–U on the collection of information to technology. Nancy J. Kessinger, Veterans Benefits Title: Application for Educational Administration (20S52), Department of Assistance Test Program Benefits, VA DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, Form 22–8889. AFFAIRS NW., Washington, DC 20420 or e-mail OMB Control Number: 2900–0383. [OMB Control No. 2900–0383] [email protected]. Please refer to Type of Review: Extension of a ‘‘OMB Control No. 2900–0383’’ in any currently approved collection. Proposed Information Collection correspondence. Abstract: Veterans and servicepersons Activity: Proposed Collection; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: pursuing approved programs of Comment Request Nancy J. Kessinger at (202) 273–7079 or education under the Educational AGENCY: Veterans Benefits FAX (202) 275–5947. Assistance Test Program (EATP) use VA Administration, Department of Veterans SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Form 22–8889 to apply for educational Affairs. PRA of 1995 (Public Law 104–13; 44 assistance. The information collected is used to determine eligibility for and ACTION: Notice. U.S.C., 3501–3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of entitlement to EATP benefits. SUMMARY: The Veterans Benefits Management and Budget (OMB) for each Affected Public: Individuals or Administration (VBA), Department of collection of information they conduct households. Veterans Affairs (VA), is announcing an or sponsor. This request for comment is Estimated Annual Burden: 6 hours. opportunity for public comment on the being made pursuant to Section Estimated Average Burden Per proposed collection of certain 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA. Respondent: 30 minutes. information by the agency. Under the With respect to the following Frequency of Response: Generally one Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of collection of information, VBA invites time. 1995, Federal agencies are required to comments on: (1) Whether the proposed Estimated Number of Respondents: publish notice in the Federal Register collection of information is necessary 12. concerning each proposed collection of for the proper performance of VBA’s information, including each proposed functions, including whether the Dated: March 30, 2001. extension of a currently approved information will have practical utility; By direction of the Secretary. collection, and allow 60 days for public (2) the accuracy of VBA’s estimate of the Barbara H. Epps, comment in response to the notice. This burden of the proposed collection of Management Analyst, Information notice solicits comments for information information; (3) ways to enhance the Management Service. needed to apply for Educational quality, utility, and clarity of the [FR Doc. 01–11432 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] Assistance Test Program benefits. information to be collected; and (4) BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
VerDate 11
Part II
Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21 et al. Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements; Final Rule
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION electronic Docket Management System incorporated instructions for (DMS) Web page (http://dms.dot.gov/ maintenance and inspection of the fuel Federal Aviation Administration search). tank system into their inspection (2) On the search page type in the last programs. 14 CFR Parts 21, 25, 91, 121, 125, and four digits of the Docket number shown Third, for new designs, the proposal 129 at the beginning of this notice. Click on included a requirement for minimizing [Docket No. FAA–1999–6411; Amendment ‘‘search.’’ the flammability of fuel tanks, a Nos. 21–78, 25–102, 91–266, 121–282, 125– (3) On the next page, which contains requirement concerning detailed failure 36, 129–30] the Docket summary information for the analysis to preclude the presence of Docket you selected, click on the final ignition sources in the fuel tanks and RIN 2120–AG62 rule. including mandatory fuel system (4) To view or download the Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System maintenance in the limitations section document click on either ‘‘Scanned Design Review, Flammability of the Instructions for Continued Image (TIFF)’’ or ‘‘Adobe PDF.’’ Airworthiness. Reduction, and Maintenance and You can also get an electronic copy Inspection Requirements using the Internet through FAA’s web Issues Prompting This Rulemaking Activity AGENCY: Federal Aviation page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/ Administration (FAA), DOT. nprm/nprm.htm or the Federal On July 17, 1996, a 25-year old Boeing ACTION: Final rule. Register’s web page at http:// Model 747–100 series airplane was www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/ involved in an inflight breakup after SUMMARY: This rule requires design aces140.html. takeoff from Kennedy International approval holders of certain turbine- You can also get a copy by submitting Airport in New York, resulting in 230 powered transport category airplanes, a request to the Federal Aviation fatalities. The accident investigation and of any subsequent modifications to Administration, Office of Rulemaking, conducted by the National these airplanes, to substantiate that the ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) design of the fuel tank system precludes SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by indicated that the center wing fuel tank the existence of ignition sources within calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to exploded due to an unknown ignition the airplane fuel tanks. It also requires identify the amendment number or source. The NTSB issued developing and implementing docket number of this final rule. recommendations intended to: • Reduce heating of the fuel in the maintenance and inspection Small Business Regulatory Enforcement center wing fuel tanks on the existing instructions to assure the safety of the Fairness Act fuel tank system. For new type designs, fleet of transport airplanes, this rule also requires demonstrating The Small Business Regulatory • Reduce or eliminate operation with that ignition sources cannot be present Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of flammable vapors in the fuel tanks of in fuel tanks when failure conditions are 1996 requires FAA to comply with new type certificated airplanes, and • considered, identifying any safety- small entity requests for information or Reevaluate the fuel system design critical maintenance actions, and advice about compliance with statutes and maintenance practices on the fleet incorporating a means either to and regulations within its jurisdiction. of transport airplanes. minimize development of flammable Therefore, any small entity that has a The accident investigation focused on vapors in fuel tanks or to prevent question regarding this document may mechanical failure as providing the catastrophic damage if ignition does contact their local FAA official, or the energy source that ignited the fuel occur. These actions are based on person listed under FOR FURTHER vapors inside the tank. accident investigations and adverse INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out The NTSB announced their official service experience, which have shown more about SBREFA on the Internet at findings of the TWA 800 accident at a that unforeseen failure modes and lack our site, http://www.gov/avr/arm/ public meeting held August 22–23, of specific maintenance procedures on sbrefa.htm. For more information on 2000, in Washington, DC. The NTSB certain airplane fuel tank systems may SBREFA, e-mail us at 9–AWA– determined that the probable cause of result in degradation of design safety [email protected]. the explosion was ignition of the flammable fuel/air mixture in the center features intended to preclude ignition of Background vapors within the fuel tank. wing fuel tank. Although the ignition On October 26, 1999, the FAA issued source could not be determined with EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2001. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) certainty, the NTSB determined that the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 99–18, which was published in the most likely source was a short circuit Michael E. Dostert, FAA, Propulsion/ Federal Register on October 29, 1999 outside of the center wing tank that Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM–112, (64 FR 58644). That notice proposed allowed excessive voltage to enter the Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft three separate requirements: tank through electrical wiring associated Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue First, a requirement was proposed for with the fuel quantity indication system SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; the design approval holders of certain (FQIS). Opening remarks at the hearing telephone (425) 227–2132, facsimile transport category airplanes to conduct also indicated that: (425) 227–1320; e-mail: a safety review of the airplane fuel tank [email protected]. ‘‘* * * This investigation and several others system and to develop specific fuel tank have brought to light some broader issues SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: system maintenance and inspection regarding aircraft certification. For example, instructions for any items determined to there are questions about the adequacy of the Availability of Final Rules require repetitive inspections or risk analyses that are used as the basis for You can get an electronic copy using maintenance. demonstrating compliance with many the Internet by taking the following Second, a requirement was proposed certification requirements.’’ steps: to prohibit the operation of those This accident prompted the FAA to (1) Go to the search function of the airplanes beyond a specified time, examine the underlying safety issues Department of Transportation’s unless the operators of those airplanes surrounding fuel tank explosions, the
VerDate 11
adequacy of the existing regulations, the Existing Regulations/Certification occurring within a fleet of aircraft. The service history of airplanes certificated Methods following guidance involving failures is to these regulations, and existing offered in that AC: The current 14 CFR part 25 • maintenance practices relative to the regulations that are intended to require In any system or subsystem, a single fuel tank system. designs that preclude the presence of failure of any element or connection during any one flight must be assumed Flammability Characteristics ignition sources within the airplane fuel tanks are as follows: without consideration as to its The flammability characteristics of Section 25.901 is a general probability of failing. This single failure the various fuels approved for use in requirement that applies to all portions must not prevent the continued safe transport airplanes results in the of the propulsion installation, which flight and landing of the airplane. • Additional failures during any one presence of flammable vapors in the includes the airplane fuel tank system. flight following the first single failure vapor space of fuel tanks at various It requires, in part, that the propulsion must also be considered when the times during the operation of the and fuel tank systems be designed to probability of occurrence is not shown airplane. Vapors from Jet A fuel (the ensure fail-safe operation between to be extremely improbable. The typical commercial turbojet engine fuel) normal maintenance and inspection probability of these combined failures at temperatures below approximately intervals, and that the major ° includes the probability of occurrence of 100 F are too lean to be flammable at components be electrically bonded to the first failure. sea level; at higher altitudes the fuel the other parts of the airplane. As described in the AC, the FAA fail- vapors become flammable at Sections 25.901(c) and 25.1309 ° safe design concept consists of the temperatures above approximately 45 F provide airplane system fail-safe following design principles or (at 40,000 feet altitude). requirements. Section 25.901(c) requires techniques intended to ensure a safe However, the regulatory authorities that ‘‘no single failure or malfunction or design. The use of only one of these and aviation industry have always probable combination of failures will principles is seldom adequate. A presumed that a flammable fuel air jeopardize the safe operation of the combination of two or more design mixture exists in the fuel tanks at all airplane.’’ In general, the FAA’s policy principles is usually needed to provide times and have adopted the philosophy has been to require applicants to assume a fail-safe design (i.e., to ensure that that the best way to ensure airplane fuel the presence of foreseeable latent catastrophic failure conditions are not tank safety is to preclude ignition (undetected) failure conditions when expected to occur during the life of the sources within fuel tanks. This demonstrating that subsequent single fleet of a particular airplane model). philosophy has been based on the failures will not jeopardize the safe application of fail-safe design • Design integrity and quality, operation of the airplane. including life limits, to ensure intended requirements to the airplane fuel tank Certain subsystem designs must also system to preclude ignition sources function and prevent failures. comply with § 25.1309. That section • from being present in fuel tanks when Redundancy or backup systems that requires airplane systems and associated provide system function after the first component failures, malfunctions, or systems to be: lightning encounters occur. failure (e.g., two or more engines, two or Possible ignition sources that have ‘‘* * * designed so that the occurrence of more hydraulic systems, dual flight been considered include: any failure condition which would prevent controls, etc.) • the continued safe flight and landing of the • Isolation of systems and Electrical arcs, airplane is extremely improbable, and the • Friction sparks, and components so that failure of one occurrence of any other failure conditions element will not cause failure of the • Autoignition. (The autoignition which would reduce the capability of the temperature is the temperature at which airplane or the ability of the crew to cope other (sometimes referred to as system the fuel/air mixture will spontaneously with adverse operating conditions is independence). • Detection of failures or failure ignite due to heat in the absence of an improbable.’’ indication. ignition source.) Compliance with § 25.1309 requires • Functional verification (the Some events that could produce an analysis, and testing where capability for testing or checking the sufficient electrical energy to create an appropriate, considering possible modes component’s condition). arc include: of failure, including malfunctions and • • Proven reliability and integrity to Lightning, damage from external sources, the ensure that multiple component or • Electrostatic charging, probability of multiple failures and • system failures will not occur in the Electromagnetic interference (EMI), undetected failures, the resulting effects same flight. or on the airplane and occupants, • Damage tolerance that limits the • Failures in airplane systems or considering the stage of flight and safety impact or effect of the failure. wiring that introduce high-power operating conditions, and the crew • Designed failure path that controls electrical energy into the fuel tank warning cues, corrective action and directs the failure, by design, to system. required, and the capability of detecting limit the safety impact. Friction sparks may be caused by faults. • Flightcrew procedures following mechanical contact between certain This provision has the effect of the failure designed to assure continued rotating components in the fuel tank, mandating the use of ‘‘fail-safe’’ design safe flight by specific crew actions. such as a steel fuel pump impeller methods, which require that the effect of • Error tolerant design that considers rubbing on the pump inlet check valve. failures and combinations of failures be probable human error in the operation, Autoignition of fuel vapors may be considered in defining a safe design. maintenance, and fabrication of the caused by failure of components within Detailed methods of compliance with airplane. the fuel tank, or external components or §§ 25.1309(b), (c), and (d) are described • Margins of safety that allow for systems that cause components or tank in Advisory Circular (AC) 25.1309–1A, undefined and unforeseeable adverse surfaces to reach a high enough ‘‘System Design Analysis,’’ and are flight conditions. temperature to ignite the fuel vapors in intended as a means to evaluate the These regulations, when applied to the fuel tank. overall risk, on average, of an event typical airplane fuel tank systems, are
VerDate 11
intended to prevent ignition sources Section 25.981 requires that the and extent of inspections necessary to inside fuel tanks. The approval of the applicant determine the highest provide for the continuing airworthiness installation of mechanical and electrical temperature allowable in fuel tanks that of the airplane (including the fuel tank components inside the fuel tanks was provides a safe margin below the lowest system). As required by Appendix H to typically based on a qualitative system expected autoignition temperature of part 25, the ICA must also include an safety analysis and component testing the fuel that is approved for use in the FAA-approved Airworthiness which showed that: fuel tanks. No temperature at any place Limitations section enumerating those • Mechanical components would not inside any fuel tank where fuel ignition mandatory inspections, inspection create sparks or high temperature is possible may then exceed that intervals, replacement times, and surfaces in the event of any failure; and maximum allowable temperature. This related procedures approved under • Electrical devices would not create must be shown under all probable § 25.571, relating to structural damage arcs of sufficient energy to ignite a fuel- operating, failure, and malfunction tolerance. Before this amendment, the air mixture in the event of a single conditions of any component whose Airworthiness Limitations section of the failure or probable combination of operation, failure, or malfunction could ICA applied only to airplane structure failures. increase the temperature inside the and not to the fuel tank system. Section 25.901(b)(2) requires that the tank. Guidance for demonstrating One method of establishing initial components of the propulsion system be compliance with this regulation has ‘‘constructed, arranged, and installed so scheduled maintenance and inspection been provided in AC 25.981–1A, tasks is the Maintenance Steering Group as to ensure their continued safe ‘‘Guidelines For Substantiating operation between normal inspection or (MSG) process, which develops a Compliance With the Fuel Tank Maintenance Review Board (MRB) overhauls.’’ Compliance with this Temperature Requirements.’’ The AC regulation is typically demonstrated by document for a particular airplane provides a listing of failure modes of model. Operators may incorporate those substantiating that the propulsion fuel tank system components that installation, which includes the fuel provisions, along with other should be considered when showing maintenance information contained in tank system, will safely perform its that component failures will not create the ICA, into their maintenance or intended function between inspections a hot surface that exceeds the maximum inspection program. and overhauls defined in the allowable fuel tank component or tank maintenance instructions. surface temperature for the fuel type for Section 21.50 requires the holder of a Section 25.901(b)(4) requires which approval is being requested. design approval, including a TC or electrically bonding the major Manufacturers have demonstrated supplemental type certificate (STC) for components of the propulsion system to compliance with this regulation by an airplane, aircraft engine, or propeller the other parts of the airplane. The testing and analysis of components to for which application was made after affected major components of the show that design features, such as January 28, 1981, to furnish at least one propulsion system include the fuel tank thermal fuses in fuel pump motors, set of the complete ICA to the owner of system. Compliance with this preclude an ignition source in the fuel the product for which the application requirement for fuel tank systems has tank when failures such as a seized fuel was made. The ICA for original type been demonstrated by showing that all pump rotor occur. certificated products must include major components in the fuel tank are instructions for the fuel tank system. A electrically bonded to the airplane Airplane Maintenance Manuals and design approval holder who has structure. This precludes accumulation Instructions for Continued modified the fuel tank system must of electrical charge on the components Airworthiness furnish a complete set of the ICA for the and the possible arcing in the fuel tank Historically, manufacturers have been modification to the owner of the that could otherwise occur. In most required to provide maintenance-related product. cases, electrical bonding is information for fuel tank systems in the Type Certificate Amendments Based on accomplished by installing jumper same manner as for other systems. Prior wires from each major fuel tank system to 1970, most manufacturers provided Major Change in Type Design component to airplane structure. manuals containing maintenance Over the years, design changes have Advisory Circular 25–8, ‘‘Auxiliary Fuel information for large transport category been introduced into fuel tank systems Tank Installations,’’ also provides airplanes, but there were no standards that may affect their safety. There are guidance for bonding of fuel tank prescribing minimum content, three ways in which major design system components and means of distribution, and a timeframe in which changes can be approved: precluding ignition sources within the information must be made available 1. The TC holder may be granted an transport airplane fuel tanks. to the operator. amendment to the type design. Section 25.954 requires that the fuel Section 25.1529, as amended by tank system be designed and arranged to Amendment 25–21 in 1970, required the 2. Any person, including the TC prevent the ignition of fuel vapor within applicant for a type certificate (TC) to holder, wanting to alter a product by the system due to the effects of lightning provide airplane maintenance manuals introducing a major change in the type strikes. Compliance with this regulation (AMM) to owners of the airplanes. This design not great enough to require a new is typically shown by incorporation of regulation was amended in 1980 to application for a TC, may be granted an design features such as minimum fuel require that the applicant for type STC. tank skin thickness, location of vent certification provide Instructions for 3. In some instances, a person may outlets out of likely lightning strike Continued Airworthiness (ICA) also make an alteration to the type areas, and bonding of fuel tank system prepared in accordance with Appendix design and receive a field approval. The structure and components. Guidance for H to part 25. In developing the ICA, the field approval process is a method for demonstrating compliance with this applicant is required to include certain obtaining approval of relatively simple regulation is provided in AC 20–53A, information such as a description of the modifications to airplanes. In this ‘‘Protection of Aircraft Fuel Systems airplane and its systems, servicing process, an authorized FAA Flight Against Fuel Vapor Ignition Due to information, and maintenance Standards Inspector can approve the Lightning.’’ instructions, including the frequency alteration by use of FAA Form 337.
VerDate 11
Maintenance and Inspection Program the system is maintained and that the accident investigation. This Requirements airplane is in an airworthy condition. unexplained accident occurred on a Historically, for fuel tank systems Airplane operators are required to newer airplane, in contrast to the July these required programs include: have extensive maintenance or 17, 1996, accident that occurred on an • Operational checks (e.g., a task to older Boeing Model 747 airplane that inspection programs that include determine if an item is fulfilling its provisions relating to fuel tank systems. was approaching the end of its initial intended function); design life. Section 91.409(e), which generally • Functional checks (e.g., a applies to other than commercial The Model 747 and 737 accidents quantitative task to determine if indicate that the development of an operations, requires an operator of a functions perform within specified large turbojet multiengine airplane or a ignition source inside the fuel tank may limits); be related to both the design and turbopropeller-powered multiengined • Overhaul of certain components to maintenance of the fuel tank systems. airplane to select one of the following restore them to a known standard; and four inspection programs: • General zonal visual inspections National Transportation Safety Board 1. A continuous airworthiness conducted concurrently with other (NTSB) Recommendations inspection program that is part of a maintenance actions, such as structural Since the July 17, 1996, accident, the continuous airworthiness maintenance inspections. FAA, NTSB, and aviation industry have program currently in use by a person However, specific maintenance been reviewing the design features and holding an air carrier operating instructions to detect and correct service history of the Boeing Model 747 certificate, or an operating certificate conditions that degrade fail-safe and certain other transport airplane issued under part 119 for operations capabilities have not been deemed models. Based upon its review, the under parts 121 or 135, and operating necessary because it has been assumed NTSB has issued the following that make and model of airplane under that the original fail-safe capabilities recommendations to the FAA intended those parts; would not be degraded in service. to reduce exposure to operation with 2. An approved airplane inspection Design and Service History Review flammable vapors in fuel tanks and program approved under § 135.419 and address possible degradation of the The FAA has examined the service currently in use by a person holding an original type certificated fuel tank history of transport airplanes and operating certificate and operations system designs on transport airplanes. specifications issued under part 119 for performed an analysis of the history of The following recommendations part 135 operations; fuel tank explosions on these airplanes. relate to ‘‘Reduced Flammability 3. A current inspection program While there were a significant number Exposure’’: recommended by the manufacturer; or of fuel tank fires and explosions that ‘‘A–96–174: Require the development 4. Any other inspection program occurred during the 1960’s and 1970’s of and implementation of design or established by the registered owner or on several airplane types, in most cases, operational changes that will preclude operator of that airplane and approved the fire or explosion was found to be the operation of transport-category by the Administrator. related to design practices, maintenance airplanes with explosive fuel-air Section 121.367, which is applicable actions, or improper modification of mixtures in the fuel tanks: to those air carrier and commercial fuel pumps. Some of the events were LONG TERM DESIGN operations covered by part 121, requires apparently caused by lightning strikes. MODIFICATIONS: operators to have an inspection Extensive design reviews were (a) Significant consideration should program, as well as a program covering conducted to identify possible ignition be given to the development of airplane other maintenance, preventative sources, and actions were taken that design modification, such as nitrogen- maintenance, and alterations. were intended to prevent similar inerting systems and the addition of Section 125.247, which is generally occurrences. However, fuel tank system- insulation between heat-generating applicable to operation of large related accidents have occurred in spite equipment and fuel tanks. Appropriate airplanes, other than air carrier of these efforts. modifications should apply to newly operations conducted under part 121, On May 11, 1990, the center wing fuel certificated airplanes and, where requires operators to inspect their tank of a Boeing Model 737–300 feasible, to existing airplanes.’’ airplanes in accordance with an exploded while the airplane was on the ‘‘A–96–175: Require the development inspection program approved by the ground at Nimoy Aquino International of and implementation of design or Administrator. Airport, Manila, Philippines. The operational changes that will preclude Section 129.14 requires a foreign air airplane was less than one year old. In the operation of transport-category carrier and each foreign operator of a the accident, the fuel-air vapors in the airplanes with explosive fuel-air U.S. registered airplane in common center wing tank exploded as the mixtures in the fuel tanks: carriage, within or outside the U.S., to airplane was being pushed back from a NEAR TERM OPERATIONAL maintain the airplane in accordance terminal gate prior to flight. The (b) Pending implementation of design with an FAA-approved program. accident resulted in 8 fatalities and modifications, require modifications in In general, the operators rely on the injuries to an additional 30 people. operational procedures to reduce the TC data sheet, MRB reports, ICA’s, the Accident investigators considered a potential for explosive fuel-air mixtures Airworthiness Limitations section of the plausible scenario in which damaged in the fuel tanks of transport-category ICA, other manufacturers’ wiring located outside the fuel tank aircraft. In the B–747, consideration recommendations, and their own might have created a short between 115- should be given to refueling the center operating experience to develop the volt airplane system wires and 28 volt wing fuel tank (CWT) before flight overall maintenance or inspection wires to a fuel tank level switch. This, whenever possible from cooler ground program for their airplanes. in combination with a possible latent fuel tanks, proper monitoring and The intent of the rules governing the defect of the fuel level float switch, was management of the CWT fuel inspection and/or maintenance program investigated as a possible source of temperature, and maintaining an is to ensure that the inherent level of ignition. However, a definitive ignition appropriate minimum fuel quantity in safety that was originally designed into source was never confirmed during the the CWT.’’
VerDate 11
‘‘A–96–176: Require that the B–747 the fuel tank system installations on a which required inspection of electrical Flight Handbooks of TWA and other representative sample of airplanes wiring routed within conduits to fuel operators of B–747s and other aircraft in within the transport fleet. The fuel tanks pumps located in the wing fuel tanks which fuel tank temperature cannot be of more than 800 airplanes were and replacement of any damaged determined by flightcrews be inspected. Data from inspections wiring. Inspection reports indicated that immediately revised to reflect the conducted as part of this effort and many instances of wear had occurred on increases in CWT fuel temperatures shared with the FAA have assisted in Teflon sleeves installed over the wiring found by flight tests, including establishing a basis for developing to protect it from damage and possible operational procedures to reduce the corrective action for airplanes within arcing to the conduit. potential for exceeding CWT the transport fleet. Inspections of wiring to fuel pumps temperature limitations.’’ In addition to the results from these on Boeing Model 737 airplanes with ‘‘A–96–177: Require modification of inspections, the FAA has received over 35,000 flight hours have shown the CWT of B–747 airplanes and the fuel reports of anomalies on in-service significant wear to the insulation of tanks of other airplanes that are located airplanes that have necessitated actions wires inside conduits that are located in near heat sources to incorporate to preclude development of ignition fuel tanks. In nine reported cases, wear temperature probes and cockpit fuel sources in or adjacent to airplane fuel resulted in arcing to the fuel pump wire tank temperature displays to permit tanks. conduit on airplanes with greater than determination of the fuel tank The following provides a summary of 50,000 flight hours. In one case, wear temperatures.’’ findings from design evaluations, resulted in burnthrough of the conduit The following recommendations service difficulty reports, and a review into the interior of the 737 main tank relate to ‘‘Ignition Source Reduction’’: of current airplane maintenance fuel cell. On May 14, 1998, the FAA ‘‘A–98–36: Conduct a survey of fuel practices. issued a telegraphic AD, T98–11–52, quantity indication system probes and Aging Airplane Related Phenomena which required inspection of wiring to wires in Boeing Model 747’s equipped Boeing Model 737 airplane fuel pumps with systems other than Honeywell Fuel tank inspections initiated as part routed within electrical conduits and Series 1–3 probes and compensators and of the Boeing Model 747 accident replacement of any damaged wiring. in other model airplanes that are used investigation identified aging of fuel Results of these inspections showed that in Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations tank system components, wear of the wiring occurred in many Part 121 service to determine whether contamination, corrosion of components instances, particularly on those potential fuel tank ignition sources exist and sulfide deposits on components as airplanes with high numbers of flight that are similar to those found in the possible conditions that could cycles and operating hours. Boeing Model 747. The survey should contribute to development of ignition The FAA also has received reports of include removing wires from fuel sources within the fuel tanks. Results of corrosion on bonding jumper wires probes and examining the wires for detailed inspection of the fuel pump within the fuel tanks on one in-service damage. Repair or replacement wiring on several Boeing Model 747 Airbus Model A300 airplane. The procedures for any damaged wires that airplanes showed debris within the fuel manufacturer investigating this event are found should be developed.’’ tanks consisting of lockwire, rivets, and did not have sufficient evidence to ‘‘A–98–38: Require in Boeing Model metal shavings. Debris was also found determine conclusively the level of 747 airplanes, and in other airplanes inside scavenge pumps. Corrosion and damage and corrosion found on the with fuel quantity indication system damage to insulation on FQIS probe jumper wires. Although the airplane (FQIS) wire installations that are co- wiring was found on 6 out of 8 probes was in long-term storage, it does not routed with wires that may be powered, removed from one in-service airplane. explain why a high number of damaged/ the physical separation and electrical In addition, inspection of airplane corroded jumper wires were found shielding of FQIS wires to the maximum fuel tank system components from out- concentrated in a specific area of the extent possible.’’ of-service (retired) airplanes, initiated wing tanks. Further inspections of a ‘‘A–98–39: Require, in all applicable following the accident, revealed limited number of other Airbus models transport airplane fuel tanks, surge damaged wiring and corrosion buildup did not reveal similar extensive protection systems to prevent electrical of conductive sulfide deposits on the corrosion or damage to bonding jumper power surges from entering fuel tanks FQIS wiring on some Boeing Model 747 wires. However, they did reveal through fuel quantity indication system airplanes. The conductive deposits or evidence of the accumulation of sulfide wires.’’ damaged wiring may result in a location deposits around the outer braid of some where arcing could occur if high power jumper wires. Tests by the manufacturer Service History electrical energy was transmitted to the have shown that these deposits did not The FAA has reviewed service FQIS wiring from adjacent wires that affect the bonding function of the leads. difficulty reports for the transport power other airplane systems. Airbus has developed a one-time- airplane fleet and evaluated the While the effects of corrosion on fuel inspection service bulletin for all its certification and design practices tank system safety have not been fully airplanes to ascertain the extent of the utilized on these previously certificated evaluated, the FAA has initiated a sulfide deposits and to ensure that the airplanes. An inspection of fuel tanks on research program to better understand level of jumper wire damage found on Boeing Model 747 airplanes also was the effects of sulfide deposits and the one Model A300 airplane is not initiated. Representatives from the Air corrosion on the safety of airplane fuel widespread. Transport Association (ATA), tank systems. On March 30, 1998, the FAA received Association of European Airlines (AEA), Wear or chafing of electrical power reports of three recent instances of the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines wires routed in conduits that are located electrical arcing within fuel pumps (AAPA), the Aerospace Industries inside fuel tanks can result in arcing installed in fuel tanks on Lockheed Association of America, and the through the conduits. On December 23, Model L–1011 airplanes. In one case, European Association of Aerospace 1996, the FAA issued Airworthiness the electrical arc had penetrated the Industries initiated a joint effort to Directive (AD) 96–26–06, applicable to pump and housing and entered the fuel inspect and evaluate the condition of certain Boeing Model 747 airplanes, tank. Preliminary investigation indicates
VerDate 11
that features incorporated into the fuel or the installation of shielding and cause damage to the rotating blades of pump design that were intended to separation of fuel quantity indicating the inducer. The inlet check valves also preclude overheating and arc-through system wiring from other airplane had significant damage. An operator into the fuel tank may not have system wiring. After reviewing the reported damage to the inlet adapter so functioned as intended due to comments received on the proposed severe that contact had occurred discrepancies introduced during requirements, the FAA issued AD 98– between the steel disk of the inlet check overhaul of the pumps. Emergency AD 20–40 on September 23, 1998, that valve and the steel screw that holds the 98–08–09 was issued April 3, 1998, to requires the installation of shielding and inducer in place. Wear to the inlet specify a minimum quantity of fuel to separation of the electrical wiring of the adapters has been attributed to contact be carried in the fuel tanks for the fuel quantity indication system. On between the inlet check valve and the purpose of covering the pumps with April 14, 1998, the FAA proposed a adapter. Such excessive wear of the liquid fuel and thereby precluding similar requirement for Boeing Model inlet adapter can lead to contact ignition of vapors within the fuel tank 737–100, –200, –300, –400, and –500 between the inlet check valve and until such time as terminating corrective series airplanes in Docket No. 98–NM– inducer, which could result in pieces of action could be developed. 50–AD, which led to the FAA issuing the check valve being ingested into the AD 99–03–04 on January 26, 1999. The Unforeseen Fuel Tank System Failures inducer and damaging the inducer and action required by those two impellers. Contact between the steel After an extensive review of the airworthiness directives is intended to disk of the inlet check valve and the Boeing Model 747 design following the preclude high levels of electrical energy steel rotating inducer screw can cause July 17, 1996, accident, the FAA from entering the airplane fuel tank sparks. To address this unsafe determined that during original wiring due to electromagnetic condition, the FAA issued an certification of the fuel tank system, the interference or electrical shorts. Several immediately adopted rule, AD 98–16– degree of tank contamination and the manufacturers have been granted 19, on July 30, 1998. significance of certain failure modes of approval for the use of alternative Another design anomaly was reported fuel tank system components had not methods of compliance (AMOC) with in 1989 when a fuel tank ignition event been considered to the extent that more these AD’s that permit installation of occurred in an auxiliary fuel tank recent service experience indicates is transient suppressing devices in the during refueling of a Beech Model 400 needed. For example, in the absence of FQIS wiring that prevent unwanted airplane. The auxiliary fuel tank had contamination, the FQIS had been electrical power from entering the fuel shown to preclude creating an arc if been installed under an STC. tank. All later model Boeing Model 747 Polyurethane foam had been installed in FQIS wiring were to come in contact and 737 FQIS’s have wire separation with the highest level of electrical portions of the tank to minimize the and fault isolation features that may potential of a fuel tank explosion if voltage on the airplane. This was shown meet the intent of these AD actions. by demonstrating that the voltage uncontained engine debris penetrated This rulemaking will require evaluation those portions of the tank. The accident needed to cause an arc in the fuel of these later designs and the designs of probes due to an electrical short investigation indicated that electrostatic other transport airplanes. charging of the foam during refueling condition was well above any voltage Other examples of unanticipated resulted in ignition of fuel-air vapors in level available in the airplane systems. failure conditions include incidents of portions of the adjacent fuel tank system However, recent testing has shown parts from fuel pump assemblies that if contamination, such as impacting or contacting the rotating fuel that did not contain the foam. The fuel conductive debris (lock wire, nuts, pump impeller. The first design vapor explosion caused distortion of the bolts, steel wool, corrosion, sulfide anomaly was identified when two tank and fuel leakage from a failed fuel deposits, metal filings, etc.) is placed incidents of damage to fuel pumps were line. Modifications to the design, within gaps in the fuel probe, the reported on Boeing Model 767 including use of more conductive voltage needed to cause an arc is within airplanes. In both cases objects from a polyurethane foam and installation of a values that may occur due to a fuel pump inlet diffuser assembly were standpipe in the refueling system, were subsequent electrical short or induced ingested into the fuel pump, causing incorporated to prevent reoccurrence of current on the FQIS probe wiring from damage to the pump impeller and pump electrostatic charging and a resultant electromagnetic interference caused by housing. The damage could have caused fuel tank ignition source. adjacent wiring. These anomalies, by sparks or hot debris from the pump to Review of Fuel Tank System themselves, could not lead to an enter the fuel tank. To address this Maintenance Practices electrical arc within the fuel tanks unsafe condition, the FAA issued AD without the presence of an additional 97–19–15. This AD requires revision of In addition to the review of the design failure. If any of these anomalies were the airplane flight manual to include features and service history of the combined with a subsequent failure procedures to switch off the fuel pumps Boeing Model 747 and other airplane within the electrical system that creates when the center tank approaches empty. models in the transport airplane fleet, an electrical short, or if high-intensity The intent of this interim action is to the FAA also has reviewed the current radiated fields (HIRF) or electrical maintain liquid fuel over the pump inlet fuel tank system maintenance practices current flow in adjacent wiring induces so that any debris generated by a failed for these airplanes. EMI voltage in the FQIS wiring, fuel pump will not come in contact with Typical transport category airplane sufficient energy could enter the fuel fuel vapors and cause a fuel tank fuel tank systems are designed with tank and cause an ignition source explosion. redundancy and fault indication within the tank. The second design anomaly was features such that single component On November 26, 1997, in Docket No. reported on Boeing Model 747–400 failures do not result in any significant 97–NM–272–AD, the FAA proposed a series airplanes. The reports indicated reduction in safety. Therefore, fuel tank requirement for operators of Boeing that inlet adapters of the override/ systems historically have not had any Model 747–100, –200, and –300 series jettison pumps of the center wing fuel life-limited components or specific airplanes to install components for the tank were worn. Two of the inlet detailed inspection requirements, unless suppression of electrical transients and/ adapters had worn down enough to mandated by airworthiness directives.
VerDate 11
Most of the components are ‘‘on contrary to the manufacturer’s the plumbing from wing movement and condition,’’ meaning that some test, recommended procedures. corrosion. check, or other inspection is performed • Use of steel impellers that may 7. Electrostatic charge: to determine continued serviceability, produce sparks if debris enters the • Use of non-conductive reticulated and maintenance is performed only if pump. polyurethane foam that holds the inspection identifies a condition • Debris lodged inside pumps. electrostatic charge buildup. • requiring correction. Visual inspection • Arcing due to the exposure of Spraying of fuel into fuel tanks of fuel tank system components is by far electrical connections within the pump through inappropriately designed the predominant method of inspection housing that have been designed with refueling nozzles or pump cooling flow for components such as boost pumps, inadequate clearance to the pump cover. return methods. • fuel lines, couplings, wiring, etc. Thermal switches resetting over Fuel Tank Flammability Typically, these inspections are time to a higher trip temperature. In addition to the review of potential conducted concurrently with zonal • Flame arrestors falling out of their fuel tank ignition, the FAA has inspections or internal or external fuel respective mounting. undertaken a parallel effort to address tank structural inspections. These • Internal wires coming in contact the threat of fuel tank explosions by inspections normally do not provide with the pump rotating group, eliminating or significantly reducing the information regarding the continued energizing the rotor and arcing at the presence of explosive fuel air mixtures serviceability of components within the impeller/adapter interface. within the fuel tanks of new type fuel tank system, unless the visual • Poor bonding across component designs, in-production, and the existing inspection indicates a potential problem interfaces. • Insufficient ground fault current fleet of transport airplanes. area. For example, it would be difficult, On April 3, 1997, the FAA published if not impossible, to detect certain protection capability. • Poor bonding of components to a notice in the Federal Register (62 FR degraded fuel tank system conditions, 16014) that requested comments such as worn wiring routed through structure. 2. Wiring to pumps in conduits concerning the 1996 NTSB conduit to fuel pumps, debris inside recommendations regarding reduced fuel pumps, corrosion to bonding wire located inside fuel tanks: • Wear of Teflon sleeving and wiring flammability listed earlier in this notice. interfaces, etc., without dedicated That notice provided significant intrusive inspections that are much insulation allowing arcing from wire through metallic conduits into fuel discussion of service history, more extensive than those normally background, and issues relating to conducted. tanks. 3. Fuel pump connectors: reducing flammability in transport Listing of Deficiencies • Electrical arcing at connections airplane fuel tanks. Review of the comments submitted to that notice The list provided below summarizes within electrical connectors due to bent indicated that additional information fuel tank system design deficiencies, pins or corrosion. • Fuel leakage and subsequent fuel was needed before the FAA could malfunctions, failures, and initiate rulemaking action to address the maintenance-related actions that have fire outside of the fuel tank caused by corrosion of electrical connectors inside recommendations. been determined through service On January 23, 1998, the FAA the pump motor which lead to electrical experience to result in a degradation of published a notice in the Federal arcing through the connector housing the safety features of airplane fuel tank Register that established and tasked an (connector was located outside the fuel systems. This list was developed from Aviation Rulemaking Advisory tank). service difficulty reports and incident Committee (ARAC) working group, the • Selection of improper materials in and accident reports. These anomalies Fuel Tank Harmonization Working connector design. occurred on in-service transport Group (FTHWG), to provide additional category airplanes despite regulations 4. FQIS wiring: • information prior to rulemaking. The and policies in place to preclude the Degradation of wire insulation (cracking), corrosion and sulfide ARAC consists of interested parties, development of ignition sources within including the public, and provides a airplane fuel tank systems. deposits at electrical connectors • Unshielded FQIS wires routed in public process to advise the FAA 1. Pumps: concerning development of new • Ingestion of the pump inducer into wire bundles with high voltage wires. regulations. the pump impeller and generation of 5. FQIS probes: debris into the fuel tank. • Corrosion and sulfide deposits Note: The FAA formally established ARAC • Pump inlet case degradation, causing reduced breakdown voltage in in 1991 (56 FR 2190, January 22, 1991), to allowing the pump inlet check valve to FQIS wiring. provide advice and recommendations • Terminal block wiring clamp (strain concerning the full range of the FAA’s safety- contact the impeller. related rulemaking activity. • Stator winding failures during relief) features at electrical connections operation of the fuel pump. Subsequent on fuel probes causing damage to wiring The FTHWG evaluated numerous failure of a second phase of the pump insulation. possible means of reducing or resulting in arcing through the fuel • Contamination in the fuel tanks eliminating hazards associated with pump housing. causing a reduced arc path between explosive vapors in fuel tanks. On July • Deactivation of thermal protective FQIS probe walls (steel wool, lock wire, 23, 1998, the ARAC submitted its report features incorporated into the windings nuts, rivets, bolts; or mechanical impact to the FAA. The full report is in the of pumps due to inappropriate damage to probes). docket created for this ARAC working wrapping of the windings. 6. Bonding straps: group (Docket No. FAA–1998–4183). • Omission of cooling port tubes • Corrosion to bonding straps. This docket can be reviewed on the U.S. between the pump assembly and the • Loose or improperly grounded Department of Transportation electronic pump motor assembly during fuel pump attachment points. Document Management System on the overhaul. • Static bonds on fuel tank system Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. The full • Extended dry running of fuel plumbing connections inside the fuel report is also in the docket for this pumps in empty fuel tanks, which was tank worn due to mechanical wear of rulemaking.
VerDate 11
The report provided a practical means of complying with the of the fuel and a significant increase in recommendation for the FAA to initiate regulation proposed by the ARAC. the formation of flammable vapors in rulemaking action to amend § 25.981, In addition to its recommendation to the tank. The FAA considers that fuel applicable to new type design airplanes, revise § 25.981, the ARAC also tank safety can be enhanced by reducing to include a requirement to limit the recommended that the FAA continue to the time fuel tanks operate with time transport airplane fuel tanks could evaluate means for minimizing the flammable vapors in the tank and is operate with flammable vapors in the development of flammable vapors therefore adopting a requirement to vapor space of the tank. The within the fuel tanks to determine provide means to minimize the recommended regulatory text proposed, whether other alternatives, such as development of flammable vapors in ‘‘Limiting the development of ground based inerting of fuel tanks, fuel tanks, or to provide means to flammable conditions in the fuel tanks, could be shown to be cost effective. prevent catastrophic damage if ignition based on the intended fuel types, to less To address the ARAC does occur. than 7 percent of the expected fleet recommendations, the FAA initiated Fourth, the FAA considers that it is operational time, or providing means to research and development activity to necessary to impose operational mitigate the effects of an ignition of fuel determine the feasibility of requiring requirements so that all required vapors within the fuel tanks such that ground-based inerting. The results of maintenance or inspection actions will any damage caused by an ignition will this activity are documented in report be included in each operator’s FAA- not prevent continued safe flight and No. DOT/FAA/AR–00/19, ‘‘The Cost of approved maintenance or inspection landing.’’ The report discussed various Implementing Ground-Based Fuel Tank program. options of showing compliance with Inerting in the Commercial Fleet.’’ A These regulatory initiatives are being this proposal, including managing heat copy of the report is in the docket for codified as a Special Federal Aviation input to the fuel tanks, installation of this rulemaking. In addition, on July 14, Regulation (14 CFR part 21), inerting systems or polyurethane fire 2000 (65 FR 43800), the FAA tasked the amendments to the airworthiness suppressing foam, and suppressing an ARAC to conduct a technical evaluation regulations (14 CFR part 25), and explosion if one occurred, etc. of certain fuel tank inerting methods amendments to the operating The level of flammability defined in that would reduce the flammability of requirements (14 CFR parts 91, 121, 125, the proposal was established based the fuel tanks on both new type designs 129) upon comparison of the safety record of and in-service airplanes. The FAA is also evaluating the Part 21 Special Federal Aviation center wing fuel tanks that, in certain potential benefits of using directed Regulation (SFAR) airplanes, are heated by equipment ventilation methods to reduce the located under the tank, and unheated Historically, the FAA works with the flammability exposure of fuel tanks that fuel tanks located in the wing. The TC holders when safety issues arise to are located near significant heat sources. FTHWG concluded that the safety identify solutions and actions that need record of fuel tanks located in the wings Discussion of the Final Rule to be taken. Some of the safety issues was adequate and that if the same level The FAA review of the service that have been addressed by this could be achieved in center wing fuel history, design features, and voluntary cooperative process include tanks, the overall safety objective would maintenance instructions of the those involving aging aircraft structure, be achieved. Results from thermal transport airplane fleet indicates that thrust reversers, cargo doors, and wing analyses documented in the report aging of fuel tank system components icing protection. Although some indicate that center wing fuel tanks that and unforeseen fuel tank system failures manufacturers have aggressively are heated by air conditioning and malfunctions have become a safety completed these safety reviews, others equipment located beneath them issue for the fleet of turbine-powered have not applied the resources contain flammable vapors, on a fleet transport category airplanes. The FAA is necessary to complete these reviews in average basis, for up to 30 percent of the amending the current regulations in four a timely manner, which delayed the fleet operating time. areas. adoption of corrective action. Although During the ARAC review it was also The first area of concern encompasses these efforts have frequently been determined that certain airplane types the possibility of the development of successful in achieving the desired do not locate heat sources adjacent to ignition sources within the existing safety objectives, a more uniform and the fuel tanks. These airplanes provide transport airplane fleet. Many of the expeditious response is considered significantly reduced flammability design practices used on airplanes in necessary to address fuel tank safety exposure, near the 5 percent value of the the existing fleet are similar. Therefore, issues. wing tanks. The group therefore anomalies that have developed on While maintaining the benefits of determined that it would be feasible to specific airplane models within the fleet FAA-TC holder cooperation, the FAA design new airplanes such that fuel tank could develop on other airplane models. considers that a Special Federal operation in the flammable range would As a result, the FAA considers that a Aviation Regulation (SFAR) provides a be limited to near that of the wing fuel one-time safety review of the fuel tank means for the FAA to establish clear tanks. The primary method of system for transport airplane models in expectations and standards, as well as a compliance with the requirement the current fleet is needed. timeframe within which the design proposed by the ARAC would likely be The second area of concern approval holders and the public can be to control heat transfer into and out of encompasses the need to require the confident that fuel tank safety issues on fuel tanks such that heating of the fuel design of future transport category the affected airplanes will be uniformly would not occur. Design features such airplanes to more completely address examined. as locating the air conditioning potential failures in the fuel tank system This final rule is intended to ensure equipment away from the fuel tanks, that could result in an ignition source in that the design approval holder providing ventilation of the air the fuel tank system. completes a comprehensive assessment conditioning bay to limit heating and Third, certain airplane types are of the fuel tank system and develops cool fuel tanks, and/or insulating the designed with heat sources adjacent to any required inspections, maintenance tanks from heat sources, would be the fuel tank, which results in heating instructions, or modifications.
VerDate 11
Safety Review be included in the system safety The number and scope of any possible The SFAR requires the design analysis. AD’s may vary by airplane type design. approval holder to perform a safety The intent of the safety review is to For example, wiring separation and review of the fuel tank system to show assure that each fuel tank system design shielding of FQIS wires on newer that fuel tank fires or explosions will that is affected by this action will be technology airplanes significantly not occur on airplanes of the approved fully assessed and that the design reduces the likelihood of an electrical design. In conducting the review, the approval holder identifies any required short causing an electrical arc in the fuel design approval holder must modifications, added flight deck or tank; many newer transport airplanes do demonstrate compliance with the new maintenance indications, and/or not route electrical power wiring to fuel standards adopted for § 25.981(a) and maintenance actions necessary to meet pumps inside the airplane fuel tanks. (b) (discussed below) and the existing the fail-safe criteria. Therefore, some airplane models may not require significant modifications or standards of § 25.901. As part of this Maintenance Instructions review, the design approval holder must additional dedicated maintenance The FAA anticipates that the safety submit a report to the cognizant FAA procedures. review will identify critical areas of the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) that Other models may require significant fuel tank and other related systems that substantiates that the fuel tank system is modifications or more maintenance. For require maintenance actions to account fail-safe. example, the FQIS wiring on some older for the affects of aging, wear, corrosion, The FAA intends that those failure technology airplanes is routed in wire and possible contamination on the fuel conditions identified earlier in this bundles with high voltage power supply tank system. For example, service document, and any other foreseeable wires. The original failure analyses history indicates that sulfide deposits failures, should be assumed when conducted on these airplane types did may form on fuel tank components, performing the safety review needed to not consider the possibility that the fuel including bonding straps and FQIS substantiate that the fuel tank system quantity indication system may become components, which could degrade the design is fail-safe. The safety review degraded, allowing a significantly lower intended design capabilities by should be prepared considering all voltage level to produce a spark inside providing a mechanism by which arcing airplane inflight, ground, service, and the fuel tank. Causes of degradation could occur. Therefore, it might be maintenance conditions, assuming that observed in service include aging, necessary to provide maintenance an explosive fuel air mixture is present corrosion, or undetected contamination instructions to identify and eliminate in the fuel tanks at all times, unless the of the system. As previously discussed, such deposits. fuel tank has been purged of fuel vapor the FAA has issued AD actions for The SFAR requires the design for maintenance. The design approval certain Boeing Model 737 and 747 approval holder to develop any specific holder is expected to develop a failure airplanes to address this condition. maintenance and inspection modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for Modification of similar types of instructions necessary to maintain the all components in the fuel tank system. installations on other airplane models design features required to preclude the Analysis of the FMEA would then be may be required to address this unsafe existence or development of an ignition used to determine whether single condition and to achieve a fail-safe source within the fuel tank system. failures, alone or in combination with design. These instructions must be established foreseeable latent failures, could cause It should be noted that any design to ensure that an ignition source will an ignition source to exist in a fuel tank. changes might, in themselves, require not develop throughout the remaining A subsequent quantitative fault tree maintenance actions. For example, operational life of the airplane. analysis should then be developed to transient protection devices typically determine whether combinations of Possible Airworthiness Directives require scheduled maintenance in order failures expected to occur in the life of The safety review may also result in to detect latent failure of the the affected fleet could cause an ignition identification of unsafe conditions on suppression feature. As a part of the source to exist in a fuel tank system. certain airplane models that would required safety review, the manufacturer Because fuel tank systems typically require issuance of airworthiness is expected to define the necessary have few components within the fuel directives. For example, the FAA has maintenance procedures and intervals tank, the number of possible internal required or proposed requirements for for any required maintenance actions. sources of ignition is limited. The safety design changes to the following Applicability of the SFAR review required by this final rule airplanes: includes all components or systems that • Boeing Models 737, 747, and 767; The requirements of the SFAR are could introduce a source of fuel tank • Boeing Douglas Products Division applicable to holders of TC’s, and STC’s ignition. This may require analysis of (formerly, McDonnell Douglas) Model for modifications that affect the fuel not only the fuel tank system DC–9 and DC–10; tank systems of turbine-powered components, (e.g., pumps, fuel pump • Lockheed Model L–1011; transport category airplanes, for which power supplies, fuel valves, fuel • Bombardier (Canadair) Model CL– the TC was issued after January 1, 1958, quantity indication system probes, 600; and the airplane has either a maximum wiring, compensators, densitometers, • Airbus Models A300–600R, A319, type certificated passenger capacity of fuel level sensors, etc.), but also other A320, and A321; 30 or more, or a maximum type airplane systems that may affect the fuel • CASA Model C–212; certificated payload capacity of 7,500 tank system. For example, failures in • British Aerospace (Jetstream) Model pounds or more. airplane wiring or electromagnetic 4100; and The SFAR is also applicable to interference from other airplane systems • Fokker Model F28. applicants for type certificates, that were not properly accounted for in Design practices used on these models amendments to a type certificate, and the original safety assessment could may be similar to those of other airplane supplemental type certificates affecting cause an ignition source in the airplane types; therefore, the FAA expects that the fuel tank systems for those airplanes fuel tank system under certain modifications to airplanes with similar identified above, if the application was conditions and therefore would have to design features may also be required. filed before the effective date of the
VerDate 11
SFAR and the certificate was not issued systems, and the objectives of this rule conduct the safety review and develop before the effective date of the SFAR. would not be achieved unless these the compliance documentation and any The FAA has determined that turbine- systems are also reviewed and their required maintenance and inspection powered airplanes, regardless of safety ensured. The service experience instructions. (Applicants whose whether they are turboprops or noted in the background of this rule applications have not been approved as turbojets, should be subject to the rule, indicates modifications to airplane fuel of the effective date would be allowed because the potential for ignition tank systems incorporated by STC’s may 18 months after the approval to sources in fuel tank systems is unrelated affect the safety of the fuel tank system. comply.) The FAA expects each design to the engine design. This results in the Modifications that could affect the approval holder to work with the coverage of the large transport category fuel tank system include those that cognizant FAA Aircraft Certification airplanes where the safety benefits and could result in an ignition source in the Office (ACO) and Aircraft Evaluation public interest are greatest. This action fuel tank. Examples include installation Group (AEG) to develop a plan to affects approximately 7,000 U.S. of auxiliary fuel tanks and installation complete the safety review and develop registered airplanes in part 91, 121, 125, of, or modification to, other systems the required maintenance and and 129 operations. such as the fuel quantity indication inspection instructions within the 18- The date January 1, 1958, was chosen system, the fuel pump system month period. The plan should include so that only turbine-powered airplanes, (including electrical power supply), periodic reviews with the ACO and AEG except for a few 1953–1958 vintage airplane refueling system, any electrical of the ongoing safety review and the Convair 340s and 440s converted from wiring routed within or adjacent to the associated maintenance and inspection reciprocating power, will be included. fuel tank, and fuel level sensors or float instructions. No reciprocating-powered transport switches. Modifications to systems or During the 18-month compliance category airplanes are known to be used components located outside the fuel period, the FAA is committed to currently in passenger service, and the tank system may also affect fuel tank working with the affected design few remaining in cargo service would be safety. For example, installation of approval holders to assist them in excluded. Compliance is not required electrical wiring for other systems that complying with the requirements of the for those older airplanes because their was inappropriately routed with FQIS SFAR. However, failure to comply advanced age and small numbers would wiring could violate the wiring within the specified time would likely make compliance impractical separation requirements of the type constitute a violation of the from an economic standpoint. This is design. Therefore, the FAA intends that requirements and may subject the consistent with similar exclusions made a fuel tank system safety review be violator to certificate action to amend, for those airplanes from other conducted for any modification to the suspend, or revoke the affected requirements applicable to existing airplane that may affect the safety of the certificate in accordance with 49 U.S.C. airplanes, such as the regulations fuel tank system. The level of evaluation § 44709. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. adopted for flammability of seat that is intended would be dependent § 46301, it may also subject the violator cushions (49 FR 43188, October 24, upon the type of modification. In most to a civil penalty of not more than 1984); flammability of cabin interior cases a simple qualitative evaluation of $1,100 per day until the SFAR is components (51 FR 26206, July 21, the modification in relation to the fuel complied with. 1986); cargo compartment liners (54 FR tank system, and a statement that the Changes to Operating Requirements 7384, February 17, 1989); access to change has no effect on the fuel tank passenger emergency exits (57 FR system, would be all that is necessary. This rule requires the affected 19244, May 4, 1992); and Class D cargo In other cases where the initial operators to incorporate FAA-approved or baggage compartments (63 FR 8032, qualitative assessment shows that the fuel tank system maintenance and February 17, 1998). modification may affect the fuel tank inspection instructions in their In order to achieve the benefits of this system, a more detailed safety review maintenance or inspection program rulemaking for large transport airplanes would be required. required under the applicable operating as quickly as possible, the FAA has Design approvals for modification of rule within 36 months of the effective decided to limit the applicability of the airplane fuel tank systems approved by date of the rule. If the design approval SFAR to airplanes with a maximum STC’s require the applicant to have holder has complied with the SFAR and certificated passenger capacity of at knowledge of the airplane fuel tank developed an FAA-approved program, least 30 or at least 7,500 pounds system in which the modification is the operator can incorporate that payload. Compliance is not required for installed. The majority of these program, including any revisions smaller airplanes because it is not clear approvals are held by the original needed to address any modifications to at this time that the possible benefits for airframe manufacturers or airplane the original type design, to meet the those airplanes would be commensurate modifiers that specialize in fuel tank proposed requirement. The operator with the costs involved. For now, the system modifications, such as also has the option of developing its applicability of the rule will remain as installation of auxiliary fuel tanks. own program independently, and is proposed in the notice. The FAA will Therefore, the FAA expects that the data ultimately responsible for having an need to conduct the economic analysis needed to complete the required safety FAA-approved program, regardless of to determine if the rule should be review identified in the SFAR would be the action taken by the design approval applied to smaller airplanes. Should the available to the STC holder. holder. results of the analysis be favorable, the The rule prohibits the operation of Compliance With SFAR FAA will develop further rulemaking to certain transport category airplanes address the smaller transports. This rule provides an 18-month operated under parts 91, 121, 125, and compliance time from the effective date 129 beyond the specified compliance Applicability of SFAR to Supplemental of the final rule, or within 18 months time, unless the operator of those Type Certificate (STC) Holders after the issuance of a certificate for airplanes has incorporated FAA- The SFAR applies to STC holders as which application was filed before the approved fuel tank maintenance and well, because a significant number of effective date of this SFAR, whichever inspection instructions in its STC’s effect changes to fuel tank is later, for design approval holders to maintenance or inspection program, as
VerDate 11
applicable. The rule requires approval approval by the cognizant PMI or other fuel tank system in its approved of the maintenance and inspection cognizant airworthiness inspector. maintenance or inspection program, as instructions by the FAA ACO, or office 5. The maintenance and inspection applicable. The operational of the Transport Airplane Directorate, instructions developed by the TC holder applicability was established so that all having cognizance over the type under the rule generally do not apply to airplane types affected by the SFAR, certificate for the affected airplaneThe portions of the fuel tank systems regardless of type of operation, are operator would need to consider the modified in accordance with an STC, subject to FAA approved fuel tank following five issues: field approval, or otherwise, including system maintenance and inspection 1. The fuel tank system maintenance any auxiliary fuel tank installations. procedures. As discussed earlier, this and inspection instructions that would Similarly, STC holders are required to rule includes each turbine-powered be incorporated into the operator’s provide instructions for their STC’s. The transport category airplane model, existing maintenance or inspection operator, however, is still responsible provided its TC was issued after January program must be approved by the FAA for incorporating specific maintenance 1, 1958, and it has either a maximum ACO having cognizance over the type and inspection instructions applicable type certificated passenger capacity of certificate or supplemental type to the entire fuel tank system of each 30 or more, or a maximum type certificate. If the operator can establish airplane that meets the requirements of certificated payload capacity of 7,500 that the existing maintenance and this rule. This means that the operator pounds or more. must evaluate the fuel tank systems and inspection instructions fulfill the Affect on Field Approvals requirements of this rule, then the ACO any alterations to the fuel tank system may approve the operator’s existing not addressed by the instructions A significant number of changes to maintenance and inspection provided by the TC or STC holder, and transport category airplane fuel tank instructions without change. then develop, submit, and gain FAA systems have been incorporated through field approvals issued to the operators 2. The means by which the FAA- approval of the maintenance and of those airplanes. These changes may approved fuel tank system maintenance inspection instructions to evaluate also significantly affect the safety of the and inspection instructions are changes to the fuel tank systems. The FAA recognizes that operators fuel tank system. The operator of any incorporated into a certificate holder’s may not have the resources to develop airplane with such changes is required FAA-approved maintenance or maintenance or inspection instructions to develop the fuel tank system inspection program is subject to for the airplane fuel tank system. The maintenance and inspection program approval by the certificate holder’s rule therefore requires the TC and STC instructions and submit it to the FAA principal maintenance inspector (PMI) holders to develop fuel tank system for approval, together with the or other cognizant airworthiness maintenance and inspection necessary substantiation of compliance inspector. The FAA intends that any instructions that may be used by with the safety review requirements of escalation to the FAA-approved operators. If however, the STC holder is the SFAR. inspection intervals will require the out of business or otherwise Compliance With Operating operator to receive approval of the unavailable, the operator will Requirements amended program from the cognizant independently have to acquire the FAA- ACO or office of the Transport Airplane approved inspection instructions. To This rule establishes a 36-month Directorate. Any request for escalation keep the airplanes in service, operators, compliance time from the effective date to the FAA approved inspection either individually or as a group, could of the rule for operators to incorporate intervals must include data to hire the necessary expertise to develop FAA-approved, long-term, fuel tank substantiate that the proposed interval and gain approval of maintenance and system maintenance and inspection will provide the level of safety intended inspection instructions. Guidance on instructions into their approved by the original approval. If inspection how to comply with this aspect of the program. The FAA expects each results and service experience indicate rule will be provided in AC 25.981–1B. operator to work with the airplane TC that additional or more frequent After the PMI having oversight holder or STC holder to develop a plan inspections are necessary, the FAA may responsibilities is satisfied that the to implement the required maintenance issue AD’s to mandate such changes to operator’s continued airworthiness and inspection instructions within the the inspection program. maintenance or inspection program 36-month period. The plan should 3. This rule does not impose any new contains all of the elements of the FAA- include periodic reviews with the reporting requirements; however, approved fuel tank system maintenance cognizant ACO and AEG responsible for normal reporting required under 14 CFR and inspection instructions, the approval of the associated maintenance 121.703 and 125.409 still applies. airworthiness inspector will approve the and inspection instructions. 4. This rule does not impose any new maintenance or inspection program The fuel tank safety review may result FAA recordkeeping requirements. revision. This approval has the effect of in maintenance actions that are overdue However, as with all maintenance, the requiring compliance with the prior to the effective date of the current operating regulations (e.g., 14 maintenance and inspection operational rules. The plan provided by CFR 121.380 and 91.417) already instructions. the operator should include impose recordkeeping requirements that recommended timing of initial apply to the actions required by this Applicability of the Operating inspections or maintenance actions that rule. When incorporating the fuel tank Requirements are incorporated in the long term system maintenance and inspection This rule prohibits the operation of maintenance or inspection program. An instructions into its approved certain transport category airplanes analysis of and supporting evidence for maintenance or inspection program, operated under 14 CFR parts 91, 121, the proposed timing of the initial action each operator should address the means 125, and 129 beyond the specified should be provided to the FAA. For by which it will comply with these compliance time, unless the operator of example, it may be determined that an recordkeeping requirements. That those airplanes has incorporated FAA- inspection of a certain component means of compliance, along with the approved specific maintenance and should be conducted after 50,000 flight remainder of the program, are subject to inspection instructions applicable to the hours. Some airplanes within the fleet
VerDate 11
may have accumulated over 50,000 temperature providing a safe margin is § 25.901(c) and the systems failure flight hours. The timing of the initial at least 50°F below the lowest expected analysis requirements of § 25.1309, as inspection must be approved by the autoignition temperature of the fuel they have been applied to powerplant FAA and would be dependent upon an throughout the altitude and temperature installations. This additional evaluation of the safety impact of the envelopes approved for the airplane requirement is needed because the inspection. It is desirable to incorporate type for which approval is requested. general requirements of §§ 25.901 and these inspections in the current heavy This rulemaking also adds a new 25.1309 have not been consistently maintenance program, such as a ‘‘C’’ or paragraph (a)(3) to require that a safety applied and documented when showing ‘‘D’’ check, without taking airplanes out analysis be performed to demonstrate that ignition sources are precluded from of service. However, it may be that the presence of an ignition source transport category airplane fuel tanks. determined that more expeditious in the fuel tank system could not result Compliance with § 25.981 requires an action is required, which may be from any single failure, from any single analysis of the airplane fuel tank system mandated by AD. failure in combination with any latent using analytical methods and failure condition not shown to be documentation currently used by the Changes to Part 25 extremely remote, or from any aviation industry in demonstrating Currently, § 25.981 defines limits on combination of failures not shown to be compliance with §§ 25.901 and 25.1309. surface temperatures within transport extremely improbable. In order to eliminate any ambiguity as airplane fuel tank systems. In order to These new requirements define three to the necessary methods of compliance, address future airplane designs, § 25.981 scenarios that must be addressed in the rule explicitly requires that the is revised to address both prevention of order to show compliance with existence of latent failures be assumed ignition sources in fuel tanks, and paragraph (a)(3). The first scenario is unless they are extremely remote, which reduction in the time fuel tanks contain that any single failure, regardless of the is currently required under § 25.901, but flammable vapors. The first part probability of occurrence of the failure, not under § 25.1309. The analysis explicitly includes a requirement for must not cause an ignition source. The should be conducted assuming design effectively precluding ignition sources second scenario is that any single deficiencies listed in the background within the fuel tank systems of transport failure, regardless of the probability section of this document, and any other category airplanes. The second part occurrence, in combination with any failure modes identified within the fuel requires minimizing the formation of latent failure condition not shown to be tank system functional hazard flammable vapors in the fuel tanks. at least extremely remote (i.e., not assessment. shown to be extremely remote or Fuel Tank Ignition Source—Section Based upon the evaluations required extremely improbable), must not cause 25.981 by § 25.981(a), a new requirement is an ignition source. The third scenario is added to paragraph (b) to require that The title of § 25.981 is changed from that any combination of failures not critical design configuration control ‘‘Fuel tank temperature’’ to ‘‘Fuel tank shown to be extremely improbable must limitations, inspections, or other ignition prevention.’’ The substance of not cause an ignition source. procedures be established as necessary existing paragraph (a), which requires For the purpose of this rule, to prevent development of ignition the applicant to determine the highest ‘‘extremely remote’’ failure conditions sources within the fuel tank system, and temperature that allows a safe margin are those not anticipated to occur to that they be included in the below the lowest expected auto ignition each airplane during its total life, but Airworthiness Limitations section of the temperature of the fuel, is retained. which may occur a few times when ICA required by § 25.1529. This Likewise, the substance of existing considering the total operational life of requirement is similar to that contained paragraph (b), which requires all airplanes of the type. This definition in § 25.571 for airplane structure. precluding the temperature in the fuel is consistent with that proposed by the Appendix H to part 25 is also revised to tank from exceeding the temperature ARAC for a revision to FAA AC add a requirement to provide any determined under paragraph (a), is also 25.1309–1A and that currently used by mandatory fuel tank system inspections retained. These requirements are the JAA in AMJ 25.1309. ‘‘Extremely or maintenance actions in the redesignated as (a)(1) and (2) improbable’’ failure conditions are those Airworthiness Limitations section of the respectively. so unlikely that they are not anticipated ICA. Compliance with these paragraphs to occur during the entire operational Critical design configuration control requires the determination of the fuel life of all airplanes of one type. This limitations include any information flammability characteristics of the fuels definition is consistent with the necessary to maintain those design approved for use. Fuels approved for definition provided in FAA AC features that have been defined in the use on transport category airplanes have 25.1309–1A and retained in the draft original type design as needed to differing flammability characteristics. revision to AC 25.1309–1A proposed by preclude development of ignition The fuel with the lowest autoignition the ARAC. sources. This information is essential to temperature is JET A (kerosene), which The severity of the external ensure that maintenance, repairs, or has an autoignition temperature of environmental conditions that should alterations do not unintentionally approximately 450°F at sea level. The be considered when demonstrating violate the integrity of the original fuel autoignition temperature of JP–4 is compliance with this rule are those tank system type design. An example of approximately 470°F at sea level. Under established by certification regulations a critical design configuration control the same atmospheric conditions, the and special conditions (e.g., HIRF), limitation for current designs discussed autoignition temperature of gasoline is regardless of the associated probability. previously would be maintaining wire approximately 800°F. The autoignition The rule also requires that the effects of separation between FQIS wiring and temperature of these fuels increases at manufacturing variability, aging, wear, other high power electrical circuits. The increasing altitudes (lower pressures). and likely damage be taken into account original design approval holder must For the purposes of this rule, the lowest when demonstrating compliance. define a method to ensure that this temperature at which autoignition can These requirements are consistent essential information will be evident to occur for the most critical fuel approved with the general powerplant installation those that may perform and approve for use should be determined. A failure analysis requirements of repairs and alterations. Visual means to
VerDate 11
alert the maintenance crew must be flammable vapors will develop in fuel 2, ‘‘Fuel Tank Flammability placed in areas of the airplane where tanks when other practicable design Minimization.’’ inappropriate actions may degrade the methods are available that can reduce AC 25.981–1B includes consideration integrity of the design configuration. In the likelihood of such development. For of failure conditions that could result in addition, this information should be example, the rule does not prohibit sources of ignition of vapors within fuel communicated by statements in installation of fuel tanks in the cargo tanks, and provides guidance on how to appropriate manuals, such as Wiring compartment, placing heat exchangers substantiate that ignition sources will Diagram Manuals. in fuel tanks, or locating a fuel tank in not be present in airplane fuel tank Flammability Requirements the center wing. It does, however, require that practical means, such as systems following failures or The FAA agrees with the intent of the transferring heat from the fuel tank (e.g., malfunctions of airplane components or regulatory text recommended by the use of ventilation or cooling air), be systems. This AC also includes ARAC. However, due to the short incorporated into the airplane design if guidance for developing any limitations timeframe that the ARAC was provided heat sources were placed in or near the for the ICA that may be generated by the to complete the tasking, a sufficient fuel tanks that significantly increased fuel tank system safety review. detailed economic evaluation was not the formation of flammable fuel vapors AC 25.981–2 provides information completed to determine if practical in the tank, or if the tank is located in and guidance concerning compliance means, such as ground based inerting, an area of the airplane where little or no with the new requirements identified in were available to reduce the exposure cooling occurs. The intent of the rule is below the specified value of 7 percent this rulemaking pertaining to to require that fuel tanks are not heated, minimizing the formation or mitigation of the operational time included in the and cool at a rate equivalent to that of ARAC proposal. The FAA is adopting a of hazards from flammable fuel air a wing tank in the transport airplane mixtures within fuel tanks. more objective regulation that is being evaluated. This may require intended to minimize exposure to incorporating design features to reduce Discussion of Comments operation with flammable conditions in flammability, for example cooling and the fuel tanks. ventilation means or inerting for fuel Thirty four commenters responded to As discussed previously, the ARAC tanks located in the center wing box, Notice 99–18, including private citizens, has submitted a recommendation to the horizontal stabilizer, or auxiliary fuel foreign aviation authorities, FAA that the FAA continue to evaluate tanks located in the cargo compartment. manufacturers of inerting equipment, means for minimizing the development At such time as the FAA has completed individual airplane manufacturers and of flammable vapors within the fuel the necessary research and identified an operators (both foreign and domestic), tanks. Development of a definitive an organization representing the standard to address this appropriate definitive standard to interests of manufacturers of general recommendation will require additional address this issue, new rulemaking will effort that will likely take some time to be considered to revise the standard aviation airplanes, an airline pilots complete. In the meantime, however, adopted in this rulemaking. representative, an organization the FAA is aware that historically Applicability of Part 25 Change representing the consolidated interests certain design methods have been found of the aviation industry worldwide, and acceptable that, when compared to The amendments to part 25 apply to the National Transportation Safety readily available alternative methods, all transport category airplane models Board. The majority of commenters increase the likelihood that flammable for which an application for type agree in principle with the proposals. A vapors will develop in the fuel tanks. certification is made after the effective discussion of these comments follows, For example, in some designs, including date of the rule, regardless of passenger including FAA’s response, grouped by the Boeing Model 747, air conditioning capacity or size. In addition, as subject matter. packs have been located immediately currently required by the provisions of below a fuel tank without provisions to § 21.50, applicants for any future Discussion of Comments on Proposed reduce transfer of heat from the packs to changes to existing part 25 type SFAR the tank. certificated airplanes, including STC’s, that could introduce an ignition source For ease of reference, throughout the Therefore, in order to preclude the following discussion, the term future use of such design practices, in the fuel tank system are required to ‘‘designer’’ is used to refer to all persons § 25.981 is revised to add a requirement provide any necessary Instructions for subject to the requirements of the that fuel tank installations be designed Continued Airworthiness, as required to minimize the development of by § 25.1529 and the change to the Special Federal Aviation Regulation flammable vapors in the fuel tanks. Airworthiness Limitations section, (SFAR). Alternatively, if an applicant concludes paragraph H25.4 of Appendix H. In General Favorable Comments that such minimization is not cases where it is determined that the advantageous, it may propose means to existing ICA are adequate for the Several commenters, including mitigate the effects of an ignition of fuel continued airworthiness of the altered representatives of manufacturers and vapors in the fuel tanks. For example, product, then it should be noted on the operators, agree in principle with the such means might include installation STC, PMA supplement, or major safety review that would be required by of fire suppressing polyurethane foam. alteration approval. the proposed new SFAR to part 21 and This rule is not intended to prevent FAA Advisory Material have, in fact, already engaged in an the development of flammable vapors in industry-wide initiative in this area. fuel tanks because total prevention has In addition to the amendments These commenters state that they currently not been found to be feasible. presented in this rulemaking, the FAA believe firmly that the objective of the Rather, it is intended as an interim is continuing development of AC proposed safety review will enhance the measure to preclude, in new designs, 25.981–1B, ‘‘Fuel Tank Ignition Source level of safety that already exists in the the use of design methods that result in Prevention Guidelines’’ (a revision to transport fleet. a relatively high likelihood that AC 25.981–1A), and a new AC 25.981–
VerDate 11
Request to Include Smaller Part 25 Request to Exclude Mitsubishi YS–11 and inspection instructions into their Airplanes, Rotorcraft, and Part 23 Airplanes and Lockheed Electra current maintenance or inspection Airplanes in SFAR Applicability Airplanes program of transport category airplanes Several commenters disagree with the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, type-certificated after January 1, 1958. proposal to limit applicability of the Inc., requests that the Mitsubishi Model That date was chosen so that all turbine- SFAR to larger airplanes (30 or more YS–11 airplane be excluded from the powered transport category airplanes passengers) due to the time needed to SFAR applicability. The commenter’s would be included, except for a few conduct a thorough economic analysis justification for this exclusion is that 1947 vintage Grumman Mallards, and and the possible impact it would have none of these airplane models is 1953–1958 vintage Convair Model 340 and 440 airplanes converted from on small businesses. However, the currently being operated in the U.S. and reciprocating to turbine power. commenters request that this evaluation none are likely to be operated in the We do not consider the information be completed and that smaller transport future. The commenter further states that there has never been a fuel tank- presented by either of the commenters airplanes be included because of the sufficient to warrant a general exclusion design similarities of the smaller related incident or accident on any of these airplane models. The commenter of either the Model YS–11 or the Model airplanes to larger airplanes. L–188 Electra from the applicability of Additionally, one commenter notes refers to the FAA’s statement in the the SFAR. We do acknowledge, that, because the proposal excludes a preamble to the notice that certain older however, that the current operations of significant portion of the fleet, the reciprocating engine-powered and Model L–188 Electra airplanes to remote proposal is not in keeping with the converted turbine-powered transport Aleutian points and on military contract FAA’s stated goals of the ‘‘One level of airplanes should be excluded from the flights do involve unique circumstances Safety’’ initiative. This commenter also rule because: worthy of further consideration. For notes that the FAA stated in the notice ‘‘* * * the few remaining such airplanes example, we might conclude that, while that applying the proposed are in cargo service and because their full compliance is not cost effective, requirements to certain regional advanced age and small numbers would some lesser degree of fuel tank system airliners would not significantly make compliance impractical from an economic standpoint.’’ evaluation is necessary. increase the expected quantitative While there is insufficient basis on benefits of the rule because there have The commenter asserts that the same which to exclude the Model L–188 been no in-flight fuel tank explosions on rationale should be applicable to the Electra airplanes in general, the TC those airplanes. The commenter is Model YS–11 because not one such holder may petition the FAA for an concerned that the FAA may be using airplane is currently operating in the exemption from the provisions of this ‘‘faulty reasoning’’ to eliminate the need U.S. and the possibility of such final rule showing that it would be in for any follow-on action to address this airplanes ever returning to cargo service, the public interest. Similarly, we would segment of the fleet. much less passenger service, in the U.S. consider petitions for exemption from Another commenter strongly is virtually non-existent. Therefore, the SFAR for the Model YS–11 or any recommends that the SFAR be extended there are no benefits to be achieved by other airplane not currently operated to include part 23 aircraft and part 27 the design review. under U.S. registry. Such requests for rotorcraft because these types of aircraft Similarly, Lockheed Martin also exemption would be handled outside of may be susceptible to fuel tank system requests that its airplane model, the this rulemaking action. Even if an problems similar to those addressed in Lockheed Model L–188 Electra airplane, exemption were granted from the SFAR the proposed rule. be excluded from the applicability of to a design approval holder, operators of FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that, the SFAR. Like the first commenter, this the affected airplanes would still be even though the fuel tank systems of commenter refers to the statement in the subject to the requirements of the smaller transport category airplanes may preamble to the notice that certain older operating rules established by this final be simpler, similarities in the designs of reciprocating and turbine-powered rule. Petitions for exemption by the the fuel systems of those airplanes may airplanes should be excluded because operators would involve different result in a need to apply the standard to compliance would be impractical from considerations. them. As discussed in the notice, we an economic standpoint. The plan to conduct the appropriate commenter suggests that the Model L– Request to ‘‘Harmonize’’ the Rule With economic analysis to determine if the 188 Electra also falls into this category European Authorities rule should be applied to smaller and should be excluded from the rule’s Several commenters, including transport airplanes. Should the results applicability. The commenter further representatives from aviation officials of of that analysis indicate that the SFAR suggests that the retroactive application the JAA and Transport Canada, state requirements should be applied to of the new requirements to any older that the proposed SFAR should have smaller transports, we will consider model include provisions in the rule been developed through the Aviation developing further rulemaking to that would permit favorable service Rulemaking Advisory Committee address those airplanes. For now, the experience to be submitted instead of (ARAC) and its harmonization process. applicability of the final rule will extensive failure analysis. The These commenters contend that remain as proposed in the notice. commenter refers to a safety study harmonizing the proposed rule would: We do not agree that the proposed conducted of the Model L–188 Electra • simplify operations, SFAR should be applied to part 23 fuel system which shows that the fuel • reduce the cost of compliance aircraft and part 27 rotorcraft at this system service experience is excellent. without compromising safety, and time. Service experience has not FAA’s Response: The FAA does not • extend the latest safety benefits indicated that immediate action is concur with these commenters’ requests more broadly in the world fleet. necessary to address the fuel tank to revise the applicability of the SFAR. The commenters also state that systems of those types of aircraft at this As stated in Notice 99–18, parts 91, 121, issuing the rule under the time. However, we may reconsider this 125, and 129 would be amended to harmonization process would have action if future service experience require operators to incorporate FAA- facilitated eventual delegation of the indicates that it is warranted. approved fuel tank system maintenance SFAR compliance findings between the
VerDate 11
FAA and the JAA. Some commenters bilateral countries choose to become commenter regards the proposal as request that the disposition of public involved in reviewing submissions for essentially a requirement to re-certify comments be handled through the compliance with the SFAR, we will the fuel systems of all turbine-powered ARAC process. work closely with them. This should commercial transports, with respect to FAA’s Response: The FAA does not facilitate the harmonization efforts avoiding fuel tank fires and explosions. concur with the commenters. When this described previously. However, under The commenter points out that, while rulemaking was initiated, we faced a the SFAR the FAA must approve the more than 450 million hours of service choice between proceeding unilaterally design approval holder’s submission. experience on these airplanes have or proceeding through the identified valuable lessons learned, this harmonization process involving the Request for Definition of Safety Review same service experience also JAA and the public through ARAC. At One commenter notes that the terms demonstrates the largely successful that time, we chose to proceed ‘‘safety review,’’ ‘‘design review,’’ outcome of the previously certified unilaterally in order to address the ‘‘safety analysis,’’ and ‘‘functional designs. The extent of the safety review important safety need on an expedited hazard assessment’’ appear to be used that the proposed SFAR would require basis. In a separate action, we did task interchangeably throughout the notice. goes beyond what is commensurate with ARAC with developing proposed However, each of these terms could the historical data. regulatory text to eliminate or reduce have significantly different meanings. FAA’s Response: The FAA does not flammability in airplane fuel tanks. The The commenter requests that, if it is the concur with the commenter that the fundamentals of ARAC’s proposal are intent of the FAA to have different service history of the affected airplanes included in this rule. meanings for these terms, then the does not warrant the type of safety With the issuance of this rule, we definitions should be clearly stated and review proposed. Specifically, we consider that the safety need has been the terms should be used in the disagree that past service has been addressed and we are now open to a appropriate context. ‘‘largely successful.’’ While the harmonization effort. To facilitate The commenter offers the following commenter states that the fleet has harmonization, we have coordinated the definitions in an attempt to establish a achieved a good safety record, we point proposal with the JAA and Transport unified understanding of the objectives: out that, as discussed in detail in the Canada. Comments from the JAA and • ‘‘Safety Review’’—a comprehensive preamble to the notice, there has been Transport Canada indicate their assessment of the fuel tank system that extensive service history data related to agreement in principle with our actions, meets all the requirements of the anomalies, system failures, aging-related and they have stated their intention to Special Federal Aviation Regulation. problems, etc., of the fuel tanks of mandate similar fuel tank safety actions. • ‘‘Safety Analysis’’—process of transport category airplanes. Service While we will ensure compliance with ensuring that the fuel system is fail-safe data show that there have been 16 fuel the SFAR, the operating rules, and the by conducting a design review and tank explosion events. Further, the fact part 25 design standards as adopted in failure modes and effects analysis. that the FAA has issued over 40 this final rule, we will continue • ‘‘Design Review’’—process of airworthiness directives to correct fuel discussions with Transport Canada and reviewing all relevant engineering tank safety hazards affecting a large the JAA concerning possible design drawings to ensure that cross section of the transport airplane harmonization efforts relating to the part appropriate design practices have been fleet indicates that extensive 25 change. used and identify failure modes. revalidation of the fuel tank systems, as The safety improvements provided by • ‘‘Failure Modes Analysis’’—process proposed, is necessary. this rule are as urgent now as they were of evaluating all identified failure when we decided to proceed modes resulting from the design review Question on Quantitative vs. Qualitative unilaterally. The comments do not by conducting a failure modes and Safety Review of Older Airplane Designs persuade us that the policy judgments effects analysis (FMEA) and a fault tree One commenter suggests that the reflected in the notice were incorrect. analysis (FTA). proposed SFAR should allow aircraft Because expedited adoption of this final The commenter requests that a similar certificated prior to Amendment 25–23 rule is necessary, and because further set of definitions be provided in the and § 25.1309 reliability requirements to discussion of comments within ARAC SFAR to clarify the intentions of the undergo a qualitative—rather than would not change the FAA’s policy regulation. quantitative—safety review. Then, from determinations, further review of the FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs the results of the review, an inspection proposed rule by ARAC would not be that clarification is appropriate. The or maintenance plan could be appropriate. objective of the SFAR is to require developed, and, finally, a one-time designers to conduct ‘‘safety reviews,’’ inspection of the entire fleet could be Request To Delegate Compliance which is the broadest term defined by performed. The commenter supports Findings the commenter. The term ‘‘safety this type of assessment for several Several commenters request that the review’’ is the correct term that is used reasons: FAA delegate SFAR compliance in the text of the SFAR. For clarification 1. The current version of § 25.1309 findings to the prime certification sake, we have used the term ‘‘safety requires a safety review and a authority in accordance with the review’’ throughout the discussions in quantitative assessment to validate that approved bilateral agreement. this preamble to describe the action a system is fail-safe. However, accurate FAA’s Response: The FAA interprets required by the SFAR. No change to the statistical reliability information needed the reference to ‘‘prime certification final rule text is necessary in this regard, to conduct the safety analysis is likely authority’’ to mean the ‘‘state of design,’’ however. to be unavailable for fuel system as that term is used in ICAO Annex 8. components used nearly 30 years ago. Because the SFAR imposes Question on the Need for a System 2. When conducting a safety review, requirements on existing designers, the Safety Review conservative assumptions are required bilateral airworthiness agreements, One commenter considers that the when accurate reliability data is which address new certifications, do not proposed safety review required under unavailable. These conservative directly apply. To the extent that the new part 21 SFAR is excessive. This assumptions could lead to false and
VerDate 11
detrimental failure probability results. technical archives of pre-amendment safe requirement for the fuel pump This circumstance could occur multiple 25–23 aircraft may be limited in their mechanical components, although it times during the analysis, or even cause usefulness to support a formalized would not necessarily address fuel compounded error effects, requiring analysis. pump motor failure modes. (Advisory even more severe corrective actions. These commenters also state that re- Circular 25.981–1B provides additional 3. By the methods proposed in the evaluation of older aircraft types using guidance on the acceptability of proposed rule, a ‘‘representative’’ fuel today’s quantitative analysis qualitative assessments where fail-safe tank system would be created based on methodologies, such as a failure modes features are provided.) 30-year-old drawings that would be and effects analysis (FMEA), would be Additionally, if fail-safe features are ‘‘fraught with unavoidable impractical and present incorporated into the design in such a assumptions,’’ while at the same time be ‘‘insurmountable difficulties,’’ given the way that the effects of other systems on required to meet the ‘‘extremely unavailability of data and the resources the fuel tank system can be shown to be improbable’’ failure condition required. One commenter states that this benign, then no additional design probability criteria of 1 × 10 ¥9. This type of safety review would be assessment and inspections would be would lead to unnecessary inspections, extremely labor-and resource-intensive, required. Designers using this approach maintenance, repairs, and and would have both short- and long- would be required to provide modifications. term adverse economic effects on the substantiation that the design features To meet the intent of the SFAR more aviation industry. preclude the need for detailed design effectively, the commenter proposes that Another commenter states that the assessment of the system and future a qualitative safety review be proposal does not provide a simple inspections. Designers considering conducted, based on: design-assessment method that is using this approach should coordinate • The investigative efforts of the FAA compatible with the technical as early as possible with the cognizant and NTSB, information available to TC and STC ACO. • AD’s, holders. (The commenter gave no On the other hand, the fact that a • Service bulletins, examples of incompatibility, however.) quantitative assessment and related data • Lessons learned, FAA’s Response: The FAA recognizes do not currently exist for some older • Performance history of the aircraft, that the fuel tank systems of most older airplane types does not mean that a and transport airplane designs were not similar safety assessment cannot be • Results of the recent industry-wide evaluated during certification using the accomplished on these airplanes. It is fuel tank inspection program. quantitative safety assessment methods feasible to use a modern safety In addition, the labor and time costs associated with § 25.1309. For these assessment method on older airplanes for a qualitative analysis would be airplanes, the FAA agrees that a that will recognize and evaluate dramatically lower than for a qualitative, rather than quantitative, potential failures and their effects, and quantitative analysis. A qualitative approach can and should be used where will identify actions that could analysis could be conducted using the possible for the fuel tank system safety eliminate or reduce the chance of a knowledge and experience of current in- review. The level of analysis required to potential failure from occurring. house personnel and applying familiar show that ignition sources will not Methods for conducting a quantitative methods of evaluation. It likely would develop will depend upon the specific analysis of any system are well- take less time, as well. design features of the fuel tank system established and readily available. For Several other commenters also being evaluated. Detailed quantitative example, the FMEA and fault tree question the practicality of requiring the analysis should not be necessary if a analysis methodology is widely proposed safety review if the latest qualitative safety assessment shows that accepted and understood. In fact, there standards are to be applied to older features incorporated into the fuel tank currently are several software packages airplane designs. These commenters system design protect against the available commercially that are maintain that the proposed SFAR development of ignition sources within specifically designed for assisting in effectively requires recertification of the fuel tank system. For example, for developing FMEA’s; these have proven older airplanes’ fuel tanks to show wiring entering the fuel tanks, to be particularly useful in reducing the compliance with the quantitative system compliance demonstration could be amount of time, labor, clerical support, safety assessment requirements shown in three steps. and monetary burden that normally introduced in § 25.1309 of Amendment • First, the wiring could be shown to would be entailed. 25–23. The commenters point out that have protective features such as In light of this, we anticipate that all those requirements were neither separation, shielding, or transient affected TC and STC holders will be developed nor in effect for the airplanes suppression devices; fully capable of complying with the whose certification basis was approved • Second, the effectiveness of those SFAR requirements. prior to the time that Amendment 25– features could be demonstrated; and No change to the final rule is 23 was issued in May 1970. The • Third, any long-term maintenance necessary with regard to these majority of the airplanes affected by the requirements or critical design comments. The rule requires that proposed SFAR fall into this category. configuration limitations could be applicants ‘‘conduct a safety review’’ of Further, the commenters note that defined so that the protective features the airplane, but does not specify any quantitative analysis methods for are not degraded. particular method of review. showing compliance with the Another example would be showing requirements of Amendment 25–23 that fuel pumps are installed in such a Question on Intent of Safety Review were not even developed or approved way that the fuel pump inlet remains One commenter questions the FAA’s by the FAA until June 1988, when the covered whenever the fuel pump is intent regarding the safety review. This FAA issued guidance on this subject in operating throughout the airplane commenter notes that the proposed Advisory Circular 25.1309–1A. These operating attitude envelope, including SFAR states, ‘‘ * * * single failures will methods were not necessarily applied to anticipated low fuel operations and not jeopardize the safe operation * * * aircraft certified before that date. Thus, ground conditions. This could be a ‘‘ and ‘‘ * * * latent failures have to be the certification documentation and satisfactory method of meeting the fail- assumed * * *’’ However, there are a
VerDate 11
number of single failures identified in regulated as a ‘‘prescriptive-type rule.’’ address problems that were known to the SFAR that have the capability to As an example, the commenters suggest have occurred in the past; however, it create an ignition source within the fuel that the FAA first define a would not necessarily address potential tank. Examples include: comprehensive list of items that may problems and risks that could occur in • Various mechanical pump failure not have been considered adequately in the future. Thus, a lessons learned focus modes, the original fuel system design and for is a reactive, not a proactive, approach. • Various electrical pump failure which there is some service experience. There may be unforeseen failure modes modes, and The list could include such items as: that would not necessarily be accounted • Arcing of pump power cables to the • Fuel pumps, for by only evaluating failure modes that conduit. • Wiring to pumps in conduits have occurred in the past, as would be There are a number of single failures located inside fuel tanks, done with a lessons-learned approach. within the examples listed above that • Fuel pump connectors, One example is in AC 25.981–1A, would not be acceptable to show • Fuel quantity indicating system published originally in 1971, which compliance in accordance with the wiring and probes, and included a list of failure modes, based current application of § 25.1309, which • Component bonding. upon lessons learned at that time, that requires that ‘‘ * * * failure of any The FAA could then require that fuel should have been considered in single component should be assumed system designs be evaluated against this showing compliance with the * * * and not prevent continued safe ‘‘checklist’’ to determine if adequate requirements of § 25.981. Since that AC flight * * *’’ In light of this, the consideration has been made regarding was published, however, numerous commenter asks if the FAA is expecting the potential effects of each item listed. unforeseen failures have occurred, thus, modifications to cover all these cases; if Any single failures shown to cause an resulting in a much longer list that is not, there is a risk that the interpretation ignition source in the fuel tank would now included in the revision to that AC. of § 25.1309 may be degraded. warrant a design change. A quantitative While such a list is valuable in The commenter further states that fault tree analysis could then be providing guidance for conducting a there are a number of latent failures in developed for combinations of failures safety assessment, it is not all-inclusive fuel tanks that could create an ignition shown to cause ignition sources, to and we do not consider it adequate for source within the fuel tank, for example: determine if such failure combinations conducting a comprehensive safety • Loss of pump over-temperature could be expected to occur in the assessment. protection, and remaining fleet life of the affected On the other hand, the qualitative • Loss of bonding (electro-static and aircraft type. approach to the required safety review lightning protection). These commenters state that among will result in consideration of, and These types of latent failures are not the benefits of this prescriptive design means to address, potential failure easy to detect without a physical review approach would be: modes, even if they have not yet been inspection inside the tank. The • A common evaluation criterion for encountered in service. For example, if commenter asks how these types of each aircraft type, regardless of its a qualitative assessment indicated that a latent failures will be considered when certification basis. particular design feature could result in assessing the safety of fuel tanks. • A more objective evaluation process a high voltage electrical surge into the Clearly, frequent internal inspections of that simplifies delegating the fuel tank, then the assessment would fuel tanks are not acceptable, and some compliance-finding task by the FAA and conclude that measures should be taken means for agreeing to certain design ensures equal treatment for each to prevent such an occurrence, practices on existing aircraft may be manufacturer and operator. regardless of whether it is a ‘‘lesson needed. • Faster completion of the task, learned’’ based on past occurrences. FAA’s Response: The intent of the submittal of the report to the FAA, and safety review, as stated in the notice, is resolution of any deficiencies in the Request for Risk Assessment Only of to apply current system safety existing fleet. Remaining Fleet Life assessment standards to the affected • Development of a standardized One commenter suggests that the airplanes in the existing transport fleet. report or checklist to ease the safety review methodology proposed by We fully expect that, where fail-safe compliance-finding process. the FAA should provide a risk features do not exist, modifications to • A far greater pool of people able to assessment over the remaining fleet life designs and changes to maintenance accomplish the task, because a of each aircraft type. Many of the practices will be required for a prescriptive review method would not aircraft types that would be affected by significant portion of the fleet to address demand engineers with detailed the proposed SFAR are approaching the the single and multiple failures noted by expertise in fuel systems and safety end of their fleet lives. The commenter the commenter. If inspections to detect assessment methodology. asserts that, when determining if safety latent failures are impractical, it would These commenters maintain that the reviews and resulting design changes be necessary to modify the design to FAA’s safety review proposed in the are warranted, the consideration should provide fail-safe features or indications SFAR would be merely an additional be based upon a risk assessment based to eliminate latency. burden that could interfere with on the remaining fleet life. realizing the benefits of lessons learned. FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that Request for a Lessons Learned They consider that their suggested the remaining fleet life could be one Approach alternative approach is more practical, consideration in establishing a basis for Certain commenters state that the and equally effective in enhancing fuel an exemption from the requirement to proposed safety review would be more system safety. perform a safety review for particular useful if it were based strictly on lessons FAA’s Response: The FAA does not models, but it is not a general basis for learned, and request that the proposal concur with these commenters’ request. limiting the applicability of the be changed accordingly. The To conduct a safety review based solely proposal. While some models of commenters propose an alternative on lessons learned would not provide airplanes have exceeded their economic method that would be based on service the level of safety that is intended by the design goal (for example the Boeing experience (lessons learned) and proposal. A lessons learned focus would Model 727 and McDonnell Douglas
VerDate 11
Model DC–9), there are individual require ‘‘all maintenance and inspection maintenance program for each airplane airplanes of those models that are still instructions necessary’’ to be submitted model. in service, and extensive future service as part of the safety review report. Certain other commenters request that life is planned for them. Consequently, However, the commenters assert that the proposal be changed to include the exposure to the risk of fuel tank effective development of a maintenance following text: explosions remains as valid for these program cannot practically start until ‘‘Compliance time: models as for any others in service. the safety review is completed, and it (a) All design review reports must be Regarding whether resulting design must be developed in coordination with submitted to the Administrator no later than changes are warranted, those changes the operators and regulatory agencies. 36 months after the effective date of this rule would necessarily be mandated by Therefore, submittal of the maintenance or within 18 months of the issuance of a separate regulatory actions (AD’s). and inspection instructions as part of certificate for which application was filed Therefore, whether the changes are the safety review report is not feasible. before [effective date of the rule], whichever warranted will be assessed in the The commenters request that the is later. context of those actions. proposal be revised to allow a period of (b) Maintenance and inspection instructions must be submitted to the Request for Change in Compliance Time 6 to 8 months for the development of Administrator no later than 8 months after for Conducting Safety Review these instructions once the FAA has the FAA has approved the design review approved the safety review report. report for the applicable aircraft type.’’ Several commenters state that the 12- Fourth, necessary design changes month compliance time for completing identified as a result of the safety review Others request that the compliance the required actions proposed under the could not be developed, evaluated, and time for completion of the safety review SFAR is unrealistic, and request a shown to comply with the new should be extended to 54 months. longer period for compliance. The requirements within the proposed FAA’s Response: The FAA has reasons that these commenters give are compliance time. The commenters considered the reasons for the as follows: request that the compliance time for commenters’ requests and concurs that First, industry lacks the resources to design change activity be treated the compliance time should be extended accomplish the requirements within the separately from the SFAR review somewhat. We have revised the final proposed timeframe. There are limited activity. rule to provide a compliance time of 18 qualified personnel to conduct the level Fifth, the FAA itself lacks resources to months for conducting the safety of safety review that the proposed SFAR support timely review of the safety reviews and submitting them to the would require. Formalized system safety review reports required by the SFAR FAA. Even for those designers who analysis of the type outlined in AC within the 12-month time proposed to work closely with the appropriate 25.1309–1A requires specialists with complete the review. The commenters ACO’s in conducting their reviews, we extensive knowledge of the system believe that the FAA has grossly acknowledge that, following architecture, component details, and underestimated its own flow times submission, some time will be required service history, as well as the analysis regarding coordination and approval of for FAA review and for any necessary methodology. the SFAR-mandated safety reviews and revisions, and we consider that 6 Second, the flow time necessary to resulting compliance substantiation months should be adequate for those perform the proposed safety review documents. Experience has shown that activities. We are aware that when the would exceed the proposed compliance the FAA typically takes 60 to 90 days FAA has mandated maintenance time. The commenters point out that to review and approve of documents of program changes in the past, we have over 100 airplane models would need to this kind. Multiplied by 100 reports or typically allowed operators 12 months be reviewed, and the proposed safety more, it would appear that the FAA to incorporate those changes into their review methodology would require two itself would require more than the programs. Therefore, we have revised to four years of effort per major model proposed 12 months compliance time to the operating rules to require that for large transport aircraft. Some major complete its review and approval cycle operators incorporate the maintenance models of airplanes have numerous once the reports are submitted by the program changes within 36 months after minor model variations. These minor industry. the effective date. model variations would add significant Another commenter considers that the Designers may allocate the 18-month additional review effort. Availability of proposed compliance time for compliance time between the safety qualified engineers does not allow these developing the maintenance and review and the development of reviews to be conducted in a completely inspection program is inadequate. The maintenance and inspection parallel fashion. Assuming a 9-month commenter asserts that, without the instructions as they deem appropriate. flow time to accomplish each review insights gained through the SFAR In evaluating the information presented and the capability to conduct up to design review assessment process, any by the commenters and the relevant three reviews simultaneously, some attempts to accurately revise existing safety concerns, we have determined manufacturers would require well in maintenance and inspection programs that this revision can be made without excess of 45 months to complete the would be ‘‘counterproductive’’ to the significantly affecting safety. proposed reviews. In other instances, goals of the proposed rule. The These revised compliance times are the resources available to some TC or commenter maintains that the FAA not as long as those requested by the STC holders may limit their capability underestimates the time necessary to commenters for the following reasons: to one safety review at a time. These prepare and develop the maintenance • The commenters based their estimates take into account work program, receive approval, and estimates on the assumption that a already accomplished by the industry implement the program. This quantitative assessment would be over the past 4 years. commenter requests that the proposed required. As discussed previously, in Third, development of the rule be changed to allow more time for most cases a less time-consuming maintenance instructions could not revising the operator’s maintenance or qualitative assessment will be sufficient. possibly be accomplished within the inspection programs, and that this time • There is a substantial degree of proposed 12-month compliance time. start only after the completion of the commonality in design features of the As written, the proposed SFAR would design review and the manufacturers’ affected models. Such commonality will
VerDate 11
allow analysis to be conducted by that the SFAR applies not just to fuel • At the next heavy-maintenance similarity to previously reviewed system STC’s, but to all STC’s that could inspection interval where the area or designs. In light of this, we do not affect the fuel system. zone is opened and accessed, or foresee designers needing to conduct a FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs • In conjunction with any downtime separate safety analysis ‘‘from scratch’’ with the commenters that a change in necessitated by a modification program for each model. the text of the SFAR is necessary to resulting from the safety review • Since the TWA 800 accident over 4 clarify the intent. It was the FAA’s required by the proposed SFAR. years ago, many manufacturers already intent that the SFAR requirements were The objective of the suggested have completed significant reviews of to apply to holders of STC’s that may inspection would be to examine wiring service history and analysis of fuel tank affect the fuel system or result in a fuel that enters the fuel tank and assess designs for many airplane types. This tank ignition source. This was explained whether any STC modifications will significantly reduce the time and in detail in the preamble to the notice, introduce non-conformities that may resources that will be needed to and that discussion is repeated in this compromise the fail-safe design concept complete the requirements of the SFAR. final rule under the heading, or may be a possible fuel tank ignition • We expect that industry will work ‘‘Supplemental Type Certificates,’’ source. (Only the wiring external to the closely with the cognizant ACO in above. tank would need to be inspected.) The planning the safety review, and Based on the comments, we recognize nonconformity would be established providing feedback as the evaluation that the proposed text could be based on a listing of specific inspection progresses. This should allow expedited construed too narrowly; that is, guidelines issued by either the FAA approval by the local office. construed to mean that the requirements (possibly in the revised AC 25.981–1B) Given the additional time provided in apply only to STC modifications that or the OEM’s for each aircraft model. As the final rule, we are confident that the actually change the fuel tank system. with the SFAR safety review, any non- technical capability exists and that We also recognize that it may not be conformity would be identified and industry will expend the resources possible to determine whether a reported to the design approval holder. needed to address this critical safety modification actually affects the safety As alternatives to this one-time issue in a timely manner. of the fuel tank system without inspection, the commenter suggests: As for the compliance time for conducting at least a rudimentary • A qualitative design review could development of needed design changes, qualitative evaluation. In order to clarify be conducted, if sufficient technical we have revised the text of the final rule this point, we have revised the text of information is available regarding the to include a provision that would allow the final rule to state that the SFAR installation of the pertinent STC’s. extensions of the compliance time on a applies to all holders of type certificates • Alternative methods could be case-by-case basis. The final rule states and supplemental type certificates that conducted that ensure the continued that the FAA may grant an extension of ‘‘may affect’’ the safety of the fuel tank airworthiness of the airplane (with the compliance time if: system. respect to wiring that enters the fuel • The safety review is completed Request for Clarification of SFAR tank). For example, installation of a within the compliance time, and Requirements for STC’s Not Directly transient suppression device should • Necessary design changes are Related to Fuel Tanks eliminate the need to inspect or conduct identified within the compliance time, design reviews of modifications that and One commenter raises concerns about might otherwise affect FQIS wiring. • Additional time can be justified. the requirements of the proposed rule as 2. The effect of modifications to the they apply to STC approvals of environmental control system (ECS) and Request for Clarification of SFAR modifications that are not specifically other system modifications capable of Applicability to STC Holders fuel tank system modifications. These generating autoignition temperature into Two commenters state that, as types of approvals are referred to as the tank structure. The commenter worded, the proposed SFAR text does ‘‘non-ATA 28 STC approvals.’’ (‘‘ATA states that a qualitative review of these not clearly specify that it applies to 28 STC’s’’ refers to approvals that systems should be conducted by holders of STC modifications that may actually change the fuel tank system.) reviewing whether the approved have no direct relationship to the fuel Specifically, the commenter questions configuration has been altered. If it has system, but could have an effect on fuel the feasibility of conducting a safety been altered, the operator would tank safety. The commenters are review on the types of modifications identify the alteration and ‘‘report it to concerned that some readers may whose installation(s) do not actually the person responsible’’ (i.e., the design misconstrue the current text as referring change, but could affect, the airplane approval holder of the design only to STC’s for modifications directly fuel tank system. modification). to the fuel tank system, and not STC’s The commenter requests that the FAA The commenter states that a one-time that are adjacent to the fuel tank and consider a separate requirement in the inspection process, as described above, may indirectly affect them. SFAR for assessing the effect of these would need to be developed using: One of these commenters non-ATA 28 STC’s on the fuel system. • The OEM’s or STC holder’s list of recommends that the proposed phrase The commenter asserts that airplanes on general design practices and precautions ‘‘supplemental type certificates affecting which non-ATA 28 STC’s are installed obtained during their SFAR safety the airplane fuel tank system’’ be should only be assessed qualitatively or reviews, and revised to ‘‘supplemental type by inspection, and that only two key • The revised maintenance program certificates capable of affecting the areas need to be examined: produced from the SFAR safety review. airplane fuel tank system.’’ The other 1. The modification of wiring next to The commenters foresee this commenter suggests that the phrase be or near wiring that enters the fuel tank. information as providing operators with revised to ‘‘supplemental type These commenters suggest that the guidelines on what to inspect, how to certificates modifying the airplane fuel effects of these STC’s could be assessed inspect, and what the pass/fail criteria tank system.’’ by a one-time inspection performed on are. The commenters consider that adding each aircraft model by a specific time, The commenter suggests that this the suggested words would make it clear such as: inspection should not repeat the
VerDate 11
inspections that have been performed to insurmountable burden’’ for the retained permanently, and § 121.380a, date by the operator. (For example, the following reasons: which requires that these records be operator should receive credit for any • A full review of modifications transferred with the airplane. inspections performed because of an accomplished by the operators over the This rulemaking originated from the airworthiness directive or part of the decades that some of the affected FAA’s conclusion that fuel tank systems industry-wide Fuel System Safety airplanes have been operated is on current transport category airplanes Program.) impracticable. may not be airworthy, and that the FAA’s Response: The FAA does not • Where operators have sold aircraft seriousness of this safety issue warrants concur with the commenter’s suggestion to another party, it is possible that the substantial efforts to identify safety for several reasons. Although the current owner of the airplane may come problems in order to prevent future commenter characterizes its proposal as back to the operator and require such an accidents such as TWA 800. It is a ‘‘qualitative review,’’ it would only evaluation. This situation is unacceptable for operators to claim not result in an inspection for ‘‘non- unmanageable. only that they are currently unable to conformities,’’ with the inspection • Operators will have difficulty understand the configurations of these results forwarded to the design approval performing any type of quantitative systems on their airplanes, but that it is holder. The suggestion does not specify analysis due to lack of intensive unreasonable to expect them to gain that what, if any, obligation the design familiarity with these types of methods. understanding. The objective of this approval holder would have to address • The technical information required rulemaking would be defeated if these non-conformities, which, by to perform a quantitative or qualitative operators of airplanes with definition, are not part of the holder’s analysis may not be available or may not configuration changes were allowed to approved design. It would be pertain to the specific aircraft model. rely solely on the instructions unreasonable to impose an obligation on • Involvement by the original developed by TC and STC holders that design approval holders to conduct equipment manufacturer (OEM) in may not reflect the actual reviews of designs for which they are providing operators with assistance is configurations. This would allow for not responsible. In light of this viewed by the operators as likely to be hazards introduced by the configuration commenter’s adverse comments minimal. changes to remain unaddressed. regarding imposing a requirement for The commenters are particularly As discussed previously, this same such holders to review their own concerned that the OEM’s are probably commenter suggests a one-time designs, imposing an additional not familiar with many of the STC’s that inspection to identify certain aspects of obligation is inconsistent. have been incorporated on the aircraft. the configuration. We concur that, for In addition, the commenter’s Further, the chance of obtaining an those operators who cannot otherwise suggestion would result in a long delay assistance contract with the OEMs is identify their airplanes’ configurations, in completion of the safety review of the slim because they will be stretched for a one-time inspection of the entire fuel tank system. For example, the manpower supporting OEM system may be an appropriate means of commenter suggests that the inspection responsibilities relating to the proposed determining the configurations. Once take place during a heavy maintenance SFAR. the configuration is known, the operator inspection; however, the heavy Additionally, the commenters are can perform a safety review of maintenance inspection intervals are concerned that technical assistance from configuration changes not included in typically every 4 to 5 years. Once the the FAA’s fuel system specialists cannot the TC holder and relevant STC holder airplane configuration was determined, be ensured for the operators. The FAA reviews. As discussed previously, this additional time would be needed to may be prepared to work with the type of review may be qualitative and complete the assessment and to develop affected type certificate holders to assist does not require a quantitative analysis. any necessary maintenance and them in complying with the In performing this review, the operator inspection programs or design changes. requirements of the proposed SFAR, but can use the guidance provided in AC The alternative process suggested by the such assistance may not be possible for 25.981–1B and the TC and relevant STC commenters could effectively postpone operators in this situation due to a lack holder maintenance and inspection addressing the effects of wiring on the of manpower. programs. fuel tank system by as much as 7 or 8 FAA’s Response: The FAA does not These operators could begin years. The elapsed time to complete this agree that the proposed rule would inspecting these airplanes immediately process would not provide the level of impose ‘‘insurmountable burdens’’ on so that the differences from the TC and safety intended by the FAA or expected operators. As with all operating rules, STC configurations can be documented by the public. the person ultimately responsible for and taken into consideration in the compliance is the operator. But this system safety assessment and any Question on SFAR Requirements for rulemaking is unique in the extent to subsequent maintenance and inspection STC’s Where No Technical Data Is which current designers are required to instructions. While operators may not Available provide operators with analysis and have adequate engineering resources to Several commenters raise a concern documentation of maintenance complete the evaluations and may not about the proposed SFAR requirements programs to support operators in be able to rely on TC holders for support as they pertain to a safety review of fulfilling their obligations. in evaluating these changes, technical pertinent STC’s where the STC holder is The existing operating rules generally assistance contracts and use of out of business and the necessary require operators to maintain their Designated Engineering Representatives technical data is not readily available. aircraft in an airworthy condition. A (DERs) are possible methods of The commenters expect that, for these prerequisite for maintaining an airplane completing the necessary work. cases, the burden would fall on the is the ability to understand its While we are confident that operators operators to conduct the review configuration, at least with respect to are capable of complying with these required by the SFAR. The commenters safety critical systems. This is reflected requirements, we recognize the validity are concerned that, for a large number in operating rules such as of the operators concerns regarding the of these operators, the review process § 121.380(a)(2)(vii), which requires a list compliance time. Because it is for these types of STC’s may present ‘‘an of current major alterations to be important that this review be done
VerDate 11
properly, the compliance time for approval does not have the same cases. To help the operators, the implementing the resulting maintenance visibility as an STC, and it could be manufacturers should be required to and inspection programs is extended substantially more difficult to identify provide for an alternative to the safety from 18 months to 36 months. This which of these types of modification assessment. provides the operators an additional 18 could affect the fuel systems. FAA’s Response: As discussed above, months after the TC and STC holders Furthermore, many might have been the FAA intends that the instructions are required to complete their programs, approved by an inspector, without to complete the safety review of any certification engineering analysis and required by the operating rules address field approvals on their airplanes, data; this would certainly complicate the actual configurations of the develop a comprehensive maintenance the safety review analysis required by airplanes. As required by 14 CFR 43.13, or inspection program, and implement the SFAR. Such modifications are of a repair must restore the airplane to its the FAA approved maintenance or interest even to foreign parties as they original or properly altered condition. inspection program. We consider this might have been incorporated on Therefore, repairs should not adversely sufficient to address any design changes aircraft that are now on foreign affect fuel tank system safety. To the identified by the operators. registries. The commenter requests that extent that known repairs may have the FAA provide more details as to how changed design features affecting fuel Question on Applicability of SFAR to it intends to apply the SFAR to the tank system safety, they should be Modifications Installed via Field modifications approved under a field Approvals addressed in the maintenance and approval. inspection instructions. We recognize One commenter points out that, in the FAA’s Response: The FAA recognizes that, unlike records of major alterations, preamble to the notice where changes to that some clarification is necessary. The repair records are not required to be the operating requirements were preamble to the notice and the retained permanently. If operators are explained, the FAA included a Discussion of the Final Rule section of unaware of such repairs, this rule does discussion of the effect of those this preamble state that the proposed not require that inspections be requirements on field approvals. [‘‘Field requirements are intended to apply to conducted solely for the purpose of approvals’’ are defined as those design type designs, supplemental type changes approved by an authorized designs, and field approvals. identifying them. On the other hand, if FAA aviation safety inspector (e.g., The FAA is aware that a significant such repairs are identified as a result of Principal Maintenance Inspector, PMI) number of changes to transport category inspections performed to identify on an FAA Form 337, ‘‘Major Repair airplane fuel tank systems have been configuration changes, those repairs and Alteration,’’ or other document incorporated through field approvals. must be addressed in the instructions. (e.g., an airline engineering order).] These changes may significantly affect Request for Clarification on Role of the However, the preamble did not include the safety of the fuel tank system. As Principal Maintenance Inspector in a discussion of field approvals in the discussed previously, the operator of SFAR Actions context of the proposed SFAR. Further, any airplane with such changes would the proposed text of neither the SFAR be required to identify them, complete One commenter requests a nor the operating requirements contains a safety assessment taking into clarification of the role of the principal any mention of field approvals. Thus, consideration the safety assessments maintenance inspector (PMI) in the fuel the commenter questions whether the completed by the TC and STC holders, tank safety review process that would be proposed rule actually applies to field and to develop applicable maintenance required by the SFAR. The commenter approvals whose installations may affect and inspection instructions and submit states that there must be technical the airplane fuel tank system. them to the FAA for approval, together Additionally, the commenter questions with the necessary substantiation of information available at the airline or whether other forms of repairs or compliance with the safety review PMI level to effectively carry out the modifications permitted on in-service requirements of the SFAR. To eliminate objective of the proposed SFAR. aircraft and not specifically mentioned any misunderstanding, the operational However, the commenter is concerned in the SFAR (for example, approvals final rules have been revised to state that, even though there will be used by airlines via SFAR 36 repairs) that the instructions for maintenance guidelines available in the new AC need to be considered within the and inspection of the fuel tank system 25.981–1B, a PMI ‘‘will not have the context of the proposed rule. must address the actual configuration of expertise to be able to evaluate whether If the FAA intends that all repairs be each affected airplane. an alternative truly satisfies the SFAR.’’ considered under the rule’s Question on Applicability of SFAR to FAA’s Response: The FAA does not requirements, then the commenter intend that the PMI would evaluate the requests that field approvals, approved Repairs technical design information. As stated repairs, and so on, be considered in the One commenter requests more details in the preamble to the notice and the same fashion as non-ATA 28 STC’s concerning how the proposed safety Discussion of the Final Rule section of (discussed above). review required by the SFAR would be Similarly, another commenter states applicable to repairs that currently exist this preamble, the FAA would require that modifications approved under a on an airplane. The commenter points that this information be submitted to the field approval may prove to be out that the proposed SFAR text omits cognizant FAA Aircraft Certification problematic when attempting to comply any mention of repairs. The commenter Office (ACO). The maintenance and with the safety review analysis that states that it would be very difficult to inspection program that is generated would be required by the proposed trace back all the repairs, and their also would be approved by the SFAR. These types of modifications supporting engineering data, so that a cognizant ACO. The PMI would be were discussed in the preamble to the proper safety analysis could be carried responsible for oversight of the operator notice, but were not accounted for in the out. The commenter believes that these to verify that any mandatory economic analysis. The commenter repairs, like ‘‘orphan STC’s,’’ might maintenance or inspection actions are considers that more details are needed render the design review by safety incorporated into the operators’ as to how to address them. The field analysis approach unworkable in many maintenance or inspection programs.
VerDate 11
Request for a One-Time Inspection type design; improperly installed parts; because the essence of the requirement Program improperly routed wiring; etc. of the proposed SFAR is captured in One commenter requests a revision to We do not consider that the another passage that appeared the proposed rule to require that, prior commenters’ suggested one-time immediately after the cited phrase in the to conducting a system safety review inspection is necessary for airplanes for preamble to the notice, which read: and analysis for each aircraft type, a which the configuration can be * * * In conducting the review, the design detailed inspection should be identified by other means. Nevertheless, approval holder would be required to conducted of the fuel tanks of several the development of critical design demonstrate compliance with the standards representative airplanes for each type configuration control limitations and proposed in this notice for § 25.981(a) and (b) mandatory maintenance and inspection * * * and the existing standards of certificated aircraft. The purpose of the § 25.901.’’ inspection would be to determine the items will likely result in eventual specific health of the fleet. The inspection of all critical fuel tank The commenter points out that the inspection should span both old and system-related areas of airplanes in the standards proposed in the notice neither newer airplanes, and include at least transport fleet. suggest nor require that the probability of the occurrence of a fire or explosion two operators and at least 10 airplanes. Question on Redundant vs. Single- The commenter suggests that this should be zero. Thread Fuel Tank Systems Alternatively, the commenter suggests should be a very aggressive inspection, One commenter questions a statement that the intent of the regulation could be which would involve removal and in the preamble to the notice that clarified to require practical elimination teardown of components and inspection introduced the FAA’s discussion of its of ignition sources with the intent to of difficult-to-reach areas. The review of maintenance practices for the eliminate all sources by use of new deficiencies and failures listed in the fuel tank system. The statement read, technology and design architecture. notice, as well as the findings of the FAA’s Response: The FAA considers industry-wide inspections of the Boeing Typical transport category airplane fuel tank systems are designed with redundancy that some clarification is necessary. We 747 fuel tanks, could provide a starting agree with the commenter that it is point for defining the nature of the and fault indication features such that single component failures do not result in any impossible to show that the probability inspections. Based on findings of these significant reduction in safety. of a fuel tank explosion is equal to zero inspections, appropriate corrective The commenter maintains that just in numerical terms. The statement cited action could be determined and in the notice was intended to express in mandated. Required design changes the opposite is true: Current designs are single-thread systems. That is because very general terms the objective of the would become apparent as a result of proposed rule—that ‘‘fuel tank fires or there will be an explosive mixture in the this inspection program. explosions will not occur.’’ The tank on a regular basis, and there is The commenter states that there are intended level of safety is clearly likely to be debris in the tank, so any precedents to this type of inspection. defined in the regulatory text. We single failure, such as a hot short, will For example, the United States Air concur with the clarification of intent compromise safety. The same is true for Force conducted aggressive inspections provided by the commenter. of B–52 and KC–135 aircraft in the pump insulation failures. 1980’s to establish the condition of FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees Request To Address Third Party these aircraft, and required corrective with this commenter’s observations in Maintenance Activity in Safety Review action for continued safe operation of part. Regulations applicable to airplanes One commenter notes that experience these aging aircraft. These inspection affected by this rulemaking require that has shown that unauthorized processes programs, referred to as Condition ‘‘no single failure or likely combination and materials are sometimes used by Assessment/Inspection Programs (CA/ of failures may result in a hazard.’’ third party repair businesses, possibly IP), were conducted for many of the However, we do agree that the even unknown to the designer. This same concerns that were raised in the investigation of fuel tank system designs may result in service problems that notice, although the programs covered has shown certain installations do not would be unforeseen by the designer, other aircraft systems as well (i.e., meet this requirement. This is one of the and possibly a reduced level of safety. electrical, avionic, hydraulic, purposes for the requirements of this The commenter argues that it does not pneumatic, etc.). The CA/IP findings rulemaking action. seem reasonable to expect a survey of resulted in numerous fuel system Request for Clarification of Statement of the safety of fuel system designs to take corrective actions to enhance safety, Probability into account the effect of unauthorized including maintenance actions and and, therefore, unforeseeable intervals, and design improvements. One commenter disagrees with a maintenance activities. There may be FAA’s Response: The FAA does not statement that appeared in the preamble features of the design that are critical to concur with the suggestions of this to the notice, which stated: the safe operation of the equipment, but commenter for several reasons: The proposed SFAR would require the not obvious to a third party. The There already have been ample design approval holder to perform a safety commenter requests that the FAA inspections, service history reviews, and review of the fuel tank system to show that consider revising the proposed other assessments of the transport fleet fuel tank fires or explosions will not occur regulation to ensure that maintenance that have confirmed, without question, on airplanes of the approved design. action carried out by parties not that the safety of the fuel tank systems The commenter states that it is cognizant of the safety consequences of on these airplanes must be improved. impossible to show that ‘‘fuel tank fires their procedures do not jeopardize the Most recently, the industry-led Fuel or explosions will not occur,’’ because safety of aircraft in service. Tank Safety Team conducted an the probability of such an event, in FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees in inspection of over 800 transport terms of a system safety analysis, cannot part with this commenter. The fuel tank category airplane fuel tanks, which be shown to be equal to zero. The safety review required by this rule must revealed such things as repairs and commenter believes that this is not what include failures that are foreseeable as alterations that may result in a fuel tank the FAA intended. The commenter well as any that have occurred in system that does not meet the original suggests that this phrase be removed service. The evaluation also must
VerDate 11
include consideration of susceptibility anticipated to originate with pre- on any transport category airplane. to maintenance errors. The requirement existing failures. However, we recognize While a rule sets a minimum standard to develop critical design configuration that the meaning of ‘‘any one flight’’ has for all the airplanes to which it applies, control limitations, discussed later, is been a contentious issue for many years, compliance determinations are intended to provide maintenance and we have agreed to work within necessarily limited to individual type personnel with precisely the type of ARAC to try and resolve the issue of designs. Consequently, all that has been safety critical information identified by ‘‘specific risk’’ for the more generally required of applicants is a sufficiently the commenter. applicable rules, such as § 25.901(c) and conservative demonstration that a § 25.1309. Furthermore, as noted earlier, condition is not anticipated to occur in Discussion of Comments on § 25.981, if a more appropriate means of service on the type design being Fuel Tank Ignition Prevention addressing this issue should result from assessed. Request for Revision to Requirement for these ARAC activities, this rule will be The means of demonstrating that the Addressing Latent Failures amended accordingly to retain occurrence of an event is extremely consistency. This commitment to ARAC improbable varies widely, depending on One commenter believes that the notwithstanding, the FAA is also the type of system, component, or proposed § 25.981(a)(3), which would committed to assuring that transport situation that must be assessed. There require demonstrating that an ignition category airplane designs are acceptably has been a tendency, as evidenced by source could not result from single or fail-safe on each flight, not just on a the comment, to confuse the meaning of latent failures, is too severe. The typical flight of mean duration or on this term with the particular means used commenter asserts that it presents flights where the airplane initially has to demonstrate compliance in those requirements that are outside the scope no failures present. various contexts. This has led to a of § 25.1309 and § 25.901(c); these are The FAA disagrees with the misunderstanding that the term has a the same standards that the FAA states commenters’ assertion that the different meaning in different sections in the preamble to be the baseline for requirements of § 25.981(a)(3) are of part 25. the proposed requirements relative to ‘‘outside the scope of § 25.1309 and As a rule, failure conditions arising the ignition source prevention § 25.901(c).’’ As stated previously in the from a single failure are not considered assessment. These regulations provide a notice and in this final rule, the FAA’s extremely improbable; thus, probability defined method for assessing latent policy for compliance with § 25.901(c), assessments normally involve failure failures (although the regulations do not in general, has been to require conditions arising from multiple specifically address latent failures). The applicants to assume the presence of failures. Both qualitative and commenter favors the continued use of foreseeable latent (operationally quantitative assessments are used in the fail-safe design concept as defined undetected) failure conditions when practice, and both are often necessary to in AC 25.1309–1A. The commenter demonstrating that subsequent single some degree to support a conclusion maintains that the new wording failures will not jeopardize the safe that an event is extremely improbable. proposed by the FAA imposes a operation of the airplane. This Qualitative methods are techniques requirement on latent failure conditions requirement (referred to as ‘‘latent plus used to structure a logical foundation that are just one part of a larger set of one’’) simply provides the same single for any credible assessment. While a combinations leading to the hazard of fault tolerance for aircraft operating best-estimate quantitative analysis is ‘‘ignition sources present in fuel tanks.’’ with an anticipated latent failure as often valuable, there are many situations It is the larger set that § 25.1309 imposes would be provided by FAA Master where the qualitative aspects of the a requirement on, thus taking into Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) assessment and engineering judgment account the complete set of all policies if that failure is known to exist must be relied on to a much greater combinations. The commenter states (i.e., not latent). degree. These situations include those that the proposed wording of As for § 25.1309, the commenter where: § 25.981(a)(3) ‘‘adversely penalizes’’ the appears to be confusing the objective of • There is insufficient reliability resulting outcome of the analysis, in the rule (i.e., to prevent the occurrence information (e.g., unknown operating particular the definition of maintenance of catastrophic failure conditions that time or conditions associated with intervals and the means for determining can be anticipated) with a conditionally failure data); whether an added safety feature is acceptable means of demonstrating • Dependencies among assessment required to mitigate or prevent the compliance, as described in AC variables are subtle or unpredictable event. 25.1309–1A (i.e., that catastrophic (e.g., independence of two circuit FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees failure conditions must have an failures on the same microchip, size and with the commenter’s assertion that ‘‘average probability per flight hour’’ of shape of impact damage due to foreign ¥ current industry practice is adequate to less than 1×10 9). Since this same objects); address fuel tank safety issues. misconception has presented itself • The range of an assessment variable Paragraph 5.a.1. of AC 25.1309–1A, many times before, the following is extreme or indeterminate; and which the commenter supports, states in discussion is intended to clarify the • Human factors play a significant part: intent of the term ‘‘extremely role (e.g., safe outcome dependent In any system or subsystem, the failure of improbable’’ and the role of ‘‘average totally upon the flightcrew immediately, any single element, component or connection probability’’ in demonstrating that a accurately, and completely identifying should be assumed to occur during any one condition is ‘‘extremely improbable.’’ and mitigating an obscure failure flight regardless of the likelihood that it The term ‘‘extremely improbable’’ (or condition). would fail. Any such single-failure should its predecessor term, ‘‘extremely Qualitative compliance guidance not prevent the continued safe flight and remote’’) has been used in 14 CFR part usually involves selecting combinations landing of the airplane, nor significantly 25 for many years. The objective of this of failures that, based on experience and impair the ability of the crew to cope with term has been to describe a condition engineering judgment, are considered to the resulting conditions. (usually a failure condition) that has a be just short of ‘‘extremely improbable’’, Consequently, if ‘‘any one flight’’ is probability of occurrence so remote that and then demonstrating that they will taken literally, this includes flights it is not anticipated to occur in service not cause a catastrophe. In some cases,
VerDate 11
examples of combinations of failures when combined with a conservative not necessarily mean that a condition is necessary for a qualitative assessment assessment and good engineering extremely improbable; it is simply are directly provided in the rule. For judgment, it has been an effective evidence that can be used to support the example, § 25.671 (concerning flight indicator that a condition is not conclusion that a condition is extremely controls) sets forth several examples of anticipated to occur, at least not for the improbable. Wherever part 25 requires combinations of failures that are reasons identified and assessed in the that a condition be ‘‘extremely intended to help define the outermost analysis. Furthermore, decreasing this improbable,’’ the compliance method, boundary of events that are not criterion to anything greater than whether qualitative, quantitative, or a ‘‘extremely improbable.’’ Judgment 1×10¥12 would not result in combination of the two, along with would dictate that other combinations, substantially improved designs, only engineering judgment, must provide equally likely or more likely, would also increased line maintenance. The FAA convincing evidence that the condition be included as not ‘‘extremely has concluded that the resulting will not occur in service. improbable.’’ However, combinations increased exposure to maintenance error less likely than the examples would be would likely counteract any benefits Request To Revise Definition of Critical considered so remote that they are not from such a change. An ARAC working Design Configuration Control expected to occur and are, therefore, group has validated these conclusions. Limitations considered extremely improbable. When using ‘‘averages,’’ care must be One commenter requests that Another common qualitative taken to assure that the anticipated proposed § 25.981(b) be changed to compliance guideline is to assume that deviations around that ‘‘average’’ are not revise or delete the reference to ‘‘critical any failure condition anticipated to be so extreme that the ‘‘peak’’ values are design configuration control present for more than one flight, unacceptably susceptible to inherent limitations.’’ This commenter cannot occurring in combination with any other uncertainties. That is to say, the risk on agree with the definition stated in the single failure, is not ‘‘extremely one flight cannot be extremely high notice as: simply because the risk on another improbable.’’ This is the guideline, often * * * any information necessary to used to find compliance with flight is extremely low. An important maintain those design features that have been § 25.901(c), that the FAA is adopting as example of the flaw in relying solely on defined in the original type design as needed a standard in § 25.981(a)(3). consideration of ‘‘average’’ risk is the to preclude development of ignition sources. Quantitative methods are those ‘‘specific risk’’ that results from numerical techniques used to predict operation with latent (not operationally The commenter raises several the frequency or the probability of the detectable) failures. It is this risk that is concerns regarding the definition and various occurrences within a qualitative being addressed by § 25.981(a)(3), as implications of critical design analysis. Quantitative methods are vital adopted in this final rule. For example, configuration control limitations: for supporting the conclusion that a latent failures have been identified as First, the commenter is concerned complex condition is extremely the primary or contributing cause of that within the definition, ‘‘any improbable. When a quantitative several accidents. In 1991, a thrust information necessary’’ can be probability analysis is used, one has to reverser deployment occurred during interpreted as being not only the accept the fact that the probability of climb from Bangkok, Thailand, on a provision of maintenance and zero is not attainable for the occurrence Boeing Model 767 due to a latent failure inspection instructions, but also the of a condition that is physically in the reversing system. In 1996, a thrust provision of the fuel tank design possible. Therefore, a probability level reverser deployment on a Fokker Model features itself. This could include is chosen that is small enough that, F–100 airplane occurred following material specifications, specific when combined with a conservative takeoff from Sao Paulo, Brazil, due to a manufacturing processes, dimensions, assessment and good engineering latent failure in the system. As noted etc. The commenter states that this judgment, it provides convincing earlier, the NTSB determined that the means the type certificate holder would evidence that the condition would not probable cause of the TWA 800 accident be required to list its proprietary design occur in service. was ignition of fuel vapors in the center approach, which could lead to a loss of For conditions that lend themselves to wing fuel from an ignition source: competitive edge and an infringement average probability analysis, a guideline on proprietary intellectual property. The * * * The source of ignition energy for the commenter objects to this requirement on the order of 1 in 1 billion is explosion could not be determined with commonly used as the maximum certainty but, of the sources evaluated by the because it would allegedly sacrifice the average probability that an ‘‘extremely investigation, the most likely was a short hard earned competitive advantage that improbable’’ condition can have during circuit outside of the center wing tank that manufacturers derive through their a typical flight hour. This 1 in 1 billion allowed excessive voltage to enter it through expertise and continuing investment in ‘‘average probability per flight hour’’ electrical wiring associated with the fuel research and development. As an criterion was originally derived in an quantity indication system [FQIS]. example, the commenter asserts, ‘‘if a effort to assure the proliferation of A latent failure or condition creating certain pump is qualified on the critical systems would not increase the a reduced arc gap in the FQIS would airplane, the industry does not believe historical accident rate. This criterion have to be present to result in an it is appropriate or necessary to list all was based on an assumption that there ignition source. This rule is intended to of the features inherent to that pump would be no more than 100 catastrophic require designs that prevent operation of itself that were qualified as part of the failure conditions per airplane. This an airplane with a preexisting condition units approval. This approved parts list criterion was later adopted as guidance or failure such as a reduced arc gap in and the associated installation and in AC 25.1309. The historical derivation the FQIS (latent failure) and a maintenance manuals suffice for of this criterion should not be subsequent single failure resulting in a maintaining the airworthiness of this misinterpreted to mean that the rule is short circuit that causes an electrical arc pump.’’ only intended to limit the frequency of inside the fuel tank. Second, the commenter is concerned catastrophe to that historic 1×10¥7 Due to variability and uncertainty in that this would put an unprecedented level. The FAA conditionally accepts the analytical process, predicting an liability risk on the type certificate the use of this guidance only because, average probability of 1 in 1 billion does holder if it omits some features, either
VerDate 11
through error or because it did not applicants subject to this requirement information we are requiring the design realize a supplementary function should be required to develop this approval holder to provide to the provided by the features. (The information and make it available to operator is basic information needed by commenter provided no further operators of affected airplanes. This is the industry to operate airplanes safely. explanation or substantiation of this consistent with the policy regarding It will provide operators with a baseline concern, however.) airworthiness limitations required by document to develop a maintenance and Third, the commenter states that the § 25.571 (‘‘Damage-tolerance and fatigue inspection program that will enhance notion of critical design configuration evaluation of structure’’). safety within the fleet. It will also aid control limitations goes beyond the 2. Concern about liability of type the operator in establishing the notion of inspection and maintenance. certificate holders. The FAA disagrees configuration requirements that must be In this regard, it does not imply the that risk of liability is an issue. If accounted for during any subsequent same compliance requirement as conscientiously implemented, this alterations to the airplane. § 25.571, which is the FAA’s stated requirement will significantly reduce 5. Concern about covering precedent for the proposed rule. the risk of accidents from fuel tank deficiencies in the STC and Fourth, the commenter considers that explosions. This, in turn, will reduce modification approval process by critical design configuration control the liability risk of design approval indirectly implicating the manufacturer. limitations go against standard industry holders. The FAA disagrees that the definition of practice regarding what manufacturers 3. Concern about new inspection and critical design configuration control should provide to users. maintenance requirements. The FAA limitations ‘‘implicates’’ the TC holder Fifth, the commenter states that the agrees in part with the commenter. in configuration changes made by notion of critical design configuration While it is true that the term ‘‘critical others. On the contrary, these control limitations attempts to cover design configuration control limitations provide TC holders with the deficiencies in the STC and the airline limitations’’ is new and may result in ability to limit the types of changes that modification approval process by new inspection and maintenance may be made to their designs that could indirectly ‘‘implicating’’ the requirements, the very intent of this rule adversely affect their safety. manufacturer in changes to the is to require mandatory maintenance certificated configuration that the and inspection for the fuel tank system. Request To Delete Use of Placards and manufacturer may not have known We agree that the compliance Decals about or performed. requirements are different between One commenter requests that For these reasons, the commenter § 25.571 and § 25.981. However, these § 25.981(b) of the proposed rule be requests that the proposed rule be differences are due to the differences revised to delete the requirements revised to delete or change the between structures and systems. For concerning placement of placards or requirement concerning critical design example, service experience indicates decals in the areas where ‘‘maintenance, configuration control limitations. that alterations have been made to repairs, or alterations may violate the FAA’s Response: The FAA does not systems affecting fuel tank safety critical design configuration concur with the commenter’s request to without consideration of the effects of limitations.’’ The commenter agrees that revise the rule, and provides the the alterations. One purpose of critical adequate information regarding general following disposition of each of the design configuration control limitations design practices and precautions must commenter’s concerns. is to ensure that maintenance personnel be available to those who perform and 1. Concern about release of are informed of and address these approve repairs and alterations to the proprietary information. The FAA has effects. In the context of structures, the airplane. However, the commenter always required manufacturers to primary concern has been aging argues that placing placards and decals provide information that is necessary to phenomena such as fatigue, and the on the airplane may not be practical, maintain the safety of a product. For limitations are intended to ensure that considering that they might not remain example, information that is contained these phenomena are identified and in place or be readable over time. The in many maintenance manuals might be addressed before they become critical. commenter suggests that a more considered proprietary in nature, but The result in both instances is effective way to convey fuel system the FAA requires each manufacturer to mandatory maintenance and inspection general practices information to develop instructions for continued requirements for both fuel tank systems operators is via the standard-practices airworthiness for their products and structures. We have determined that section of the Aircraft Maintenance containing this information. Defining the fuel tank system warrants Manual (or a similar section of another features of an airplane design, such as mandatory minimum maintenance appropriate manual). The commenter wire separation, explosion proof criteria to prevent catastrophic failure. does agree that the fuel quantity features of a fuel pump, maintenance By placing these requirements in the indicating system (FQIS) wiring could intervals for transient suppression Airworthiness Limitations section of the be better identified, and suggests that devices, minimum bonding jumper Instructions for Continued manufacturers work with the resistance levels, etc., is needed so that Airworthiness, the design approval appropriate agencies to develop a any maintenance actions or subsequent holder provides consistent mandatory standardized system (similar to that for changes to the product made by baseline maintenance standards for the oxygen lines) to identify critical fuel operators or the manufacturer do not fleet. systems wiring for future aircraft degrade the level of safety of the original 4. Concern that the requirement goes designs. type design. The definition of critical against standard industry practice FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs in design configuration control limitations regarding what manufacturers should part with the commenter. The rule is does not include ‘‘all of the features provide to users. The FAA agrees that meant to be a performance-based rule; inherent’’ in the design; it only includes the proposed rule may differ from therefore, the FAA’s objective is not to information that is necessary to ensure historical industry practice. However, mandate the use of any specific means safety of fuel tank systems. The policy the purpose of this rule is to improve of providing visual identification of determination underlying this both the safety of the fleet and the critical design control limitations. requirement is that design approval practices within the industry. The Although the text suggests the use of
VerDate 11
placards and decals, the rule allows that must be documented. The (‘‘Certification Maintenance visible means other than placards and commenter asserts that this proposed Requirements,’’ issued November 28, decals to be used. Placards are normally requirement fails to recognize that 1994), to allow operators to absorb tasks used in many locations of transport equivalent systems-related tasks are within the existing maintenance airplanes to convey information to already defined under Certification programs if a MSG–3 task is identified. maintenance personnel, but placards are Maintenance Requirements (CMR), a This reduces costs associated with only one option of identifying critical process that has been in place since the tracking additional Airworthiness design configuration limitations. The early 1980’s and formalized in 1994. Limitations, which would be required in FAA also recognizes that installation [CMR’s are maintenance requirements accordance with the proposed and maintenance of placards in certain that identify aircraft system-related Appendix H requirements. locations of the airplane may not be safety tasks for ‘‘dormant’’ (latent) FAA’s Response: The FAA does not practical. failure conditions related to hazardous concur that the rule should be revised The objective of this requirement is to and catastrophic failure conditions.] to include the CMR process. The provide a means to assist maintenance The commenter states that CMR’s are concept of this rule goes beyond the personnel in reducing maintenance considered the systems equivalent of the current CMR process. CMR’s only errors. Adverse service experience structural airworthiness limitations and address mandatory maintenance that is demonstrates that modifications have are part of today’s certification process, applied to the airplane at the time of inadvertently resulted in routing of high even though CMR’s are not included in original certification. The requirement power wiring with FQIS wiring. The part 25. The FAA Aircraft Certification of this rule for configuration design need to provide visible identification of Offices (ACO) and other prime control limitations will address not only critical design configuration control certifying authorities regularly approve mandatory maintenance actions, but limitations will depend upon the CMR’s, and all operators’ maintenance also design features (e.g., wire particular airplane configuration. programs use these same CMR’s. This separation, pump impeller material As an example, the FAA anticipates commenter states that the proposed specification) that cannot be altered that the requirements of this rule will requirement indirectly regroups all except in accordance with the result in modifications either to separate maintenance tasks associated with the Instructions for Continued FQIS wiring from high power sources, prevention of fuel tank ignition sources Airworthiness (ICA). The configuration or to install transient suppression under the responsibility of the ACO, design control limitations will be made devices. If transient suppression devices and this undermines the MRB process part of the Airworthiness Limitations are incorporated into the FQIS, the FAA as well as the FAA’s Aircraft Evaluation section of the ICA; therefore, they will would not consider separation of the Groups’ (AEG) responsibility in be mandatory in accordance with wiring from other high power wiring a approving maintenance programs. § 91.403(c). critical design configuration item and, In light of this, the commenter Further, the current MRB process therefore, would not require visible suggests that rather than regulate the does not provide a mandatory, legally identification. If separation of FQIS CMR concept system-by-system as the enforceable means to require mandatory from high power sources wiring is proposed Appendix would do, the FAA maintenance tasks; nor does it provide critical, the FAA will require a visible should pursue a separate regulatory the critical control limitations that are means of identification. One acceptable initiative that would give official needed to assist operators when making means of compliance in this case would recognition of the CMR’s and make future repairs and alterations to an be to install color-coded tape at them enforceable. The commenter states aircraft. specified intervals along critical wiring. that doing so would ‘‘fix a long-standing There would be some value in To clarify the intent of this regulatory deficiency.’’ The advantage of changing the regulations to mandate requirement, we have revised the such an alternative rulemaking either application of the CMR process to approach is that it would: wording within the rule to eliminate • all systems or including all systems in reference to placards and decals. The Keep current procedures and the Limitations Section of the ICA. text of the final rule states only that a processes in place and avoid the However, such action is beyond the visible means of identification must be creation of another bureaucratic scope of the current rulemaking, and provided. approval process; would significantly delay action to • Accomplish the FAA objective of address fuel tank safety issues. We are Discussion of Comments on Appendix requiring manufacturers to create an considering tasking ARAC to address H25.4, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Limitations section in the this issue. If the ARAC process develops Airworthiness Instructions for Continued an improved proposal, amendment of Airworthiness similar to that approved Request To Mandate Certification the regulations to adopt an alternative to under § 25.571 for structure; and Maintenance Requirements Instead of • Eliminate the need to enforce the actions required by this final rule Appendix mandatory inspection or other can be made at that time. One commenter opposes the proposed procedures via § 25.981(b). Discussion of Comments on Operating Appendix H25.4(a)(2), which would Similarly, another commenter Rules require revising the Instructions for believes that the FAA should formally Continued Airworthiness (ICA) to set recognize the CMR concept in the Request To Revise Maintenance forth each mandatory replacement time, proposed rule. This commenter states Operations Requirements inspection interval, related inspection that in doing so, the concept of One commenter agrees in principle procedure, and all critical design declaring ‘‘critical configuration control with the intent of the proposed changes configuration control limitations limitations,’’ as proposed in § 25.981(b), to §§ 91.410, 121.370, and 125.248, and approved under § 25.981 for the fuel would be unnecessary. The commenter supports the concept of reviewing and tank system. The commenter considers recommends the rule be revised to allow revising, if necessary, the fuel tank that singling out just the fuel system for use of the Certification Maintenance system maintenance and inspection this requirement is not justified because Coordination Committee (CMCC) program. However, the commenter all systems have their own criticalities process, as described in AC 25–19 disagrees with the FAA’s proposed
VerDate 11
methodology and time frame for Based on this suggested alternative, • For approval of the individual fulfilling this intent. the commenter requests that the rule be operator’s maintenance program, ‘‘the As for the FAA’s methodology, the revised to delete the proposed Administrator’’ is the Principal commenter opposes mandating changes §§91.410, 121.370, and 125.248. Maintenance Inspector (PMI). to maintenance programs via operations FAA’s Response: The FAA does not FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs rules. Instead, the commenter requests concur with this commenter. First, the that clarification is necessary. Part 1 of that mandatory maintenance tasks be MRB process is not a means to mandate 14 CFR does define the Administrator to introduced using current industry compliance; it is a means to identify include those delegated the authority to practices, such as the use of the manufacturers’ recommended minimum act on her behalf. However, in the case Maintenance Review Board (MRB) initial scheduled inspection and of this rule, we have determined that the process and MSG guidelines. The maintenance tasks for new aircraft. cognizant ACO is the appropriate entity commenter states that the inspection Further, in light of service history that can address the myriad of technical programs developed using these regarding fuel tank events, it is apparent and practical issues faced by processes are based on a foundation of that the MRB using the MSG–3 process implementing and enforcing compliance information derived from various has previously been unable to develop with this rule. As discussed elsewhere, sources using a defined process. adequate maintenance procedures to neither the PMI nor the MRB process is Further, the commenter states that the address various fuel tank safety issues. authorized to perform these duties. The manufacturers’ recommended Second, for the reasons discussed final rule has been revised to maintenance and inspection programs previously, the FAA does not agree that specifically reference the cognizant already serve as the basis for developing changing the current approach to CMR’s ACO, or office of the Transport Airplane operators’ individual maintenance and is appropriate in this rulemaking. Third, Directorate, as the appropriate official inspection programs. Within these while AD’s are enforceable, they for approving the initial and any established programs, safety issues are generally are limited to safety issues of revisions of the instructions for identified and addressed at both the specific aircraft models. As discussed in maintenance and inspection of the fuel type certification and continued- the preamble to the notice and tank systems required by the rule. airworthiness levels. The FAA has previously in this final rule, there is no internal processes for managing the advantage in addressing this industry- Request for Extension of Compliance approval of manufacturer-developed wide safety issue in a piecemeal Time maintenance and inspections programs, fashion. We anticipate that in Several commenters request that the safety tasks, and the final individual- complying with this rule both designers proposed compliance time for the operator maintenance and inspection and operators will take advantage of required actions of §§91.410, 121.320, programs. many of the methods developed in 125.248, and 129.14 be extended. These However, the commenter maintains existing cooperative programs noted by commenters state that incorporating the that it appears that the proposed the commenter. new instructions into maintenance and requirements will ‘‘dissolve’’ this inspection programs cannot possibly be existing process only to require meeting Request for Definition of ‘‘Administrator’’ accomplished within 18 months as a calendar deadline. The commenter would be provided by the proposal. does not consider that this will lead to One commenter requests clarification These commenters request a minimum a safety enhancement. of the term ‘‘the Administrator,’’ as it is compliance time of 54 months. This commenter suggests the used in proposed §§91.410, 121.320, FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs following alternative for implementing a 125.248, and 129.14. The commenter that the compliance time can be new or revised maintenance program: interprets the term ‘‘Administrator’’ to extended somewhat. As discussed First, the fuel tank system mean ‘‘the Federal Aviation previously in this preamble, we have maintenance programs should be Administration or any person to whom revised the compliance time to 36 reexamined in context both with the he has delegated his authority in the months. results of the required SFAR safety matter concerned.’’ This is consistent review and with the existing MRB and with the definition of the term that Request To Issue Airworthiness other mandated programs [such as the appears in 14 CFR part 1 (§ 1.1). Directives To Change Maintenance Corrosion Protection Control Program The commenter objects to the Programs Instead of Operating Rules (CPCP) and Supplemental Structural inconsistent definition that appeared in One commenter disagrees with the Inspection Program (SSID)]. the proposal that identified ‘‘the proposed requirement to change Second, the approval process Administrator’’ as ‘‘the manager of the operators’ maintenance programs described in AC 25–19, ‘‘Certification cognizant FAA Aircraft Certification through changes to the operating Maintenance Requirements (CMR),’’ Office (ACO).’’ Instead, the commenter requirements. The commenter suggests should be used, as appropriate, to requests that the FAA revise the that the FAA mandate such determine the task classification, proposed rule to reflect the formalized, maintenance actions via Airworthiness interval, and method of task industry-recognized roles of other Directives specific to each model type, transmission (for example, via service authority entities, such as the PMI and rather than by modifying the operational bulletins or via the existing program the MRB process. Specifically, the rules. The AD’s will allow both the FAA update process). commenter requests the following and the industry to: Third, the FAA should mandate via revision: • Assess the actual impact of the AD’s the service bulletins or program • For approval of the development of maintenance program (cost versus interval changes developed as an the designer’s maintenance and benefit); outcome of this process. This way, any inspection program, ‘‘the • Ensure that the appropriate changes in maintenance and inspection Administrator’’ is the FAA ACO, the compliance time scale is mandated programs can be communicated to FAA Aircraft Evaluation Group (AEG), versus the effective date of the rule and operators in an approved format that is or the non-U.S. airworthiness authority the resources available; and compatible with the aircraft certification (if the FAA ACO has delegated its • Ensure that foreign authorities and basis. authority via a bilateral agreement). operators are notified of the mandatory
VerDate 11
continuing-airworthiness information timeframe within which the design mitigation, potentially allowing via a recognized document (ICAO approval holders and the public can be designers to assume the absence of a obligation, Annex 8, paragraph 4.2.2). confident that fuel tank safety issues on flammable ullage under certain Similarly, another commenter states the affected airplanes will be uniformly conditions.’’ This commenter considers that the proposed operating rule examined. that that affordable technology is remote changes are not needed. This This rule ensures that the designer and, therefore, it should be made clear commenter asserts that, if the completes a comprehensive assessment that the design philosophy behind the instructions for maintenance and of the fuel tank system and develops proposed § 25.981 has firmly retained inspections are developed through the any required inspections, maintenance the assumption of flammable ullage. MSG–3 process, there is no need to instructions, and modifications, if FAA’s Response: As noted by the include them in the Airworthiness needed. As such, the requirements of commenter, we affirmed that we are not Limitation section, as would be required this final rule are intended to provide considering a change to the current by the proposed rule. If they should be maintenance requirements that will philosophy of assuming a flammable mandatory, then the FAA should prevent unsafe conditions from ullage. However, if technological mandate them by AD’s. developing. This proactive approach changes are developed, such as full-time FAA’s Response: The FAA does not provides predictability and efficiency. fuel tank inerting, and prove to be a concur with either of these commenters. superior method of eliminating the risk As discussed in the notice and Discussion of Comments on of fuel tank ignition, the FAA could elsewhere in this final rule, we will Flammability Minimization— consider a change in this philosophy in issue AD’s to mandate any design § 25.981(c) future rulemaking. changes identified as needed as a result General Agreement With Reducing Request To Mandate Means to of the design review required by the Flammability SFAR established by this final rule. Preventing Flammable Vapors—Inerting However, the FAA considers it All comments received support the Several commenters suggest that inappropriate to delay requiring overall goal of reducing fuel tank flammable vapors in the fuel tank implementation of the maintenance flammability. Several commenters should be prevented and that practical programs developed as a result of the strongly support the FAA’s position technologies currently exist that should SFAR. It is evident that existing that, despite compliance with the be mandated. One commenter suggests maintenance programs are generally proposed flammability reduction that even with § 25.981(c) in place, inadequate to ensure the safety of fuel portion of the rule, the applicant must circumstances might occur tanks systems and that program ensure compliance with the ignition operationally in which even an improvements are necessary. As source prevention requirements. unheated wing tank has a flammable reflected in the regulatory evaluation Other commenters support the ullage with a relatively low ignition prepared for this rulemaking, this proposed rule, but suggest other energy threshold, and that these approach has been found to be cost alternatives. For example, one conditions may warrant attention effective. commenter asks the FAA to consider through amending the rule to further As discussed previously, we have increasing the scope of the proposal to reduce flammability in the future. carefully considered the first minimize fuel tank flammability to FAA’s Response: The FAA does not commenters’ concerns regarding totally preventing operation of fuel concur that mandating fuel tank inerting compliance times, and have extended tanks with flammable vapors. Similarly, technology has been shown to be the times to address those concerns. another commenter requests that the feasible at this time. This was discussed Finally, foreign authorities have been applicability of the proposal be in detail in the preamble to the notice. fully informed of the FAA’s activities, increased so that the flammability of We are continuing to evaluate further and we will continue to include foreign vapors in certain in-service airplanes safety improvements, and are authorities in future discussions of these would be reduced. Other commenters conducting research and development issues. suggest the FAA mandate the to investigate the feasibility of Unlike AD’s, the operating rule installation of means to mitigate the incorporating nitrogen inerting on both changes adopted by this final rule do effects of fuel tank ignition, such as in-service and new type design not require the adoption of particular metal foils or polyurethane foam should airplanes. As noted previously in this programs developed by design approval be mandated. Each of these proposals is preamble, we tasked the ARAC on July holders. Rather, the rules require discussed below. 14, 2000 (65 FR 43800), to evaluate both adoption of programs that meet the Request To Retain Assumption of on-board and ground-based fuel tank objective of providing an acceptable Flammable Ullage inerting systems. If further improvement level of safety for fuel tank systems. is found to be practicable, we may While the programs developed by Several commenters recognize that consider initiating further rulemaking to design approval holders will provide a fuel system design has been based on address such improvements. In the foundation for operators’ programs, the the assumption that the ullage fuel/air meantime, this final rule requires a individual operator is responsible to mixture is always flammable. However, means to minimize flammability or a ensure that its programs address the these commenters express concern that means to mitigate the effects of ignition. actual configurations of its fuel tank the proposal to require minimization of As a performance-based regulation, this systems. fuel tank flammability could result in a allows the use of any effective, In the preamble of the notice, we also relaxation of the requirements for approved means, but does not require discussed use of a SFAR and changes to precluding ignition sources within the the use of any one particular means. the operating rules, instead of AD’s, as fuel tanks. One commenter asserts that the primary means of achieving the the FAA has retained this assumption Request To Revise Proposed regulatory objective. As we stated, we for now, but ‘‘seems to indicate a Flammability Standard consider that an SFAR provides a means willingness to eventually entertain One commenter believes that the for the FAA to establish clear designs that would rely more on ARAC report referenced in the preamble expectations and standards, as well as a flammability minimization and to the notice is flawed in its logic,
VerDate 11
which arrived at a suggested exposure In the context of this rule, ’minimize’ FAA’s Response: The FAA does not time to explosive conditions not to means to incorporate practicable design agree with either the commenter’s exceed ‘‘7 percent’’ of fleet operating methods to reduce the likelihood of proposal to delay the rule relating to time. This recommendation was based flammable vapors. fuel tank flammability or the on comparison of the incident rate of ‘‘Practicable design methods’’ are commenter’s proposed regulatory text. fuel tank explosions and ignition events feasible means, such as transferring heat The proposal offered by the commenter for center tanks to that for wing tanks. from the fuel tank (e.g., use of would require only that a ‘‘means to The commenter states that, due to ventilation or cooling air). We have reduce heating of fuel tanks by adjacent operating procedures, the wing tanks are provided further guidance in AC systems shall be provided * * *’’ The seldom empty and are not located near 25.981–2, which describes how proposed text suggested by the comment any heat sources. While wing tank demonstrating that the flammability of does not require any measurable vapors may be explosive when taxiing the fuel tank is equivalent to that of an reduction in flammability, which is the on a hot runway for extended periods, unheated wing fuel tank would be one objective of this rulemaking. For they are never as explosive as are those acceptable means of showing example, under the commenter’s that often exist in empty center tanks. compliance. As with all new suggested standard, if a fuel tank The most serious situation for wing fuel performance based standards, it will be initially contains a flammable fuel-air tanks would be when the airplane lands necessary for the Transport Airplane mixture, a ‘‘means to reduce heating of on a hot runway with nearly empty Directorate to participate in the review the tank’’ may reduce the temperature of tanks. However, taxi time at landing is of proposed means of compliance to the fuel, but not necessarily to the usually short. At takeoff, even with a ensure standardization. extent that the temperature would long taxi, the wing tanks will be nearly Request That Rule Based on remain below the flammable range for full with relatively cool fuel. The Flammability Be Delayed Until the duration of the flight. commenter concludes that to have Standard Is Established The commenter asserts that there is comparable safety margins for center no standard for assessing flammability tanks as for wing tanks, the degree of One commenter representing of airplane fuel tanks. However, explosiveness would have to be manufacturers and operators agrees in industry members represented by the equivalent. principle with the FAA’s overall intent commenter were members of the ARAC to enhance the fuel system safety of Another commenter asserts that the group that recommended that the future aircraft designs through measures proposed flammability requirement is regulatory text mandate a maximum fuel to reduce fuel tank flammability not sufficiently detailed to ensure that tank flammability of 7 percent of the exposure. The commenter agrees that compliance can be achieved without operating time. The ARAC report action should be taken, as identified by having to resort to external guidance, provides numerous calculations of fuel the ARAC Fuel Tank Harmonization not published in the rule. The tank flammability that were conducted Working Group, ‘‘to address commenter is concerned that the by industry representatives. We are flammability mitigation as a new layer proposed rule text is sufficiently vague confident that industry is capable of of protection to the fuel system.’’ to promote lack of standardization in assessing fuel tank flammability, and we However, the commenter disagrees with findings of compliance with the have provided guidance in AC 25.981– the proposed § 25.981(c) that would regulation. Although relevant material is 2, which defines methods of require minimization of fuel tank available in the associated AC 25.981– demonstrating compliance with the flammability, because ‘‘there is not an 2, the commenter is aware that guidance flammability requirements of the rule. agreed-to definitive industry standard in the AC is not mandatory and is One method described in the AC for for assessing flammability of aircraft concerned that the wording of the rule showing compliance is to demonstrate fuel tanks.’’ that the flammability of the tank is equal essentially requires an interpretation of In light of this, the commenter to or less than that of an unheated wing ‘‘minimize flammability’’ from the requests that a rule based on tank on the airplane type. As discussed relevant AC. flammability be delayed until a standard previously, § 25.981(c) has been FAA’s Response: The FAA considers is defined. In its place, the commenter clarified by adding a definition of that additional clarification is necessary. recommends a new rule that would ‘‘minimize.’’ For applicants who are As for the first comment, the ARAC accomplish some degree of flammability unable to demonstrate equivalent recommendation of a 7 percent reduction, even though a definitive flammability to an unheated wing tank, flammability standard did not provide flammability standard does not exist. the use of ‘‘practicable design methods,’’ an equivalent level of flammability to The commenter suggests that the new such as transferring heat from the fuel that of the wing (main) tanks, which the rule should require practical measures tank, will be required. The final rule is ARAC determined were the tanks with to reduce heat transfer from adjacent adopted with the change noted. an acceptable level of fuel tank safety in heat sources into fuel tanks, and relation to ignition or explosion events. proposes the following text for the rule: Request Not To Mandate Fuel Tank The ARAC calculated a range of 3 to 5 § 25.981(c): Flammability to the Level Proposed percent for wing tanks. We considered If systems adjacent to fuel tanks could The commenter does not agree with this concern when developing the cause significant heat transfer to the tanks: regulatory text for this rule, and this is (1) Means to reduce heating of fuel tanks the FAA’s statement in the preamble to why the proposal requires flammability by adjacent systems shall be provided; or (2) the notice that read: to be ‘‘minimized’’ rather than accepting Equivalent flammability reduction means ‘‘* * * the intent of the proposal is to the ARAC recommendation of 7 percent. shall be provided to offset flammability require that fuel tanks are not heated, and In response to the second commenter, increases that would otherwise result from cool at a rate equivalent to that of a wing tank we consider it appropriate to further heating; or in the transport airplane being evaluated.’’ (3) Means to mitigate the effects of an clarify the intent of the rule by ignition of fuel vapors within fuel tanks shall For example, directed ventilation incorporating a definition of the term be provided such that no damage caused by systems may reduce heating of adjacent ‘‘minimize’’ in the text of § 25.981(c), as an ignition will prevent continued safe flight fuel tanks, but they do not eliminate follows: and landing. heating. Furthermore, the commenter
VerDate 11
asserts that there should not be a The commenter adds that, if an time is needed to perform the in-depth requirement to ‘‘cool at a rate equivalent unheated wing fuel tank does not exist research and economic evaluations to that of a wing tank.’’ The studies on a particular design, then one could necessary to determine if certain conducted by the ARAC Fuel Tank be modeled and used as the reference technologies that could reduce or Harmonization Working Group did not standard for all tanks on that design. eliminate fuel tank flammability would conclude that such a requirement was The second commenter recommends be practical for use on the existing fleet necessary or achievable. The commenter that the FAA consider an alternative to of transport airplanes. As noted requests that the FAA not mandate have the applicant determine an previously, we also are studying minimizing fuel tank flammability to acceptable heat transfer rate at a critical concepts such as ventilating spaces the level proposed in the notice, fuel load, rather than determining if a adjacent to fuel tanks, and recently because it would not be practical to cool temperature limitation is exceeded, tasked the ARAC to evaluate inerting tanks within the fuselage to the same given that the tank ullage is considered systems for possible retrofit into the level as tanks located in the wing. flammable. This would alleviate the existing transport fleet. We will FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees. difficulties of working with a high consider initiating additional The rule only affects new type designs. number of parameters inherent in the rulemaking if further improvements are Therefore, possible design numerous aircraft types and conditions found to be effective and practicable. considerations to comply with the rule (including the effects of pumping, vibration, altitude, fuel load, etc.) by Request To Ban Use of Low Flash Point would include: Fuels • Locating heat sources away from considering a generic installation. fuel tanks; FAA’s Response: The FAA does not Several commenters suggest that the • Introduction of cool air from agree with either commenter. use of lower flash point fuels, such as outside sources into air gaps between Minimizing flammability is the ultimate JP–4 or Jet B, should be disallowed heat sources and fuel tanks to transfer objective of the rule. We considered because these fuels cause a much greater heat from tanks while inflight; and many options when establishing the exposure to flammable vapors. One • Introducing cool air from ground or regulatory text, and determined that a commenter notes that while it appears airplane sources during ground performance-based rule is most that these fuels are no longer commonly operations. appropriate because it allows the used, they may still exist as approved Some of these features are already designer to control fuel tank alternative fuels for several transport incorporated into certain models of the flammability by using any number of aircraft. If any operators routinely use transport fleet. These methods are methods. It also allows the use of new Jet B or JP–4 type fuel, then their risk technically feasible and could provide technology designs that may be would be much greater than the risk for an equivalent level of exposure to developed in the future. On the other operators using Jet A. operation with flammable vapors to that hand, the commenters’ proposals focus FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that of unheated wing fuel tanks—the fuel only on heat balance and heat transfer, use of lower flash point fuels increases tanks with a safety level that the ARAC rather than flammability. Their the exposure to operation with defined as an acceptable standard. The proposals would not allow the designer flammable fuels in the fuel tank. In fact, commenter provided no data to support the flexibility to introduce other means this rule does require consideration of the assertion that ‘‘it would not be of reducing flammability, other than fuel type. The limited use of these fuels practical to cool tanks within the controlling heating/cooling of the tank, on a temporary basis to allow operation fuselage to the same level as tanks such as with nitrogen inerting. Further, from remote airports is discussed in AC located in the wing.’’ the commenters’ proposals would not 25.981–2. The FAA does not agree that significantly simplify the compliance use of these fuels should be banned for Request To Provide Alternatives to demonstration over that of the options in-service airplanes. Data available Minimizing Flammability described in AC 25.981–2X. In light of indicates that these fuels are not Two commenters request that this, the commenters’ proposals are not routinely used in U.S. operations. alternative regulatory text be included accepted. However, in some cases, airplanes may in the proposed rule concerning the divert into locations where JP–4 fuel is Request To Require Retroactive requirement to minimize flammability. the only fuel available. Use of this fuel The first commenter believes that the Reduction in Flammability on a temporary basis allows FAA’s intent, as stated in the preamble One commenter states that the designs continuation of the flight without to the notice and restated in draft AC of some in-service airplanes have shown requiring tankering of Jet A fuel to a 25.981–2X, is ‘‘to require that the undesirable characteristics. Because the remote alternate airport and the exposure to formation or presence of proposed flammability requirements associated delays and inconvenience to flammable vapors is equivalent to that would only affect new airplane type the flying public. If use of lower flash of an unheated wing tank in the designs, this commenter seeks insurance point fuels increases due to market transport airplane being evaluated.’’ The from the FAA that older and current conditions, the FAA will consider commenter considers this a reasonable designs also will be assessed, and rulemaking to limit their use. objective. The commenter recommends suggests a case-by-case approach. Request To Require Use of Means To that the FAA reword the proposed rule FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that Prevent Fire Within Fuel Tank text to clearly frame the intent within some in-service airplanes have the rule itself, and believes that the undesirable levels of fuel tank Several commenters request that the wording would be more specific and flammability. To address this issue, we FAA revise § 25.981(c)(2) to require the less prone to misinterpretation if it tasked the ARAC in 1998 to provide use of specific means to address the contained the following statement: advice and recommendations on requirement to mitigate the effect of an A means must be provided to ensure that methods that could eliminate or ignition of fuel vapors within the fuel the net heat balance within any tank will be significantly reduce the exposure of tanks. Some of the commenters’ equivalent to that of an unheated wing fuel transport airplane fuel tanks to suggestions include flame quenching tank during any portion of the passenger flammable vapors. Our review of the metallic foils and polyurethane foam. carrying operation. ARAC report indicates that additional These commenters state that such
VerDate 11
technologies as these are available and We agree with the commenter that our evaluation of their effects on the fuel consider them effective in preventing analysis had not included any Fokker tank system. We also have determined propagation of flame or explosion Model F27 Mark 50 or Boeing Model that 325 non-fuel tank system STC within the fuel tanks 717 airplanes in the fleet. The reason holders will each need to conduct a FAA’s Response: The FAA does not was that the fleet data set that we used more detailed engineering review that agree that a change to the proposed rule contained no U.S.-registered Model F27 will involve an average of 75 hours of is necessary. As stated previously, the Mark 50 airplanes. The more recent data engineering time. The economic final rule is a performance-based set we used for the final regulatory analysis has been revised accordingly. evaluation also contains no U.S.- regulation. As such, it may permit the Cost of Use of Proprietary Data use of such means as those suggested by registered Model F27 Mark 50 airplanes; commenters, but the rule does not thus, those airplanes are not included in One commenter raises concerns require the use of any one particular the analysis. We did not include any regarding the costs associated with STC means. AC 25.981–2 provides guidance Model 717 airplanes because that fleet holders obtaining data from the type on use of these means. data was based on a 1996 listing when approval holder. The commenter points no Model 717 airplanes had yet been out that, in the ‘‘Regulatory Evaluation’’ Discussion of Comments Concerning manufactured. The airplane data set that section of the notice, the FAA stated: Cost of the Rule we used in the final regulatory Many STC holders would be able to The detailed responses and the evaluation is based on 1999 data and incorporate a large portion of a TC holder’s impacts of the comments on the costs of contains Model 717 airplanes. We also fuel tank system assessment into its the rule are contained in the Final note that even though the 1999 fleet assessment. data set reported no U.S. registered Regulatory Evaluation, which is The commenter states that, in Airbus Model A321, A330, or A340 available in the docket. The quantitative practice, the release of such proprietary airplanes, we assumed that these effects of the comments on the information to a third party would need models will enter the U.S. fleet assumptions and the cost estimates are to occur under a technical assistance summarized in the Economic Evaluation eventually and, therefore, the costs to review these fuel tank systems were contract. Therefore, the cost of this discussion later in this final rule. The transaction should be added to the following discussion is a more general included in the analysis. We agree with the commenter that the FAA’s cost analysis. disposition of the comments concerning FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees the cost of the rule. analysis had not included all of the fuel tank system STC’s. After further with this commenter. While a technical Number of Airplanes, TC’s, and STC’s research, we discovered one fuel tank assistance contract may be needed to Affected system STC for an Airbus airplane obtain this information, the overall cost to the aviation industry is not affected One commenter notes that the FAA model, one fuel tank system STC for a Bombardier airplane model, and no fuel because the payment to the data holder assumed that a U.S. fleet size of 6,006 will offset some of the engineering costs airplanes would be affected by the tank system STC’s for Fokker or Aerospatiale airplane models. The associated with the fuel tank system proposed rule. While this number may design review. As a result, the overall have been appropriate in 1996, the economic analysis has been adjusted accordingly. cost of the rule is not affected by these commenter states that by the time the We do not agree with the commenter contracts, although the distribution of a final rule is issued, there likely will be regarding consideration of worldwide part of these costs will shift from certain more than 7,000 affected airplanes. impact of this rulemaking. The FAA is TC holders to certain STC holders. Additionally, the commenter notes not required to account for costs to that the number of affected type Cost of Fuel Tank System Safety Review foreign operators not operating in the Required by SFAR certificates counted by the FAA did not U.S. because those operators are not include the Fokker Model F27 Mark 50 subject to these rules. One commenter disagrees with the or the Boeing Model 717. Further, the FAA’s estimate of $14.4 million for the FAA’s listing of fuel system STC’s was Cost of Evaluating Non-Fuel System- costs of completing the fuel tank system incomplete; for example, there were no Related STC’s reviews required by the proposed SFAR. fuel tank system STC’s listed for any One commenter agrees with the FAA The commenter points out that the FAA Airbus, Fokker, Bombardier, or that only a small number of non-fuel- estimated that the review would require Aerospatiale airplanes. system STC’s will require a system 0.5 to 2 engineering years per airplane Finally, the commenter states that the assessment. However, the commenter model. However, the commenter FAA’s cost estimate should take into asserts that the FAA’s analysis does not calculates the actual level of effort account the worldwide impact that the account for the significant effort and required will be more like 2 to 4 proposed rule will have, as other associated cost that would be required engineering years for each major model. regulatory authorities adopt identical or to determine whether or not these non- Minor model variation will add similar rules. Thus, the true cost of this fuel system-related STC’s affect the fuel additional effort that is difficult to activity will far exceed the cost system and thus merit further attention. quantify, but could easily increase the associated with only the U.S. fleet. Such a determination would be required total effort by 30 to 50 percent. In FAA’s Response: The FAA concurs under the proposed SFAR requirements. addition, the commenter states that with the commenter that the number of FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that systems do evolve with time, leading to airplanes in the U.S. fleet has increased the costs to determine which STC’s additional permutations that must be since the data set used in the notice was affect the fuel tank system should be considered. collected. As a result, we now estimate included in the economic analysis. In light of this, the commenter that 7,875 U.S.-registered airplanes will However, we have determined that 90 believes that the basic safety reviews undergo the fuel tank system percent of the non-fuel tank system will require two to three times more inspections beginning in the year 2004. STC’s will need only a minimal degree effort and cost than identified by the The economic analysis has been of engineering effort (with a resultant FAA. Accordingly, the cost of the basic modified accordingly. minimal cost) for a qualitative design review may be in the range of
VerDate 11
$28 million to $52 million, plus an that have twenty or thirty operators and Cost of Safety Review of STC’s on Older additional $14 million to account for the hundreds of operating aircraft. (They Airplanes variations within models. commenter reports that there are only While commenters generally agree FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that 13 Model L–188 Electras currently that the design review should apply to the number of engineering hours to operating in the U.S.) STC’s and field modifications, several review the fuel tank systems should be commenters express concern that the increased but disagrees about the The commenter requests that the FAA design review will be difficult to amount of the increase. As discussed take into consideration the following conduct on older airplanes. In later in more detail in the Economic information when finalizing the particular, reviewing non-fuel tank Evaluation section of this preamble, we economic analysis of the proposed rule: related STC’s and field approvals could determined that there were two types of 1. The FAA’s cost benefit analysis be unmanageable for airplanes with a fuel tank system reviews: identifies an engineering effort to • The first, which is referred to as the long service life and with multiple perform the SFAR safety review and owners. The commenters note that the ‘‘full-scale’’ review, is the first fuel tank preparation of documents as taking from review done for a model that has several FAA did not make any accounting in three-quarters to three person years to the notice for the cost of addressing series. perform. However, because the Model • The second, which is referred to as these modifications. L–188 Electra was certified prior to the One commenter proposes an the ‘‘derivative’’ review, are the reviews issuance of § 25.901 and § 25.1309, the of the other series in that model. alternative approach: A one-time Using the Boeing Model 737–300/– SFAR safety review will require all new inspection to determine the 400/–500 as an example, we determined analysis and possibly testing to prove configuration of the airplane and to that this model will involve one ‘‘full- that the design meets the requirement verify that wiring entering the fuel tank, scale’’ review and two ‘‘derivative’’ for all operating conditions. The effort and systems capable of generating auto- reviews. In addition, the fuel tank to do this will likely exceed the ignition temperature into fuel tank system reviews performed for all maximum FAA estimate of three person structure, have not been compromised ‘‘extended range’’ series and freighter years. by STC modifications. The commenter series are evaluated as ‘‘derivative’’ 2. Then, the time to familiarize a new asserts that such an inspection would reviews. On that basis, we determined staff with the design, to locate pertinent require about 50 to 100 labor hours to that, depending upon the model, it will files, to relate those files to the long perform. The resultant inspection labor take 6 months to 4 years of engineering history of the aircraft, and to develop costs alone could amount to $28 million to $52 million, depending upon the time to perform a ‘‘full-scale’’ fuel tank test and compliance documents for new number of airplanes to be inspected (for system review. The FAA also regulations are time-consuming tasks example, 7,000 airplanes × 100 hours determined that it will take 6 months to that will add significant time and costs per airplane × $70 per labor-hour). This 1 year of engineering time to perform a to the FAA’s estimates. ‘‘derivative’’ fuel tank system review. estimate does not include the cost of the (See the commonality of design 3. If the analysis shows that the downtime (and resultant revenue loss) discussion presented earlier in this design does not meet the newly required to accomplish such an preamble for an engineering explanation imposed requirements, redesign will be inspection; yet the proposed compliance why the review of a model’s series after necessary. Such redesign would time of 12 months would require the first review will take less time than increase the expense by a factor of 3 to airplanes to be pulled from revenue the first review.) 5, depending on the detail. It would also service for special inspection. In the The FAA agrees that the number of increase considerably the expense to the notice, the FAA had estimated that an fuel tank system reviews needs to be operator of installing the new design. annual increase in out-of-service time of increased, but disagrees about the extent FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that 11.5 hours to 32 hours would occur, of the increase. The FAA determined additional time and costs will be depending upon the model, and that this would result in lost net revenues of that the rule will require 46 ‘‘full-scale’’ required to review the designs on some $6.4 million for a 12-month period. The reviews and 52 ‘‘derivative’’ reviews. airplane types where design information commenter maintains that the one-time The impact on the total cost of these is not readily available. However, the inspection alternative would also reviews is provided in the Economic FAA does not agree that all of the work Evaluation section of this preamble. require this much downtime. identified by the commenter is FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees that Cost of Safety Review of Older Type necessarily required. As discussed the costs associated with reviewing non- Designs previously in this preamble, the FAA fuel tank-related STC’s and field One commenter, Lockheed Martin, extended the compliance time for approvals needs to be addressed. considers that the FAA clearly conducting the actions required by the However, we disagree with the underestimated the costs to conduct the SFAR, which addresses the commenter as to the direction and safety review required under the new commenter’s concern about the needed magnitude of the effort that will be SFAR on older airplanes, such as the time. Further, the FAA increased the needed to evaluate these factors. Lockheed Model L–188 Electra. The number of engineering years to Specifically, we agree that a ‘‘paper commenter notes that the FAA’s complete a Model L–188 fuel tank review’’ of the airplane’s service history economic analysis of the cost of the system design review to 4 years. will be needed for compliance. We design review proposed in the notice is Additionally, as noted in the earlier disagree that this review will necessitate based on a fleet-wide consideration. disposition of the comment relating to an airplane inspection that is separate This approach results in a per-aircraft- the applicability of the SFAR, the FAA from the initial fuel tank system cost basis that does not appear will consider the merits of exemptions inspection and that the labor hours for unreasonable. However, the expense to to the requirements of the SFAR based any such airplane inspection have been perform the design reviews and prepare upon the number of airplanes in service included in the labor hours to complete service documents will be the same for and the safety benefits that could be the initial fuel tank inspection. We agree Lockheed as for other manufacturers achieved by a safety review. that the amount of effort to complete
VerDate 11
this ‘‘paper review’’ will vary across airplanes), and new design change costs Cost To Comply With the SFAR individual airplanes. Airplanes that averaged $40,000 per airplane, the total One commenter asserts that the have been in near-continuous operation cost would be $140 million. combined cost of the safety review and by major, national, and regional airlines The commenter acknowledges that it development of instructions may well (the majority of the airplanes affected by is not possible to predict what effect the be $180 to $330 million, rather than the the rule) should possess well- proposed rule would actually have on $16 million estimated by the FAA. documented service history records the fleet, but the potential obviously FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees such that those operators will need a exists for costs that range between $100 with the underlying assumptions made minimal amount of time to complete the million and $200 million, or more. by the commenter to develop this paper reviews for those airplanes. estimate. The commenter’s first However, we realize that there will be FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees that the cost of new design change assumption is that $100 million to $200 smaller operators that will spend more million of these costs are based on the time to trace their airplanes’ service requirements should be included in the cost analysis for this rule. As discussed commenter’s argument that, ‘‘Should histories—particularly if the airplane compliance with this specific rule has had multiple operators and owners. in the notice, new design change requirements will be implemented require design changes broadly across As a result, we have determined that it the fleet, the costs would be substantial. will take an average of one engineering through the AD process, during which the FAA will fully analyze the costs and For example, if [emphasis FAA] this day (a cost of $880 per airplane) for an rule were to impact half the U.S. fleet operator to complete this paper review the public will have an opportunity to comment on the FAA’s estimates. (about 3,500 airplanes) and modification for every airplane. costs averaged $40,000 per airplane, the Cost of Design Changes Cost of Developing Maintenance and total cost would be $140 million. It is Inspection Instructions not possible to predict what effect this Several commenters raise concerns new rule would actually have on the about accounting for the costs of new One commenter disagrees with the fleet, but the potential obviously exists design changes that could be required FAA’s assumption that the development for costs that range between $100 under the proposed SFAR requirements. of maintenance and inspection million and $200 million, or more.’’ One commenter representing instructions would simply be part of the [The commenter is referring to the manufacturers and operators agrees, in required SFAR safety review. On the requirements of § 25.981(a)(3) of the general, that any design changes contrary, this commenter states that this rule, which involve evaluating the resulting from the safety review should work, in fact, must be done after effects of latent failures.] be handled outside the scope of the completion of the safety review. This argument assumes that the cost SFAR. However, there would be However, the commenter states that, if of the potential future AD’s should be additional costs associated with one assumes that this effort represents attributed to this rule. As stated earlier, developing the necessary design 20 to 30 percent of the effort associated we maintain that the cost of complying changes identified by the SFAR safety with the basic safety review, then the with potential future AD’s is attributed reviews. The commenter points out that, cost could be on the order of $10 specifically to those individual AD’s in the notice, the FAA stated: million. when they are issued. As a result, we * * * the design review may identify FAA’s Response: The FAA partially have determined that there are no conditions that would be addressed by disagrees that the costs of developing compliance costs attributable to this specific service bulletins or unsafe the maintenance instructions were not rule for any future design changes that conditions that would result in FAA issuance of an airworthiness directive (AD). However, included in the cost analysis of the rule. will be accomplished through an AD. those future costs would be the result of The estimated labor hours required for The commenter’s second assumption compliance with the service bulletin or the the design review specifically included is that the fuel tank system review costs AD and are not costs of compliance with the an estimate of 0.15 year to one year of will be two to three times the $16 proposed rulemaking. Those costs would be engineering time for the TC holders, and million estimated by the FAA, plus estimated for each individual AD, when 0.1 year to 0.25 year for the fuel tank there will be an additional $14 million proposed. system STC holders, to develop the to review the fuel tanks for the This commenter does not consider it inspection and maintenance variations within models. As noted appropriate for the FAA to assert that recommendations. Further, we had earlier, we disagree with the amount of none of these costs are attributable to assumed that the design approval holder engineering time assumed by the the proposed rulemaking. In those recommendations would have been commenter, as well as the number of instances where new rules are created completed after the fuel tank system fuel tank reviews that will be that go beyond existing rules— review. Nevertheless, as the proposed performed. We have recalculated the essentially raising the current level of compliance time was 1 year, the fact estimated compliance cost and safety—the cost of any design change that developing the recommendations determined that it will be about $30 driven by these new rules should be after completing the fuel tank system million. considered as part of the total cost of the review had no effect on the present Finally, the commenter assumes that rule. value of the estimated costs because all each airplane will need a one-time The commenter points to of the expenditures would have inspection to verify that previous § 25.981(a)(3) as such a rule that occurred in the first year. This is not the airplane modifications have not proposes new, more-stringent case for the 18-month compliance time compromised the wiring entering the requirements associated with evaluating provided in the final rule. We have fuel tank and entering the systems the effects of latent failures. Should determined that all of the engineering capable of generating autoignition compliance with this specific rule costs to develop the recommendations temperatures into fuel tank structure. require design changes broadly across will occur during the second year after The commenter estimates this will cost the fleet, the costs would be substantial. the effective date of the rule. We have $28 million to $52 million for labor, and For example, if this rule were to affect included those costs in the final $6.4 million for lost net revenue due to half the U.S. fleet (about 3,500 economic analysis. out-of-service time. As noted earlier, we
VerDate 11
agree that an individual airplane review associated with this should be of components (e.g., pumps). The will be needed, but we disagree in that considered in the rule. Also, the costs of commenter notes that the FAA did not the labor hours have been included as preparing tanks for entry should be consider either of these possibilities in part of the labor hours to perform the considered. the cost analysis; however, the initial fuel tank system inspection. We FAA’s Response: The FAA agrees magnitude of the cost impact could have, however, calculated a $5.5 million with the first commenter. Assuming the extend into the billions of dollars. cost for a ‘‘paper review’’ of every commenter’s airplanes were FAA’s Response: The FAA does not airplane’s service history. manufactured between 1960 and 1980, concur. The conclusion of this Based on these figures, we conclude we calculated that the initial fuel tank commenter that the costs of compliance that the costs to comply with the SFAR system inspection, plus the two with § 25.981(a)(3) ‘‘could extend into will be $35.5 million. (More details reinspections that will occur during a the billions of dollars’’ is based upon an concerning these costs are explained 12-year period, will result in a total assumption concerning the impact of later in this preamble.) number of 330 labor hours per airplane. the requirement. The example provided We disagree with the second by the commenter, which assumes that Cost of Operating Rule Changes commenter. The commenter states that the requirement limits the probability of ¥ One commenter agrees with the 60 percent of the initial fuel tank system latent failure to less than 1×10 7, statement in the notice that read: inspections will be performed during a indicates a misinterpretation of the The FAA intends that any additional fuel ‘‘C’’ check , which will require that the requirement. The rule does not allow a tank system inspection and maintenance fuel tank be opened, drained, and single failure to hazard the airplane, actions resulting from the SFAR review vented. We included these costs in the regardless of the probability of its would occur during an airplane’s regularly number of labor hours for the initial occurrence. The FAA expects that scheduled major maintenance checks. From inspection, which are twice the number designs that have single failures that can a safety standpoint, repeated entry increases of labor hours for the later reinspections result in an ignition source will be the risk of damage to the airplane. Thus, the that will be performed during ‘‘D’’ modified to include fail-safe features. proposal would not require air carriers to checks. Further, we included a value for Modifications may also be necessary to alter their maintenance schedules, and the the lost net revenue to the aviation address combinations of failures. If a FAA anticipates that few or no airplanes system as a result of the additional fuel tank system is designed such that would be taken out of service solely to comply with the proposal unless an number of out-of-service days (from one the safety level is heavily dominated by immediate safety concern is identified. to three days) for the initial fuel tank one of the components or features in the system inspections performed during combinations of failures, then added This commenter strongly recommends the ‘‘C’’ check. inspections, hard-timing, or installation that the FAA ensure that the final rule of annunciation features to eliminate does not penalize the industry by Cost of Complying With New Method of Addressing Latent Failures latency are exactly what was intended requiring inspection intervals more by the regulation. The need for frequent than truly necessary, or lead to One commenter states that the new inspections and hard-timing can be unnecessary hard-timing of (placing life- treatment of latent failures (to maintain limited by providing redundancy and limits on) components. the probability of occurrence of a given fail-safe features and/or by eliminating × ¥7 FAA’s Response: The FAA responds latent failure to less than 1 10 ), as latency. Therefore, inspection or to this commenter by reiterating that the would be required by § 25.981(a)(3), will replacement of components at the rate intent is to have the maintenance and lead to enormous costs with no noted by the commenter would not be inspections generated by this rule be attendant benefit. As an example, a required. developed so that the tasks can be component with a latent failure rate of The FAA position is supported by ¥ performed during regularly scheduled 1 × 10 9 per flight-hour would have to another commenter who provided maintenance. be inspected (or hard-timed) every 100 information regarding transient hours (or 200 hours, if an average Cost of Inspections suppression units (TSU) developed for exposure time is assumed to be T/2) to the Boeing Model 737 and 747 One commenter disagrees with the keep the probability of failure under airplanes. The commenter states, ‘‘The ¥ number of hours that the FAA estimated 1×10 7. A component failure rate of TSU eliminates the need to inspect ¥ would be required to conduct the added 1×10 8 per flight-hour would require harnesses, probe terminations, etc. The inspections required by the rule. The inspection every day (10 hours). The TSU itself would be subject to periodic commenter calculates that the metric commenter asserts that the benefit (25,000 hours) inspections.’’ It should will be 300 to 500 labor hours per derived from performing such be noted that heavy maintenance checks airplane every 9 to 11 years, plus any inspections or hard-timing is nil, and typically occur on transport airplane parts replacement costs yet to be the implications of such a rule are self- models prior to accumulating 25,000 defined by the manufacturer. evident. hours time in service; therefore, the cost Another commenter suggests that the Further, this commenter points out of inspections for the TSU units would cost analysis needs to be adjusted to that the FAA’s cost estimate for the be low. address in-tank inspections. The operational rule changes is $154 million The speculation by the commenter commenter asserts that the FAA over 10 years, and that is based upon that ‘‘the magnitude of the cost impact assumes that much of the in-tank the assumption that the required could extend into the billions of inspection work will be accomplished maintenance and inspection programs dollars’’ is based on a misunderstanding during heavy maintenance checks when will coincide with an airplane’s of the final rule and, therefore, was not the tanks are open and purged. regularly scheduled major maintenance considered in the final economic However, for some aircraft, the tanks are checks. However, the commenter states analysis. opened only once every eight years for that the situation described above scheduled maintenance. Therefore, if in- would result in numerous inspections Costs of New Modifications tank inspections are mandated, some that would not align with these One commenter expresses concern aircraft will have to be removed from regularly scheduled checks. In addition, that the cost analysis is ‘‘greatly flawed’’ scheduled service and the costs it could lead to widespread hard-timing because it did not consider all the costs
VerDate 11
that will result from the requirements of with redundancy and fault indications because compliance with the proposed the SFAR, such as high cost items like features such that single component change would be done during the design aircraft modifications and ‘‘hard timing’’ failures do not result in any significant phase of the airplane model before any new of components. The cost analysis takes reduction in safety. Therefore, fuel tank airplanes would be manufactured. credit for the benefits that will result systems historically have not had any The commenter considers that the from these modifications; however, the life-limited components or specific FAA’s assumption is incorrect. commenter considers that the costs detailed inspection requirements unless Proposed § 25.981(c)(1) would require should be included as well. mandated by AD.’’ We agree that some that the fuel tank installation include ‘‘a As an example of the potential costs past design practices have been means to minimize the development of of modifications, this commenter deficient and that adding the specific flammable vapors in the fuel tanks.’’ provided the following specific requirement in § 25.981(a)(3) to address Moreover, the FAA states that it intends information concerning how the latent failures may require new design that the body tanks ‘‘cool at a rate proposal would affect its fleet of features for existing airplanes. We also equivalent to that of a wing tank.’’ airplanes: The commenter owns agree with the commenter that The commenter asserts that, based on approximately 160 Boeing Model 727 modifications to the FQIS and/or any this requirement, the cost impact to airplanes. As a result of the proposed other wiring entering the fuel tank future airplane designs could be SFAR safety review, some of the system may be required (such as substantial. As an example, the modifications that might be mandated separation and shielding of FQIS wiring commenter presents a preliminary cost for these airplanes are: or, for older airplanes, installation of assessment of a directed ventilation • Replacement of the analog FQIS transient suppression devices). We do system, below. The commenter derived with a digital FQIS; not agree that the rule would mandate the cost estimates from a report • Installation of current suppression replacement of analog FQIS with digital prepared by an ARAC working group devices; systems, although this may be one (Fuel Tank Harmonization Working • Installation of flame arrestors; and method used on certain portions of the Group). These fuel tank cooling cost • Possibly, replacement of fuel boost fleet. However, because correcting those estimates are divided into the categories pumps. design deficiencies will be indicated. The analysis considers the The cost of these modifications alone, accomplished through the AD process, costs associated with small, medium, based on data received from the those compliance costs will be and large airplane designs. (It should be equipment manufacturers, is estimated when the relevant AD is noted that directed ventilation systems approximately $125,000 per airplane. proposed. of the type evaluated would not cool a Since some of the commenter’s The SFAR does not require center wing tank at a rate equivalent to airplanes already have a FQIS installed, installation of flame arrestors in fuel that of a wing tank.) the cost to modify the commenter’s fleet tank vents. We have initiated tasking an 1. Development costs per airplane would be approximately $17,000,000. ARAC group to provide design = $2.8 million. This figure does not include other recommendations addressing both a part 2. Installation costs per production modifications that might be mandated 25 amendment and retroactive airplane = $21,200. for the airplanes. The commenter points operational requirement for installation 3. Additional airplane operational costs out that this is the modification cost for of flame arrestors in fuel tank vent per airplane per year: only one aircraft type for one airline. If outlets. If any rulemaking is • all costs for all U.S. registered aircraft Small airplane = $30,408. subsequently proposed based on the • were to be included, the result would be Medium airplane = $39,295. recommendations, the FAA will • far greater than the total indicated in conduct separate economic analyses for Large airplane = $50,518. FAA’s cost analysis presented in the those proposals. Using these numbers, a simple notice. calculation may be performed to FAA’s Response: The FAA does not Cost of Changes to Part 25 on Future estimate the recurring costs associated agree that the cost analysis concerning Designs with such a system over a 10-year possible modifications was flawed. One commenter disagrees with the period. These costs would consist of the Section 25.901(b)(2) requires that the FAA’s cost analysis regarding the affects installation costs per production ‘‘Components of the installation must be of changes to part 25 requiring airplane and the additional operational constructed, arranged and installed so ‘‘minimizing flammability.’’ This costs per airplane per year, applied to a as to ensure their continued safe commenter points to a statement in the fleet of a new airplane design with an operation between normal inspections notice that read: assumed production rate. The following and or overhauls.’’ As stated in the The FAA anticipates that the proposed part table presents the results of this simple notice, ‘‘Typical transport category 25 change would have minimal effect on the estimate for a 10-year period (ignoring airplane fuel tank systems are designed cost of future type certificated airplanes inflation, cost of capital, and so on):
Annual produc- Operational Size tion rate Production cost cost Total cost
Small ...... 180 $38,160,000 $301,039,200 $339,199,200 Medium ...... 72 15,264,000 155,608,200 170,872,200 Large ...... 60 15,264,000 129,673,500 144,937,500
Although the above example is are indeed substantial, even if the initial of the final rule should result in very simplistic in nature, the commenter developmental costs are not. little increased production costs. Certain maintains that the conclusion may be FAA’s Response: The FAA disagrees airplane models in production today drawn that the overall potential costs with the commenter. The requirements locate sources of heat away from the
VerDate 11
center wing fuel tanks. Other models International Compatibility • Back Aviation Solutions (Fleet PC, locate the air conditioning packs below Version 4.0); In keeping with U.S. obligations • the center wing fuel tank, but under the Convention on International Information from service bulletins; incorporate air gaps that are ventilated and Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to • such that heat transfer into the center comply with International Civil FAA discussions with industry wing tank is significantly reduced. Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards engineers. Other airplane models incorporate and Recommended Practices to the Affected Airplanes and Aviation Sectors directed ventilation means for areas maximum extent practicable. The FAA In the notice, the FAA, using 1996 below the heated center wing tanks. determined that there are no ICAO data, estimated that the proposal would The FAA does not agree with the cost Standards and Recommended Practices have affected 6,006 airplanes. Of this assessment provided by the commenter. that correspond to these regulations. number: The cost estimate referenced by the • commenter is stated to apply to ‘‘present Economic Evaluation, Regulatory 5,700 airplanes were operated by airplane designs.’’ It assumes that the Flexibility Determination, Trade Impact 114 air carriers under part 121 service, • 193 airplanes were operated by 7 environmental control system (ECS) Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates carriers that operated under both part packs will be located adjacent to the Assessment 121 and part 135, center wing tank, and that heat shields Changes to Federal regulations must • 22 airplanes were operated by 10 and ventilation air would be used to undergo several economic analyses. carriers under part 125 service, and remove heat from the center wing fuel First, Executive Order 12866 directs • 91 airplanes were operated by 23 tank. This approach results in added each Federal agency to propose or adopt carriers operating U.S.-registered weight and drag penalties. New designs a regulation only if the agency makes a reasoned determination that the benefits airplanes under part 129. allow the designer numerous options to At that time, the FAA did not have achieve an optimized design. Air of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility information on airplanes operating conditioning equipment can, and has under part 91 that would have been been, located away from fuel tanks. Act of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory affected by the proposal; however, the Cooling air is available from the ECS FAA had stated its belief that very few system, ground sources and outside air changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. airplanes operating under part 91 would in flight. Incorporation of these features have been affected by the proposal. in the initial design would result in section 2531–2533) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create The FAA also estimated that the little added cost over that of features proposed rule would have affected: noted in the preceding paragraph on unnecessary obstacles to the foreign • commerce of the United States. In 12 manufacturers holding 35 part many airplane designs. 25 type certificates (TC’s); The ARAC report, from which the developing U.S. standards, this Trade • Act requires agencies to consider 26 manufacturers, airlines, and commenter has gathered data for its cost repair stations holding 168 estimates, includes a discussion to international standards. Where appropriate, agencies are directed to use supplemental type certificates (STC’s) ‘‘locate significant heat sources away for part 25 fuel tank systems, of which from fuel tanks.’’ The report states that, those international standards as the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the 69 were for different modifications; ‘‘* * * quantifying the impact of this • Manufacturers of future, new part method would only be possible for Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a written 25 type certificated airplane models; specific new designs,’’ and the report and provides little data regarding the costs assessment of the costs, benefits, and • other effects of proposed or final rules. Holders of future, new part 25 for locating packs away from fuel tanks. This requirement applies only to rules STC’s for new fuel tank systems. We agree with the commenter that At that time, the FAA was unable to that include a Federal mandate on State, cooling air may be needed to meet the local, or tribal governments, likely to predict the number of new airplane TC’s requirements of this regulation and this result in a total expenditure of $100 but, based on the average of the can result in additional operating costs million or more in any one year previous 10 years, the FAA had during certain flight operations. (adjusted for inflation). anticipated that 17 new fuel tank system However, these costs are airplane model In conducting these analyses, the FAA STC’s would be granted annually. The design-specific and could not be has determined that this rule: (1) Has FAA had requested comments on these estimated without input from the benefits which justify its costs and is a estimates. industry. Nevertheless, in the absence of ‘‘significant regulatory action;’’ (2) will In order to update the aviation specific industry design and cost data, have a significant impact on a industry data, the FAA used a different we maintain that these additional substantial number of small entities; (3) database for this final rule from what it operating costs will be minimal. has minimal effects on international used for the analysis of the proposed Further, these costs will occur on trade; and (4) does not impose an rule. However, as this more current airplanes that will be manufactured unfunded mandate on state, local or database does not report the same many years in the future and, as a result, tribal governments or the private sector. information as that reported in the the present value of those operating The FAA has placed these analyses in previous database, an exact comparison costs will be even less. the docket and summarizes them as between the two databases is not possible. Consequently, using 1999 data, Paperwork Reduction Act follows. the FAA determined that the final rule There are no new requirements for Data Sources affects 6,971 airplanes, of which 6,252 information collection associated with • The principal data sources used for are turbojets and 719 are turboprops. Of this amendment that would require this analysis are: these 6,971 airplanes: approval from the Office of Management • The public comments submitted to • 6,485 (5,802 turbojets and 683 and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork the notice for this rulemaking action; turboprops) are operated by 143 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. • The World Jet Inventory at Year- scheduled and non-scheduled air 3507(d)). End 1999; carriers,
VerDate 11
• 117 are operated by 76 private would prevent between 75 percent and would be expected to occur during the operators (primarily corporations), and 90 percent of the future fuel tank 10-year time period of 2004 through • 369 are currently held by 112 explosions. The basis for this prevention 2013. Further, the FAA determined that manufacturers and brokers and leasing is derived primarily from the the probability that the first accident companies. incorporation of design changes to would occur on or before the year 2008 The FAA also determined that the enhance fail-safe features of design and is the same as the probability that it final rule affects: enhanced fuel tank system inspections would occur after 2008. • 13 manufacturers holding 37 part that will discover conditions that could Thus, based on a loss of $401 million 25 type certificates (TC’s); result in an ignition source before for a ‘‘representative’’ accident, the FAA • 46 manufacturers, airlines, and ignition of flammable fuel vapors could calculated that the present values of the repair stations holding 173 occur. The fuel tank system review, by losses from future mid-air explosions supplemental type certificates (STC’s) itself, will have little direct effect on that would occur between 2004 and for part 25 fuel tank systems, of which preventing these future accidents, 2013 are: 79 are for different fuel tank system unless it uncovers an immediately • $233.7 million for one prevented modifications; hazardous condition that results in an accident and • 325 non-fuel tank system STC AD being issued. As stated earlier, the • $400.4 million for two prevented holders that will need to evaluate their FAA has initiated 40 AD’s to address accidents STC’s to determine their impacts on fuel unsafe fuel tank system features on (The statistically expected value is tank systems; numerous airplane types within the $248.9 million for the 1.09 accidents.) • Manufacturers of future, new part current fleet. While the FAA expects For this final rule analysis, the FAA 25 type certificated airplane models; these actions will significantly improve reviewed the public comments and its and safety, an in-depth analysis of all previous analysis for the notice, and • Holders of future, new part 25 airplane models required by this rule determined that the data are insufficient STC’s for new fuel tank systems. has not been completed and it would be to permit a credible estimate of the Based on the previous 10 years, the difficult to predict the overall effect on percentage of future mid-air explosion FAA projects that there will be between the accident rate. Therefore, the cost/ accidents that the final rule would two and four new part 25 TC airplane benefit analysis assumes that the prevent. The uncertainty of the causes models during the next 10 years. Using accident rate for fuel tank explosions of the two accidents and the uncertainty the same methodology, the FAA projects will remain constant until the reviews of the effects of the 40 AD’s on that there will be three to four new fuel are complete. preventing future explosions does not tank system STC’s annually granted With the proposed 18-month allow a quantitative estimate of the during the next 10 years. compliance time, the FAA estimated the potential effectiveness of the final rule. benefits based on these inspections Benefits Thus, although the FAA believes that starting in 2001. The resulting the rule will significantly reduce the In the notice, the FAA had assumed probability analysis indicated that the risk of a future accident, the FAA does that the potential U.S. fuel tank first such accident would occur in 2006 not calculate quantified benefits explosion rate due to an unknown and the second accident (if a second one resulting from the final rule. internal fuel tank ignition was the same would occur) in 2009. On that basis, the as that rate for the worldwide fleet over estimated present value of the expected Sources of Compliance Costs for the the years 1989 through 1998. On that benefits discounted over 10 years to Proposal and the Final Rule basis, the FAA had estimated that, if no 1999 at 7 percent would have been: The costs to comply with the SFAR preventative actions were to be taken, • $260 million for one prevented derive from the engineering time to then between one and two (the accident and comprehensively review fuel tank statistically expected value was 1.25) • $520 million for two prevented system designs by the design approval fuel tank explosions would be projected accidents. holders (i.e., part 25 TC holders, part 25 to occur during the next 10 years (2000 For the final rule, the FAA revised fuel tank system STC holders, and through 2009) in U.S. operations. The these earlier estimates to include the certain part 25 non-fuel tank system FAA also determined that the effect that lengthening the compliance STC holders). There also are costs to probability that such an accident would time from 18 months to 36 months has operators that derive from the have occurred prior to 2006 was equal on the potential benefits. As a result, the engineering time to conduct the design to the probability that it would have 3-year compliance time indicates that, review for any field approvals on their occurred after 2006. with the exception noted in the airplanes and to develop any necessary In order to quantify the potential previous paragraph, the first benefits fuel tank system inspections and benefits from preventing a from improved fuel tank system maintenance recommendations for ‘‘representative’’ commercial aviation inspections will not occur until 2004. operators and repair stations. mid-air explosion, the FAA had used: The FAA also revised the earlier These reviews may also identify • A value of $2.7 million to prevent estimates to substitute more current conditions that will subsequently need a fatality, fleet and operations data into the to be addressed by specific service • An average of 130 passengers and calculations. The FAA also noted that 2 bulletins, or unsafe conditions that crew on a commercial flight, years without a mid-air explosion have would subsequently require the FAA to • A value of $20 million for a passed since the analysis of the issue AD’s. However, those future costs destroyed airplane, and proposal, which makes the years 1989 are not the costs of compliance with this • A cost of $30 million for an through 2000 (rather than 1989 through SFAR; rather, they are costs to conform investigation of a mid-air explosion 1998) the appropriate timeframe for to the service bulletin or to comply with accident. calculating the historical accident rate. the AD, and would be estimated for Thus, a total loss would be $401 On that basis, the FAA calculated that, each individual service bulletin or AD million. if no preventative actions were taken, when it is issued or proposed. In the notice, the FAA had assumed between one and two (the expected The costs to comply with the that compliance with the proposal value is 1.09) fuel tank explosions operational rule changes of this final
VerDate 11
rule derive from the requirements that certificate airplane (for example, a • The third action involves the lost operators incorporate these Model 737); whereas, an airplane net revenue from an airplane’s increased recommendations into their ‘‘series’’ is defined to refer to a version out-of-service time due to the enhanced maintenance manuals and then inspect (often under an Amended TC) of a fuel tank system inspection. and maintain the fuel tank systems model (for example, a Model 737–300). • The fourth action involves the labor accordingly. As a result, additional In the notice, the FAA had estimated time to provide the increased airplane mechanic labor time will be that 35 TC’s and 68 fuel tank system documentation, recording, and reporting needed during an airplane inspection to STC’s would have needed a fuel tank the results from the fuel tank system perform an enhanced inspection of the system design review. Depending upon inspections and tests. fuel tank system and components. the airplane model, the FAA had The FAA had assumed that each However, the costs to repair and replace estimated that a fuel tank system design operator has one maintenance manual equipment and wiring that the review would have taken between 0.5 to for each airplane model in its fleet. The inspection identifies as needing repair 2.0 engineer years for a TC holder, and FAA then determined that there were or replacement is not a cost of an average of 0.25 engineer year for a 290 individual airplane model/operator compliance with the operational rules fuel tank system STC holder. The FAA combinations. The FAA estimated that changes. Although these costs can be had also estimated that developing it would have taken 5 engineer days (at substantial, they are attributable to manual revisions and service bulletins a cost of $4,000 per manual) to existing FAA regulations that require would have taken between 0.25 to 1.0 incorporate these recommendations into such repairs and replacements to be engineer years for a TC holder, and an the various maintenance manuals. On made in order to assure the airplane’s average of 0.1 engineer year for a fuel that basis, the FAA had calculated that continued airworthiness. tank system STC holder. this total cost would have been $1.16 Finally, the part 25 revisions of this Using a total engineer compensation million. As these expenses would have final rule may require some future TC rate (salary and fringe benefits, plus a occurred in the second year, the present and STC’s to employ designs of fuel mark-up for hours spent by value of these costs was $1.084 million. tank systems and other aviation systems management, legal, etc. on the review) With respect to the costs of fuel tank that would not have been used were it of $100 an hour, the FAA had estimated system inspections, the FAA had not for these revised certification that the one-time fuel tank system estimated that it would have taken requirements. design review would have cost TC between 60 and 330 additional labor holders $9.5 million, and it would have hours per airplane to complete the Estimated Total Compliance Costs for cost STC holders $4.9 million. initial fuel tank system inspection, and the Proposal it would have taken between 30 and 180 Proposed Costs of Fuel Tank System additional labor hours per airplane for As seen in Table 1, the FAA had Inspections—Operational Rule Changes estimated in the notice that the present later fuel tank system reinspections. All value in 1999 of the compliance costs The costs to operators of complying of the initial inspections would have with the proposal during the time with the proposed operational been completed during the first 3 years period 2000–2011 would have been requirements would have been the after the maintenance manual changes about $170 million ($9.5 million for TC additional airplane mechanic labor had been approved by the FAA (i.e., holders, $4.9 million for STC holders, hours and the lost net revenue from the during the years 2002 through 2004). and $153 million for operators). The airplane’s additional time out-of-service Each airplane would have been following sections briefly summarize in order to complete the fuel tank reinspected every 3 years after the the discussions in the notice about these system inspections and maintenance. initial fuel tank system inspection. various cost estimates. The FAA had assumed that the design Using a total compensation rate (wages approval holders’ recommendations and fringe benefits, plus a mark-up for TABLE 1.—PRESENT VALUE IN 1999 would have required fuel tank systems time spent by supervisors, management, etc. on the inspections) of $70 an hour OF THE COSTS OF COMPLIANCE to be inspected only during the regularly scheduled major maintenance for airplane mechanics, the FAA had WITH THE PROPOSED RULE checks. As a result, the FAA had estimated that the initial fuel tank [As estimated in the preliminary regulatory expected that no airplanes would have system inspection would have cost evaluation] been taken out of service solely to between $4,200 and $23,100 per airplane and fuel tank system Present value inspect the fuel tank system unless the in 1999 of the fuel tank system review would have reinspections would have cost between $2,100 and $12,600 per airplane. The Source of cost compliance identified an immediate safety concern. costs In that case, the corrective action would present value of the total fuel tank (in 1998 system inspection costs, discounted at 7 $ millions) have been mandated by an AD. On that basis, the FAA had percent over the period 2002 through Fuel Tank Review (Total) ..... 14.4 determined that operators would have 2011, would have been $99 million. [For TC Holders: 9.5] needed to take four actions to comply In the notice, the FAA had assumed [For STC Holders: 4.9] with the proposal that would have that the initial fuel tank system Maintenance and Inspection 100.0 either required an expenditure of inspection would have been performed Lost Net Revenue ...... 35.6 resources or lost revenue: during a ‘‘C’’ or a ‘‘D’’ check. On that Additional Recordkeeping ..... 17.4 • The first action involves the labor basis, the FAA had estimated that the time to incorporate the design approval additional out-of-service time would Total ...... 167.4 holders’ recommendations into the have been between 36 hours and 96 maintenance manuals. hours per airplane for each airplane Proposed Costs of Fuel Tank System • The second action involves the inspected during a ‘‘C’’ check, and Design Review labor time to perform the enhanced fuel would have been zero hours for each By way of explanation, for the tank system inspections, which includes airplane inspected during a ‘‘D’’ check. purpose of this analysis, an airplane testing of fuel tank system equipment Similarly, the FAA had estimated that ‘‘model’’ is defined to refer to a type and wiring. the additional out-of-service time would
VerDate 11
have been between 24 hours and 72 discounted at 7 percent over 10 years, determined that the part 25 changes hours for each airplane fuel tank system would have been $35.6 million. would have a minimal impact on future reinspection that would have occurred The FAA had determined that the fuel tank system STC’s because current during a ‘‘C’’ check, and would have increased annual documentation and industry design practices could be been zero hours if the reinspection reporting time would have been 1 hour adapted to allow compliance with the would have occurred during a ‘‘D’’ of recordkeeping for every 8 hours of requirement. check. labor time for the initial fuel tank Differences in Assumptions and Values The economic cost of out-of-service system inspection, and would have been Between the Notice and the Final Rule time is the lost net revenue to the 1 hour of recordkeeping for every 10 aviation system. Most of the passengers hours of labor time for the The most significant difference who would have flown on an airplane reinspections. Thus, the per airplane between the proposal and the final rule that has been taken out of service will documentation cost would have been is that the proposal allowed only 12 take another flight. As a result, most of between $450 and $2,550 for the initial months for design approval holders to the lost revenue for that out-of-service fuel tank system inspection and $300 to complete their fuel tank system reviews airplane is actually captured by other $1,620 for a fuel tank system and recommendations. The proposal airplane flights. The cost of the rule is reinspection. The present value of the also allowed operators only 6 months to the loss to the aviation system—not to total recordkeeping cost discounted at 7 incorporate these recommendations into the individual airplane operator. On percent for 10 years would have been their maintenance manuals. The final that basis, the FAA computed the lost $17.4 million. rule allows design approval holders 18 revenue to the aviation system by using months to be in compliance and also Proposed Costs of Future Fuel Tank the Office of Management and Budget allows operators 18 months after that to System Design Changes—Revised Part (OMB) determination that the average incorporate the recommendations into 25 annual risk-free productive rate of their maintenance manuals. return on capital is 7 percent of the The FAA had determined that the part Table 2 lists the most significant average value of the airplane model. 25 changes would have a minimal effect differences in the assumptions made, Thus, the FAA had calculated that the on the cost of future type certificated data used, and the different out-of-service lost aviation net revenue airplanes because compliance with the requirements between the proposal and per fuel tank system inspection would proposed changes would be done during the final rule. Although there are other have ranged from $50 to $9,750 per the design phase of the airplane model differences that have altered the airplane per day. The present value of before any new airplanes would be calculated costs, the differences listed in this total lost aviation net revenue, manufactured. In addition, the FAA had Table 2 are the significant ones.
TABLE 2.—SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES IN ASSUMPTIONS AND VALUES BETWEEN THE PRELIMINARY REGULATORY EVALUATION AND THE FINAL REGULATORY EVALUATION
Assumption or value Preliminary regulatory analysis Final regulatory analysis
Number of Airplanes ...... 6,006 (in 1996) ...... 6,971 (in 1999). Timeframe for Analysis ...... 2000–2011 ...... 2001–2013 Net Rate of Fleet Growth ...... 4.3 percent ...... 3.0 percent. Hourly Compensation per: Engineer; Mechanic $100; $70 ...... $110; $75. Number of Fuel Tank System TC Reviews ...... 35 ...... 98 (46 ‘‘full-scale’’ and 52 ‘‘derivative’’). Number of Engineering Years for TC Review ... 0.5 to 2 ...... 0.5 to 3. Number of Fuel Tank System STC Reviews .... 68 ...... 74 Number of Engineering Years for Fuel Tank 0.35 ...... 0.15 System STC Review. Number of Non-Fuel tank system STC Reviews None (Asked for Comments) ...... 325 Number of Engineering Years for Non-Fuel None (Asked for Comments) ...... 0.0375 tank system STC Review. Operator Paper Review of Airplane Fuel Tank None ...... 1 engineer day per existing airplane. System-Field Approvals/STC’s. Number Months to Compete Safety Review 12 ...... 18 Fuel Tanks. Number Months to Revise Maintenance Manual 6 ...... 18 (After Review). Number Years to Complete Initial Inspection 3 years (Completed between 2002 and 2004) 2 years (Completed during 2004 and 2005). (After Manual Revision). Determinants of Number Inspection Hours ...... Airplane Model ...... Airplane Model plus Year Manufactured. Time before Initial Inspections Begin ...... 18 months ...... 36 months. Number Years to Complete Initial Inspection .... 3 years ...... 2 years. Number Labor Hours for Initial Inspection ...... 50 to 198 ...... 49 to 218. Number Days Out-of-Service for Initial Inspec- 0 to 4 (40 percent inspections done at ‘‘C’’ 0 to 4 (60 percent of inspections done at ‘‘C’’ tion. checks). checks). Year Reinspections Start ...... 2004 (immediately after initial inspections) ...... 2008 (2 years after initial inspections). Reinspection Frequency...... Every 3 years (Some done during ‘‘C’’ Every 5 years (All done during ‘‘D’’ checks). checks). Number Hours for Reinspection ...... 40 to 160 ...... 25 to 87. Reduced Inspection Hours Due to AD’s Already All Model 747 hours not included; 50 hours for No adjustment. Issued. Mode 737’s not included. Number Days Out-of-Service for Reinspection 0 to 3 (40 percent of reinspections done at 0 (All reinspections done at ‘‘D’’ checks). ‘‘C’’ checks).
VerDate 11
Cost of Compliance With the Final Rule the ‘‘full-scale’’ fuel tank system design first year (2002) and one-half will occur review: in the second year (2003), while all of As seen in Table 3, based on the • public comments and the changes in 3 years for large turbojets (1969– the time to develop recommendations assumptions and values listed in Table 1980), will occur in the second year (2003). On • 2 years for large turbojets (1980– 2, the FAA has determined that the that basis, the present value of the total 1988), present value of the costs of compliance one-time cost of compliance will be $2.5 • 1 year for large turbojets (post- with the rule over the time period million. 1988), 2001—2013 are $165.1 million. This • Certain part 25 non-fuel tank system 0.5 to 0.75 year for regional jets, STC holders will also need to complete figure includes: • 0.5 to 0.75 year for large turboprops, • $27.1 million for TC holders, more than a cursory review of their • and modifications for the potential impact $2.8 million for fuel tank system • 0.5 year for small turbojets and on the fuel tank system. The FAA STC holders, turboprops. • determined that there are 325 non-fuel $2.6 million for non-fuel tank With respect to the ‘‘derivative’’ fuel tank system STC’s that will need to system STC holders, and tank system design reviews, the FAA • $132.5 million for operators. undergo a review. The FAA also determined that these will take between The following sections summarize the determined that this review will take 0.5 year and one year for large turbojets, results in the Final Regulatory one quarter of the engineer time to and 0.5 year for regional turbojets and Evaluation. complete a fuel tank system STC review for turboprops. The FAA determined that the amount (or 0.375 engineer year). On that basis, TABLE 3.—PRESENT VALUE OF THE of engineering time to develop the the FAA determined that the average COSTS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE recommendations for the maintenance cost for a non-fuel tank system STC FINAL RULE manuals will be 20 percent of the review will be $8,250. amount of time to complete the fuel As the non-fuel tank system STC Present value tank system review. holder will have 18 months to comply in 2001 of the with the final rule, the FAA determined compliance Using a total engineer compensation Source of cost costs rate of $110 an hour, the FAA calculated that one-half of the review costs will (in 2000 that the one-time fuel tank system occur in the first year (2002) and one- $ millions) design review will cost between half will occur in the second year $200,000 and $1.525 million per (2003), while all of the time to develop Part 25 Fuel Tank Design .... 0.315 recommendations will occur in the (For TC Airplanes: Mini- airplane model, with most of the mal). individual costs in the range of second year (2003). On that basis, the (For Fuel Tank STC Hold- $500,000 to $800,000. These costs will present value of the total one-time cost ers: 0.315). be about $125,000 to $150,000 for of compliance will be $2.6 million. Fuel Tank Review (Total) ..... 38.157 turboprops. Finally, based on the comments, the (For TC Holders: 27.107). As the TC holder will have 18 months FAA determined that each operator will (For Fuel Tank STC Hold- to comply with the final rule, the FAA perform a paper review of each airplane ers: 2.522). to determine the modifications (For Non-Fuel-Tank STC determined that one-half of the review Holders: 2.594). costs will occur in the first year (2002) (including field approvals) that have (For Operators: 5.934). and one-half will occur in the second been made on the airplane. Although Maintenance and Inspection 92.043 year (2003), and all of the costs to the vast majority of these airplanes have Lost Net Revenue ...... 24.224 develop recommendations will occur in been purchased by major, national, and Additional Recordkeeping ..... 10.338 the second year (2003). On that basis, regional airlines that should possess the present value of the total one-time well-documented maintenance history Total ...... 165.077 cost of compliance to TC holders will be records, a significant minority of these $27.1 million, of which $22.7 million airplanes have had multiple owners or Costs of Fuel Tank System Design will be for the fuel tank system review lessors and the maintenance records Review and $4.390 million will be to develop may not be quite as complete. Thus, the In the Final Regulatory Evaluation, recommendations for the maintenance FAA determined that, on average, this the FAA has determined that existing manuals. paper review will take one day per TC holders will need to complete 46 For part 25 fuel tank system STC airplane. On that basis, the average cost ‘‘full-scale’’ fuel tank system reviews for holders, the FAA determined that there per airplane will be $880. the individual airplane models, and 52 are 74 fuel tank system STC’s that will In order to meet the 36-month ‘‘derivative’’ fuel tank system reviews need to undergo a review. The FAA also compliance date, operators will need to for the separate series in the models. determined that it will take an average discover if their airplanes have any Using the Model 737–300/400/500 of 0.15 engineering year to complete the ‘‘orphan’’ STC’s or if there are any field family of airplanes as an illustration, the review because the STC holder had to approvals that affect the fuel tank FAA determined that Boeing will need complete a substantial amount of system. Completing these paper reviews to complete one ‘‘full-scale’’ review and engineering work to obtain FAA will then give the operators 18 months, two ‘‘derivative’’ reviews for this family approval of the STC, and many of the after the TC and STC holders complete of airplanes. In addition, each airplane STC’s affect only a part of the fuel tank their required reviews, to complete any series that has an extended range system. On that basis, the FAA additional fuel tank system engineering modification or a freighter modification determined that the average cost for a reviews and to make the resultant will require a ‘‘derivative’’ fuel tank fuel tank system STC review will be changes to their maintenance manuals. system review. $33,000. Therefore, the FAA determined that Depending upon the airplane model As the fuel tank system STC holder one-half of the review costs will occur and the date it was first manufactured, will have 18 months to comply with the in the first year (2002) and one-half will the FAA determined the following final rule, the FAA determined that one- occur in the second year (2003). On that average numbers of engineer years for half of the review costs will occur in the basis, the present value of the total one-
VerDate 11
time cost of compliance will be $5.9 model/operator combinations, which based on the date the airplane was million. produces a cost of $726,400. As these manufactured. There is also the potential that this manual changes will not be made until • For the 1960–1980 group, the ‘‘paper review’’ will reveal a field the year 2003, the present value of these number of labor hours estimated in the approval or an ‘‘orphan’’ STC that compliance costs is $635,000. notice plus 20 hours was used. affects the safety of the fuel tank system. The FAA also determined that 15 • Airplanes manufactured between In that case, the operator would be repair stations will perform these fuel 1981 and 1995 require 20 percent fewer responsible for the engineering review tank system inspections for the smaller labor hours than those for the 1960– and for developing inspection and operators and, on average, each repair 1980 group. maintenance procedures for the station will perform these inspections • Airplanes manufactured between maintenance manual. The FAA did not for 10 different airplane models. The 1995 and 2003 will require 30 percent receive any data on this factor, but compliance costs for these repair fewer labor hours than those for the maintains that it is likely to infrequently stations will be $660,000, which will be 1960–1980 group. occur and, further, the amount of passed on to the operators. However, as The third adjustment is that the engineering needed would be relatively these manual changes will not be made number of labor hours to reinspect fuel minor. until the year 2003, the present value of tank systems will be one-half of the these compliance costs is $576,475. number of labor hours needed for the Costs of Fuel Tank System The FAA determined that it will take, initial fuel tank system inspection, Inspections—Operational Rule Changes on average, one engineer day (or $880) based on the last year that the airplane As was true for the analysis in the for each maintenance manual to model was manufactured. notice, the costs to operators of incorporate the recommendations from The fourth adjustment is that the complying with the final rule’s a fuel tank system STC holder. The FAA number of labor hours for the first operational requirements do not include also determined that each of the 79 fuel inspection of a future manufactured the costs of corrective actions tank system STC’s will produce airplane’s fuel tank system will be the undertaken to repair deficiencies in the inspection and maintenance same as for later reinspections, and is fuel tank system that were found recommendations that will affect, on the same number as that to reinspect the because of a fuel tank system average, two maintenance manuals. On newest airplane category. inspection, because the airplanes are that basis, the compliance costs will be Using those adjustments and the required to be maintained as airworthy. $139,000. However, as these manual changes listed in Table 2, the FAA On that basis, the FAA determined changes will not be made until the year determined that it will take between 49 that operators will take four actions that 2003, the present value of these and 218 labor hours to complete an will generate costs or lost revenue to compliance costs is $121,450. initial fuel tank system inspection, and comply with the final rule. The FAA anticipates that it will take between 25 and 108 labor • The first action involves the labor implementation of the final rule will hours to complete a fuel tank system time to incorporate the design approval result in the initial fuel tank system reinspection. Using a total holders’ recommendations into the inspection to be performed at the first compensation rate (wages plus fringe maintenance manuals. major maintenance check after the benefits) of $75 an hour for airplane • The second action involves the maintenance manual modifications have mechanics, the FAA estimated that the labor time to perform the enhanced fuel been approved by the FAA. As the FAA initial fuel tank system inspection will tank system inspections, which includes defines a ‘‘C’’ check (or its equivalents) cost between $3,625 and $16,350 per testing of fuel tank system equipment as a major maintenance check, the FAA airplane, and fuel tank system and wiring. determined that all of the affected reinspections will cost between $1,875 • The third action involves the lost airplanes will receive an initial fuel tank and $8,100 per airplane. The present net revenue from an airplane’s increased system inspection by 2 years after the value of the total labor cost discounted out-of-service time due to the enhanced maintenance manuals have been at 7 percent for the period 2004 through fuel tank system inspection. modified. Thus, the FAA determined 2013 is $92.043 million. • The fourth action involves the labor that all of the initial fuel tank system As stated earlier, the FAA had time to provide the increased inspections will be performed in either determined that the initial fuel tank documentation, recording, and reporting 2004 or 2005. system inspection will be performed the results from the fuel tank system The FAA made four adjustments to during a ‘‘C’’ or a ‘‘D’’ check. The inspections and tests. the number of airplane mechanic hours duration and process of major In calculating the compliance costs for an initial fuel tank system inspection inspections varies by airline and for maintenance manual revisions due as estimated in the notice: airplane type. Some airlines choose to to TC holder recommendations, the The first adjustment is that the FAA conduct these checks during one time FAA revised its assumption made in the added 20 labor hours across the board block of typically 7 to 10 days for a ‘‘C’’ notice that each operator has one in order to account for any check and 20 to 25 days for a ‘‘D’’ check. maintenance manual for each model in unanticipated inspection Other airlines conduct segmented its fleet. However, the FAA determined recommendations from the product checks where the airplane is taken out that its assumption of 5 days of engineer approval holders. of service for several shorter time time to modify a maintenance manual is The second adjustment is that the intervals that allow the overall task to be valid. Since the issuance of the notice, FAA varied the number of labor hours completed. The FAA has determined the FAA has been informed that nearly not only by certification date but also by that an airplane undergoing a segmented all airlines with fewer than 20 airplanes manufactured date of the airplane. ‘‘C’’ check is, on average, out-of-service contract their major maintenance checks Older airplanes of an airplane model for two days, whereas a segmented ‘‘D’’ to third party (or other operators’) repair will require, on average, more labor check takes an airplane out of service stations. The FAA determined that 49 hours to complete an initial fuel tank for 14 to 21 days. The FAA determined airlines (each with 20 or more airplanes) system inspection than will newer that two mechanics can simultaneously perform their own maintenance. For airplanes. As a result, the FAA work on a fuel tank system inspection. those 49 airlines, there are 165 airplane separated airplanes into 3 categories On that basis, the FAA determined that
VerDate 11
no additional out-of-service days will industry design practices could be specifically requested public comment occur for 1 to 48 additional labor hours. adapted to allow compliance with the on the potential impact of the proposed Each additional 48 labor hours after the requirement. rule on small entities. first 48 labor hours will add one day to Benefit-Cost Comparison Need for and Objectives of the Rule the out-of-service time. On that basis, the initial fuel tank system inspection As noted, the FAA has not quantified The final rule is being issued in order will produce between 0 and 4 additional the potential benefits from this final rule to reduce the risk of a mid-air airplane out-of-service days. because there is uncertainty about the fuel tank explosion with the resultant The economic cost of out-of-service actual ignition sources in the two fuel loss of life (as evidenced by TWA Flight time is the lost services from a capital tanks. However, using a 800). Existing fuel tank system asset, which is computed by ‘‘representative’’ commercial airplane, inspections have not provided multiplying the airplane value by the the FAA calculated that the losses from comprehensive, systematic prevention number of days out of service and by 7 a mid-air explosion would be $401.6 and control of ignition sources in percent (the OMB risk-free rate of million. In addition, the FAA airplane fuel tanks, thereby allowing a return). The average residual value of determined that the present value of the small, but unacceptable risk of a fuel the turbojet models is based on the compliance costs is $165.1 million. tank explosion. AVITAS 2nd Half 1999 Jet Aircraft If the final rule would prevent one The objective of the final rule is to Values, and the average value of the such accident by the year 2014, the ensure the continuing airworthiness of turboprop models is based on the present value of the prevented losses airplanes certificated for 30 or more AVITAS 2nd Half 1997 Turboprop would be greater than the present value passengers or with a payload of more Aircraft Values. Thus, the FAA of the compliance costs. than 7,500 pounds. Design approval calculated that the out-of-service lost Therefore, based on these factors and holders (including TC holders, fuel tank capital services from the initial fuel tank analysis, the FAA considers the final system STC holders, and holders of system inspection will be between $200 rule to be cost-beneficial. certain non-fuel tank system STC’s) will be required to complete a fuel tank and $86,000 per airplane per day. Regulatory Flexibility Act As noted earlier, the FAA determined system design review and to provide that one-half of the airplanes will The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 recommendations and instructions to undergo an initial fuel tank system (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of operators and repair stations concerning inspection in 2004 and one-half will regulatory issuance that agencies shall fuel tank system inspections and undergo an initial fuel tank system endeavor, consistent with the objective equipment and wiring testing. This inspection in 2005. However, 20 percent of the rule and of applicable statutes, to review may result in the development of of these airplanes each year will receive fit regulatory and informational service bulletins and AD’s. All operators this inspection during a ‘‘D’’ check, in requirements to the scale of the covered by Title 14, Code of Federal which there are no additional out-of- business, organizations, and Regulations (CFR) parts 91, 121, and service days due to the fuel tank system governmental jurisdictions subject to 125, and all U.S.-registered airplanes inspection. As a result, the FAA regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, used in scheduled operations under part calculated that the present value of the the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 129, will be required to incorporate total lost net revenue from the consider flexible regulatory proposals these recommendations into their additional out-of-service days is $24.224 and to explain the rationale for their maintenance manuals and to perform million. actions. The RFA covers a wide range of the inspections and tests as required. In For the final rule, the FAA small entities, including small addition, repair stations that are determined that its original estimate businesses, not-for-profit organizations, contracted to perform maintenance are that every 8 hours of airplane mechanic and small governmental jurisdictions. also required to comply with these labor for the initial fuel tank system Agencies must perform a review to requirements. inspection will produce one hour of determine whether a proposed or final documentation and recordkeeping labor rule will have a significant economic Summary of Comments Made in hours is valid. However, the FAA impact on a substantial number of small Response to the Initial Regulatory determined that it had overestimated entities. If the determination finds that Flexibility Analysis the amount of recordkeeping for it will, the agency must prepare a There were two commenters that reinspections, and used the ratio of 12 Regulatory Flexibility Analysis as indirectly discussed issues of concern in hours of reinspection airplane mechanic described in the RFA. the Initial Regulatory Flexibility labor time for 1 hour of documentation However, if an agency determines that Analysis: and recordkeeping. On that basis, the a proposed or final rule is not expected The General Aviation Manufacturing present value of the recordkeeping cost to have a significant economic impact Association (GAMA) supported the is $10.338 million. on a substantial number of small FAA’s decision to exclude airplanes entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act certificated for 30 passengers or fewer Costs of Future Fuel Tank System provides that the head of the agency from the final rule. Although they did Design Changes—Revised Part 25 may so certify, and a Regulatory not address the small business aspect of The FAA had determined that the part Flexibility Analysis is not required. The this decision, nearly every operator of 25 change will have a minimal effect on certification must include a statement these excluded airplanes is a small the cost of future type certificated providing the factual basis for this entity. However, GAMA opposed the airplanes because compliance with the determination, and the reasoning should proposed part 25 future design proposed change would be done during be clear. requirements as not appropriate for the design phase of the airplane model For the proposed rule, the FAA had business jets and stated that these before any new airplanes would be conducted an Initial Regulatory airplanes should be excluded from the manufactured. In addition, the FAA Flexibility Analysis, which established part 25 requirements. The FAA determined that the part 25 changes will that it would have a significant impact disagreed with this comment because a have a minimal impact on future fuel on a substantial number of small future business jet that has a 7,500 tank system STC’s because current entities. As a result, the FAA had pound payload is a large airplane and
VerDate 11
its fuel tank system faces the same Reporting and Recordkeeping addressed the IRFA, the FAA addresses potential for explosion as other large Requirements comments related to small entities. transport category airplanes. The final rule requires that operators As published in the notice, the FAA The Regional Airline Association maintain a record of the results of the did not require fuel tank inspections for (RAA) supported the FAA’s decision to fuel tank system inspections and aircraft with a payload under 7,500 exclude airplanes certificated for 30 maintenance done on the airplane. For pounds. The primary difference passengers or fewer from the final rule. the small operators that contract their between the proposed rule and the final They, too, did not directly address the maintenance to third party repair rule is that the FAA extended operator compliance time from 18 to 36 months. small business aspect of this decision. stations (nearly all of the small airlines In addition, the FAA determined that However, they opposed the FAA’s and other operators), they will be fewer fuel tank reinspections will be decision to include airplanes required to keep a copy of the report needed than originally estimated in the certificated for fewer than 60 passengers that the repair station will give them. NPRM. or for less than a 15,000 pound payload. Small entities will not need to acquire As a result of these changes, about Their primary argument in favor of this additional professional skills to prepare these reports. 140 airplanes that would have been exclusion is that these airplanes do not required to undergo a fuel tank have a history of these types of Description of the Alternatives inspection under the proposed rule will accidents. The FAA disagreed with this Evaluated not be required to undergo a fuel tank comment because, by itself, the accident In the Initial Regulatory Flexibility inspection under the final rule because histories of specific types and classes of Analysis, the FAA had evaluated three they will have been retired during the airplanes are insufficient to demonstrate alternatives to the proposed rule: additional 18 months allowed for that their fuel tank systems attain the • The first alternative was to require compliance. In addition, all of the required level of safety. An important all airplanes with 10 or more seats be inspections and reinspections would consideration in these accident histories covered by the proposed rule. have had to be completed 18 months is that these airplanes have not • The second alternative was to earlier under the proposed rule than accumulated the number of flight hours require all airplanes with 30 or more under the final rule, resulting in a as those of the larger transport category seats and all airplanes with 10 or more higher present value of the compliance airplanes. As fuel tank explosions are seats in commercial service be covered costs. Consequently, recalculating (due rare events, there is the possibility that by the proposal. to the greater number of airplanes and such an accident has not occurred in • The third alternative was to require other values) the present value of the these airplanes because not enough only turbojet airplanes in commercial costs to operators to comply with the hours have been flown. In addition, it service be covered by the proposal. proposed rule would result in a cost of may be that the fuel tank system design There were no comments from the $172.2 million, which is approximately review will reveal that these systems do public in support of these alternatives. 36 percent more than the $126.6 million not have the same risk as the risk A complete discussion of these costs to operators to comply with the associated with larger transport category alternatives is available in the public final rule. airplanes. In that case, the impact of the docket for this rulemaking. Trade Impact Assessment rule on operators of these airplanes will Differences Between the Proposed Rule be much less than estimated by the The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 and the Final Rule Requirements FAA. However, until the fuel tank prohibits Federal agencies from system design review is completed, the The primary change from the engaging in any standards or related FAA does not know what the potential proposed rule is that the final rule activities that create unnecessary is for these airplanes to have a mid-air allows operators 36 months to comply obstacles to the foreign commerce of the explosion and, as the FAA cannot rule whereas the proposed rule had required United States. Legitimate domestic out the possibility, the FAA cannot compliance within 18 months. In objectives, such as safety, are not exclude these airplanes from coverage addition, the FAA determined that considered unnecessary obstacles. The under the final rule. fewer fuel tank reinspections will be statute also requires consideration of needed than the FAA had estimated in international standards and, where Description and Estimate of the Number the Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation. appropriate, that they be the basis for of Small Entities Affected by the Final As a result, the present value of the U.S. standards. In addition, consistent Rule costs to operators will be approximately with the Administration’s belief in the 20 percent less per airplane under the general superiority and desirability of The FAA determined that there are a final rule than they would have been free trade, it is the policy of the total of 143 U.S. airlines, 76 private under the proposed rule. Administration to remove or diminish operators (primarily corporations with to the extent feasible, barriers to corporate jets), and 112 manufacturers, Conclusion international trade, including both airplane brokers, and airplane leasing Both the proposed and final rule will barriers affecting the export of American companies affected by the final rule. Of have a significant impact on a goods and services to foreign countries, the 143 U.S. airlines, 107 are small substantial number of small entities. and barriers affecting the import of airlines. Nearly all of the 76 private Consistent with SBA guidance, the FAA foreign goods and services into the operators are large corporations that can conducted an initial regulatory United States. afford to operate and maintain a flexibility analysis (IRFA) and a final In accordance with the above statute corporate jet airplane. Most of the regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA). and policy, the FAA assessed the airplane brokers and airplane leasing The initial regulatory flexibility analysis potential effect of this final rule and companies are privately held provided a detailed analysis of the determined that it will have only a corporations or partnerships, and the impact on small entities. The FRFA domestic impact and, therefore, a FAA was unable to establish whether or directly addresses five requirements. minimal effect on any trade-sensitive not most of them are small entities. While no comments specifically activity.
VerDate 11
Unfunded Mandates Assessment extent to which Alaska is not served by payload capacity of 7,500 pounds or more. transportation modes other than This SFAR also applies to applicants for type The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act certificates, amendments to a type certificate, of 1995 (the Act), enacted as Pub. L. aviation, and to establish such regulatory distinctions as she considers and supplemental type certificates affecting 104–4 on March 22, 1995, is intended, the fuel tank systems for those airplanes among other things, to curb the practice appropriate. The FAA, therefore, identified above, if the application was filed of imposing unfunded Federal mandates specifically requested comments on before June 6, 2001, the effective date of this on State, local, and tribal governments. whether there is justification for SFAR, and the certificate was not issued Title II of the Act requires each applying the proposed rule differently before June 6, 2001. Federal agency to prepare a written to intrastate operations in Alaska. 2. Compliance: No later than December 6, statement assessing the effects of any Although one commenter expressed a 2002, or within 18 months after the issuance Federal mandate in a proposed or final concern related to a particular Alaskan of a certificate for which application was intrastate operation involving Lockheed filed before June 6, 2001, whichever is later, agency rule that may result in a $100 each type certificate holder, or supplemental million or more expenditure (adjusted Model L–188 Electra airplanes, no type certificate holder of a modification annually for inflation) in any one year comments were received concerning affecting the airplane fuel tank system, must by State, local, and tribal governments, such justification in general. Since no accomplish the following: in the aggregate, or by the private sector; comments in that regard were received, (a) Conduct a safety review of the airplane such a mandate is deemed to be a and since the FAA is not aware of any fuel tank system to determine that the design ‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ justification for such regulatory meets the requirements of §§ 25.901 and As seen in Table IV–13 in the Final distinction, the final rule is not applied 25.981(a) and (b) of this chapter. If the Regulatory Evaluation (contained in the differently to intrastate operations in current design does not meet these requirements, develop all design changes to docket to this rule), this final rule does Alaska. the fuel tank system that are necessary to not contain such a mandate. Therefore, List of Subjects meet these requirements. The FAA (Aircraft the requirements of Title II of the Certification Office (ACO), or office of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 14 CFR Parts 21, 25, 91, and 125 Transport Airplane Directorate, having do not apply. Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting cognizance over the type certificate for the affected airplane) may grant an extension of Executive Order 3132, Federalism and recordkeeping requirements. the 18-month compliance time for The FAA has analyzed this final rule 14 CFR Part 121 development of design changes if: under the principles and criteria of (1) The safety review is completed within Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We the compliance time; Reporting and recordkeeping (2) Necessary design changes are identified determined that this action will not requirements, Safety, Transportation. within the compliance time; and have a substantial direct effect on the (3) Additional time can be justified, based States, or the relationship between the 14 CFR Part 129 on the holder’s demonstrated aggressiveness national Government and the States, or Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, in performing the safety review, the on the distribution of power and Reporting and recordkeeping complexity of the necessary design changes, the availability of interim actions to provide responsibilities among the various requirements. levels of government. Therefore, we an acceptable level of safety, and the determined that this final rule does not The Amendment resulting level of safety. (b) Develop all maintenance and inspection have federalism implications. In consideration of the foregoing, the instructions necessary to maintain the design Environmental Analysis Federal Aviation Administration features required to preclude the existence or development of an ignition source within the FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA amends parts 21, 25, 91, 121, 125, and 129 of Title 14, Code of Federal fuel tank system of the airplane. actions that may be categorically (c) Submit a report for approval to the FAA excluded from preparation of a National Regulations, as follows: Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), or office Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) PART 21—CERTIFICATION of the Transport Airplane Directorate, having environmental impact statement. In cognizance over the type certificate for the PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND affected airplane, that: accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D, PARTS appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this (1) Provides substantiation that the airplane fuel tank system design, including rulemaking action qualifies for a 1. The authority citation for Part 21 all necessary design changes, meets the categorical exclusion. continues to read as follows: requirements of §§ 25.901 and 25.981(a) and Energy Impact Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 40105; 40113; (b) of this chapter; and 44701–44702, 44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, (2) Contains all maintenance and The energy impact of this final rule 44715, 45303. inspection instructions necessary to maintain has been assessed in accordance with the design features required to preclude the 2. In part 21, add SFAR No. 88 in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act existence or development of an ignition numerical order at the beginning of the (EPCA) Public Law 94–163, as amended source within the fuel tank system part to read as follows: (42 U.S.C. 6362) and FAA Order 1053.1. throughout the operational life of the It has been determined that the final * * * * * airplane. rule is not a major regulatory action SFAR No. 88—Fuel Tank System Fault PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS under the provisions of the EPCA. Tolerance Evaluation Requirements STANDARDS: TRANSPORT Regulations Affecting Intrastate 1. Applicability. This SFAR applies to the CATEGORY AIRPLANES Aviation in Alaska holders of type certificates, and supplemental 3. The authority citation for part 25 Section 1205 of the FAA type certificates that may affect the airplane fuel tank system, for turbine-powered continues to read: Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat. transport category airplanes, provided the 3213) requires the Administrator, when Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– type certificate was issued after January 1, 44702, and 44704. modifying regulations in Title 14 of the 1958, and the airplane has either a maximum CFR in a manner affecting intrastate type certificated passenger capacity of 30 or 4. Section 25.981 is revised to read as aviation in Alaska, to consider the more, or a maximum type certificated follows:
VerDate 11
§ 25.981 Fuel tank ignition prevention. H25.4 Airworthiness Limitations section. or office of the Transport Airplane (a) No ignition source may be present (a) The Instructions for Continued Directorate, having cognizance over the at each point in the fuel tank or fuel Airworthiness must contain a section titled type certificate for the affected airplane. tank system where catastrophic failure Airworthiness Limitations that is segregated Operators must submit their request and clearly distinguishable from the rest of could occur due to ignition of fuel or the document. This section must set forth— through the cognizant Flight Standards vapors. This must be shown by: (1) Each mandatory replacement time, District Office, who may add comments (1) Determining the highest structural inspection interval, and related and then send it to the manager of the temperature allowing a safe margin structural inspection procedures approved appropriate office. Thereafter, the below the lowest expected autoignition under § 25.571; and approved instructions can be revised temperature of the fuel in the fuel tanks. (2) Each mandatory replacement time, only with the approval of the FAA (2) Demonstrating that no temperature inspection interval, related inspection Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), or at each place inside each fuel tank procedure, and all critical design office of the Transport Airplane where fuel ignition is possible will configuration control limitations approved Directorate, having cognizance over the exceed the temperature determined under § 25.981 for the fuel tank system. (b) If the Instructions for Continued type certificate for the affected airplane. under paragraph (a)(1) of this section. Operators must submit their request for This must be verified under all probable Airworthiness consist of multiple documents, the section required by this revisions through the cognizant Flight operating, failure, and malfunction paragraph must be included in the principal Standards District Office, who may add conditions of each component whose manual. This section must contain a legible comments and then send it to the operation, failure, or malfunction could statement in a prominent location that reads: manager of the appropriate office. increase the temperature inside the ‘‘The Airworthiness Limitations section is tank. FAA-approved and specifies maintenance PART 121—OPERATING (3) Demonstrating that an ignition required under §§43.16 and 91.403 of the REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, source could not result from each single Federal Aviation Regulations, unless an AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS failure, from each single failure in alternative program has been FAA combination with each latent failure approved.’’ 8. The authority citation for part 121 condition not shown to be extremely continues to read: PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND remote, and from all combinations of FLIGHT RULES Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, failures not shown to be extremely 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–44711, improbable. The effects of 6. The authority citation for part 91 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903– manufacturing variability, aging, wear, continues to read: 44904, 44912, 46105. corrosion, and likely damage must be 9. Amend § 121.370 by revising the considered. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1301(7), 1303, 1344, section heading; redesignating the (b) Based on the evaluations required 1348, 1352 through 1355, 1401, 1421 through 1431, 1471, 1472, 1502, 1510, 1522, and 2121 introductory text, paragraphs (a) by this section, critical design through 2125; Articles 12, 29, 31, and 32(a) introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(3), configuration control limitations, of the Convention on International Civil and paragraphs (b) through (l) as inspections, or other procedures must Aviation (61 Stat 1180); 42 U.S.C. 4321 et paragraph (a) introductory text, be established, as necessary, to prevent seq.; E.O. 11514; 49 U.S.C. 106(g) (Revised paragraphs (a)(l) introductory text, development of ignition sources within Pub. L. 97–449, January 21, 1983). (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a) (1)(iii), and the fuel tank system and must be 7. Amend § 91.410 by revising the paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(12); and included in the Airworthiness section heading; redesignating the adding a new paragraph (b) to read as Limitations section of the Instructions introductory text, paragraphs (a) follows: for Continued Airworthiness required introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(3), by § 25.1529. Visible means to identify and paragraphs (b) through (l) as § 121.370 Special maintenance program requirements. critical features of the design must be paragraph (a) introductory text, placed in areas of the airplane where paragraphs (a)(l) introductory text, * * * * * maintenance actions, repairs, or (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a)(1)(iii), and (b) After June 7, 2004, no certificate alterations may be apt to violate the paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(12); and holder may operate a turbine-powered critical design configuration limitations adding a new paragraph (b) to read as transport category airplane with a type (e.g., color-coding of wire to identify follows: certificate issued after January 1, 1958, separation limitation). and either a maximum type certificated (c) The fuel tank installation must § 91.410 Special maintenance program passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a include either— requirements. maximum type certificated payload (1) Means to minimize the * * * * * capacity of 7,500 pounds or more, development of flammable vapors in the (b) After June 7, 2004, no person may unless instructions for maintenance and fuel tanks (in the context of this rule, operate a turbine-powered transport inspection of the fuel tank system are ‘‘minimize’’ means to incorporate category airplane with a type certificate incorporated in its maintenance practicable design methods to reduce issued after January 1, 1958, and either program. These instructions must the likelihood of flammable vapors); or a maximum type certificated passenger address the actual configuration of the (2) Means to mitigate the effects of an capacity of 30 or more, or a maximum fuel tank systems of each affected ignition of fuel vapors within fuel tanks type certificated payload capacity of airplane and must be approved by the such that no damage caused by an 7,500 pounds or more, unless FAA Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ignition will prevent continued safe instructions for maintenance and or office of the Transport Airplane flight and landing. inspection of the fuel tank system are Directorate, having cognizance over the 5. Paragraph H25.4 of Appendix H to incorporated into its inspection type certificate for the affected airplane. part 25 is revised to read as follows: program. These instructions must Operators must submit their request address the actual configuration of the through an appropriate FAA Principal Appendix H to Part 25—Instructions for fuel tank systems of each affected Maintenance Inspector, who may add Continued Airworthiness airplane, and must be approved by the comments and then send it to the * * * * * FAA Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), manager of the appropriate office.
VerDate 11
Thereafter, the approved instructions instructions for maintenance and adding a new paragraph (b) to read as can be revised only with the approval of inspection of the fuel tank system are follows: the FAA Aircraft Certification Office incorporated in its inspection program. (ACO), or office of the Transport These instructions must address the § 129.32 Special maintenance program requirements. Airplane Directorate, having cognizance actual configuration of the fuel tank over the type certificate for the affected systems of each affected airplane and * * * * * airplane. Operators must submit their must be approved by the FAA Aircraft (b) For turbine-powered transport requests for revisions through an Certification Office (ACO), or office of category airplanes with a type certificate appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance the Transport Airplane Directorate, issued after January 1, 1958, and either Inspector, who may add comments and having cognizance over the type a maximum type certificated passenger then send it to the manager of the certificate for the affected airplane. capacity of 30 or more, or a maximum appropriate office. Operators must submit their request type certificated payload capacity of through an appropriate FAA Principal 7,500 pounds or more, no later than PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND Maintenance Inspector, who may add June 7, 2004, the program required by OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A comments and then send it to the paragraph (a) of this section must SEATING CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE manager of the appropriate office. include instructions for maintenance PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM Thereafter, the approved instructions and inspection of the fuel tank systems. PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 6,000 can be revised only with the approval of These instructions must address the POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES the FAA Aircraft Certification Office actual configuration of the fuel tank GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD (ACO), or office of the Transport SUCH AIRCRAFT systems of each affected airplane and Airplane Directorate, having cognizance must be approved by the FAA Aircraft 10. The authority citation for part 125 over the type certificate for the affected Certification Office (ACO), or office of continues to read: airplane. Operators must submit their the Transport Airplane Directorate, requests for revisions through an having cognizance over the type Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance 44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 44716– certificate for the affected airplane. 44717, 44722. Inspector, who may add comments and Operators must submit their request then send it to the manager of the 11. Amend § 125.248 by revising the through an appropriate FAA Principal appropriate office. section heading; redesignating the Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the introductory text, paragraphs (a) PART 129—OPERATIONS: FOREIGN introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(3), manager of the appropriate office. AIR CARRIERS AND FOREIGN Thereafter the approved instructions and paragraphs (b) through (l) as OPERATORS OF U.S.-REGISTERED paragraph (a) introductory text, can be revised only with the approval of AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON the FAA Aircraft Certification Office paragraphs (a)(l) introductory text, CARRIAGE (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a) (1)(iii), and (ACO), or office of the Transport Airplane Directorate, having cognizance paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(12); and 12. The authority citation for part 129 over the type certificate for the affected adding a new paragraph (b) to read as continues to read: follows: airplane. Operators must submit their Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40104–40105, requests for revisions through an § 125.248 Special maintenance program 40113, 40119, 44701–44702, 44712, 44716– appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance requirements. 44717, 44722, 44901–44904, 44906. Inspector, who may add comments and * * * * * 13. Amend § 129.32 by revising the then send it to the manager of the (b) After June 7, 2004, no certificate section heading; redesignating the appropriate office. holder may operate a turbine-powered introductory text, paragraphs (a) transport category airplane with a type introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(3), Issued in Washington, DC, on April 19, 2001. certificate issued after January 1, 1958, and paragraphs (b) through (l) as and either a maximum type certificated paragraph (a) introductory text, Jane F. Garvey, passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a paragraphs (a)(l) introductory text, Administrator. maximum type certificated payload (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and (a) (1)(iii), and [FR Doc. 01–10129 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] capacity of 7,500 pounds or more unless paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(12); and BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate 11
Part III
Department of Defense General Services Administration National Aeronautics and Space Administration 48 CFR Part 9, et al. Federal Acquisition Regulation; Contractor Responsibility, Labor Relations Costs, and Costs Relating to Legal and Other Proceedings: Revocation; Proposed Rule
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAR Council has decided to extend that If you wish to attend the meeting and/ due date until July 6, 2001, to ensure all or make presentations on the proposed GENERAL SERVICES potential commentors have adequate rule, please contact and submit a copy ADMINISTRATION time to prepare their submissions. Also, of your presentation by June 4, 2001, to ensure an open dialogue between the to—General Services Administration, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Government and interested parties on Acquisition Policy Division (MVP), SPACE ADMINISTRATION the proposed rule, the FAR Council will 1800 F Street, NW., Room 4035, ATTN: hold a public meeting on the proposed Ralph DeStefano, Washington, DC 48 CFR Parts 9, 14, 15, 31, and 52 rule on June 18, 2001. 20405, Telephone: (202) 501–0692. [FAR Case 2001–014 (Extension and Public DATES: Comments: Interested parties Submit electronic materials via the Meeting)] should submit comments in writing on Internet to— or before July 6, 2001, to be considered RIN 9000–AJ10 meeting.2001–[email protected]. in the formulation of a final rule. Please submit presentations only and Federal Acquisition Regulation; Public Meeting: A public meeting will be conducted at the address shown cite Meeting 2001–014 in all Contractor Responsibility, Labor correspondence related to this public Relations Costs, and Costs Relating to below starting at 12 noon to 4:00 p.m., local time, on June 18, 2001, to ensure meeting. The submitted presentations Legal and Other Proceedings— will be the only record of the public Revocation an open dialogue between the Government and interested parties on meeting. If you intend to have your AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), the proposed rule. presentation considered as a public General Services Administration (GSA), comment on the proposed rule, the ADDRESSES: Submit written comments presentation must be submitted and National Aeronautics and Space on the proposed rule to be considered Administration (NASA). separately as a public comment as in the formulation of a final rule to instructed above. ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of General Services Administration, FAR comment period; notice of public Secretariat (MVR), 1800 F Street, NW., FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The meeting. Room 4035, ATTN: Laurie Duarte, FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Washington, DC 20405. Building, Washington, DC, 20405, at SUMMARY: The Federal Acquisition (202) 501–4755 for information Regulatory Council (FAR Council) Submit electronic comments via the Internet to: pertaining to status or publication published in the Federal Register at 65 schedules. Contact Mr. Ralph De farcase.2001–[email protected] FR 80255, December 20, 2000, a final Stefano, Procurement Analyst, at (202) rule addressing contractor Please submit comments only, 501–1758 for clarification of content. responsibility, labor relations costs and including public meeting presentations Please cite FAR case 2001–014. Contact costs relating to legal and other to be considered as comments, and cite Ms. LaRhonda Erby at (202) 501–0692 proceedings. The FAR Council is FAR case 2001–014 in all for information pertaining to time and reconsidering its position and published correspondence related to this case. location of the public meeting. in the Federal Register at 66 FR 17758, Public Meeting: The location of the April 3, 2001, a proposed rule with public meeting will be at the—National Dated: May 2, 2001. request for public comments revoking Aeronautics and Space Administration, Al Matera, the December 20, 2000, final rule. The Headquarters Auditorium 300 E Street, Director, Acquisition Policy Division. proposed rule specified a June 4, 2001, SW, First Floor, West Lobby, [FR Doc. 01–11382 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am] due date for receipt of comments. The Washington, DC 20546. BILLING CODE 6820–EP–U
VerDate 11
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 88 Monday, May 7, 2001
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MAY
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 17 CFR 3 CFR 240...... 21648 Presidential Documents Proclamations: 241...... 22916 Executive orders and proclamations 523–5227 7430...... 22103 The United States Government Manual 523–5227 7431...... 22423 19 CFR Executive Orders: 102...... 21660 Other Services 13183 (Amended by EO 13209)...... 22105 132...... 21664 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523–4534 13209...... 22105 163...... 21664 Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 13210...... 22895 Proposed Rules: Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 4...... 21705 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229 5 CFR 24...... 21705 1600...... 22088 101...... 21705 1601...... 22092 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 21 CFR Proposed Rules: World Wide Web 1604...... 21693 173...... 22921 510...... 22116, 22118 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other 7 CFR 520...... 22116 publications: 930...... 21836 522...... 22116, 22118 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 1240...... 21824 524...... 22116 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 1410...... 22098 529...... 22116 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access: Proposed Rules: 558 ...... 21861, 22116, 22118 29...... 21888 http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 25 CFR 981...... 21888 E-mail 11...... 22118 9 CFR PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an E-mail 26 CFR service for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. To 94...... 22425 subscribe, send E-mail to 362...... 21631, 22899 1...... 22286 381...... 21631, 22899 [email protected] Proposed Rules: 1...... 21844 with the text message: 10 CFR subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name 9...... 22907 27 CFR 490...... 21851 Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe to 250...... 21667 PENS. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 50...... 22134 9...... 21707 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the Federal Register system to: 14 CFR 28 CFR [email protected] 21...... 23086 25...... 22898 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 25 ...... 22426, 22428, 23086 regulations. 39 ...... 21851, 21852, 21853, 29 CFR 21855, 21859, 22431, 22432, 2202...... 21670 22908, 22910, 22913, 22915 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MAY 71...... 21639 33 CFR 91...... 23086 21631–21850...... 1 97...... 22435, 22437 117...... 21862 21851–22106...... 2 121...... 23086 164...... 21862 22107–22424...... 3 125...... 23086 165 ...... 21864, 21866, 21868, 22425–22898...... 4 129...... 23086 21869, 22121 22899–23134...... 7 382...... 22107 173...... 21671 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 39 ...... 21697, 21699, 21700, 151...... 22137 21703, 21892, 21893, 21896, 160...... 21710 21898, 22478, 22479, 22482, 164...... 21899 22484, 22486 165...... 21715 71...... 22489, 22490 175...... 21717 15 CFR 37 CFR 902...... 21639 Proposed Rules: 201...... 22139 16 CFR Proposed Rules: 38 CFR 1700...... 22491 3...... 21871
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:05 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07MYCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids
39 CFR Ch. 304 ...... 22491 64...... 22447 Proposed Rules: 73 ...... 21679, 21680, 21681, 107...... 22080 Proposed Rules: 42 CFR 111...... 21720 22448, 22449, 22450 365...... 22371 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 368...... 22328 40 CFR 405...... 22646 73 ...... 21727, 21728, 22498, 383...... 22499 52 ...... 21675, 21875, 22123, 412...... 22646 22499 384...... 22499 22125, 22922, 22924 413...... 22646 385...... 22415 62...... 22927 485...... 22646 48 CFR 387...... 22328 486...... 22646 390...... 22499 81...... 22125 Ch. 1 ...... 22082 180...... 22128, 22930 44 CFR 2...... 22082 261...... 21877 37...... 22082 50 CFR 64...... 22936 Proposed Rules: 39...... 22084 52 ...... 21721, 21727, 21901, 65...... 22438 17...... 22938 Proposed Rules: 22140, 22141, 22970 206...... 22443 216...... 22133, 22450 9...... 23134 62...... 22970 600...... 22467 46 CFR ‘14 ...... 23134 81...... 22141 648...... 21639, 22473 15...... 23134 144...... 22971 Proposed Rules: 660...... 22467 31...... 23134 146...... 22971 67...... 21902 679 ...... 21691, 21886, 21887 52...... 23134 Proposed Rules: 41 CFR 47 CFR 17 ...... 22141, 22983, 22994 Proposed Rules: 20...... 22445 49 CFR 622...... 22144 Ch. 300 ...... 22491 54...... 22133 27...... 22107 635...... 22994
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:05 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\07MYCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids iii
REMINDERS INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Spearmint oil produced in Far by 5-7-01; published 4- The items in this list were Fish and Wildlife Service West; comments due by 5- 23-01 editorially compiled as an aid Fish and wildlife restoration; 9-01; published 4-24-01 FEDERAL to Federal Register users. Federal aid to States: COMMERCE DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATIONS Inclusion or exclusion from Sport fish program; National Oceanic and COMMISSION this list has no legal participation by District of Atmospheric Administration Common carrier services: significance. Columbia and U.S. insular Fishery conservation and Americans with Disabilities territories and management: Act; implementation— commonwealths; published Caribbean, Gulf, and South Telecommunications relay RULES GOING INTO 4-6-01 EFFECT MAY 7, 2001 Atlantic fisheries— services; coin sent-paid NATIONAL AERONAUTICS Gulf of Mexico fishery calls; comments due by AND SPACE management plans; 5-7-01; published 4-5-01 ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATION generic amendment; Radio stations; table of PROTECTION AGENCY Acquisition regulations: comments due by 5-7- assignments: Air pollution control; new 01; published 3-7-01 Arizona and Louisiana; motor vehicles and engines: Safety and Health (Short Form) clause; published CONSUMER PRODUCT comments due by 5-7-01; Motor vehicle inspection/ 4-5-01 SAFETY COMMISSION published 4-4-01 maintenance (I/M) Poison prevention packaging: program requirements; on- SECURITIES AND Illinois; comments due by 5- board diagnostic checks; EXCHANGE COMMISSION Child-resistant packaging 7-01; published 3-28-01 published 4-5-01 Securities: requirements— Louisiana; comments due by Hazardous waste: Electronic Signatures in Household products 5-7-01; published 3-28-01 containing low-viscosity Identification and listing— Global and National Television broadcasting: hydrocarbons; Chlorinated aliphatics Commerce Act; electronic Digital television broadcast storage media use; comments due by 5-11- signals; carriage of production wastes; 01; published 4-11-01 published 11-8-00 guidance to broker- transmissions by cable dealers; published 5-7-01 ENVIRONMENTAL operators; comments due Pesticides; tolerances in food, PROTECTION AGENCY by 5-10-01; published 3- animal feeds, and raw TRANSPORTATION 26-01 agricultural commodities DEPARTMENT Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Multipoint distribution Forchlorfenuron; published Federal Aviation service; two-way 5-7-01 Administration Sterilization facilities; transmissions; Basic Airworthiness directives: ethylene oxide; comments FEDERAL due by 5-7-01; published Trading Area authorization COMMUNICATIONS Airbus; published 4-2-01 3-6-01 holders; five-year build-out COMMISSION Boeing; published 4-2-01 Air pollution; standards of requirement extension by Radio stations; table of McDonnell Douglas; performance for new two years; comments due assignments: published 4-2-01 stationary sources: by 5-9-01; published 4-30- 01 Illinois; published 4-4-01 Pratt & Whitney; published Electric utility and industrial- New York; published 4-4-01 3-6-01 commercial-institutional FEDERAL ELECTION Wisconsin; published 4-4-01 Saab; published 4-2-01 steam generating units; COMMISSION HEALTH AND HUMAN Airworthiness standards: comments due by 5-10- Political committee; definition; 01; published 4-10-01 comments due by 5-7-01; SERVICES DEPARTMENT Special conditions— Air quality implementation published 3-7-01 Food and Drug Ayres Corp. Model LM plans; approval and Administration 200 Loadmaster HEALTH AND HUMAN promulgation; various Biological products: airplane; published 4-6- SERVICES DEPARTMENT States: Manufacturing errors and 01 Food and Drug Missouri; comments due by Administration accidents; reporting TREASURY DEPARTMENT 5-7-01; published 4-6-01 Biological products: requirements; published Alcohol, Tobacco and 11-7-00 Pesticides; tolerances in food, Human cellular and tissue- Firearms Bureau animal feeds, and raw Correction; published 11- based products Alcohol; viticultural area agricultural commodities: 9-00 manufacturers; current designations: Chlorothalonil; comments Food additives: good tissue practice; West Elks, CO; published 3- due by 5-11-01; published inspection and Secondary direct food 6-01 3-12-01 enforcement; comments additives— Radiation protection programs: due by 5-8-01; published Acidified sodium chlorite Rocky Flats Environmental 1-8-01 solutions; published 5-7- COMMENTS DUE NEXT Technology Site— 01 WEEK INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Transuranic radioactive Land Management Bureau HOUSING AND URBAN waste for disposal at AGRICULTURE Minerals management: DEVELOPMENT Waste Isolation Pilot DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT Plant; waste Mining claims under general Federal Housing Enterprise Agricultural Marketing characterization program mining laws; surface Oversight Office Service documents availability; management; proposed Practice and procedure: Cotton classing, testing, and comments due by 5-7- suspension of rules; standards: 01; published 4-5-01 comments due by 5-7-01; Federal National Mortgage published 3-23-01 Association and Federal Classification services to Water supply: INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Home Loan Mortgage growers; 2001 user fees; National primary drinking Corporation— comments due by 5-8-01; water regulations— Fish and Wildlife Service published 4-23-01 Assessments; published Arsenic; maximum Endangered and threatened 4-5-01 Olives grown in— containment level goal, species: Civil money penalties, California; comments due by etc.; effective date Hoover’s woolly-star; etc.; published 4-5-01 5-7-01; published 3-6-01 delay; comments due delisting; comments due
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:05 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07MYCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids
by 5-7-01; published 3-6- (CASA); comments due Veterans law judges; new located at 620 Jacaranda 01 by 5-10-01; published 4- title for Board members; Street in Lanai City, Hawaii, INTERIOR DEPARTMENT 10-01 comments due by 5-7-01; as the ‘‘Goro Hokama Post published 3-6-01 Office Building’’. (Apr. 12, Surface Mining Reclamation General Electric Co.; 2001; 115 Stat. 8) and Enforcement Office comments due by 5-7-01; Medical benefits: published 3-6-01 Permanent program and Compensated Work H.R. 395/P.L. 107–7 Honeywell International, Inc.; Therapy/Transitional abandoned mine land To designate the facility of the comments due by 5-11- Residence Program; reclamation plan United States Postal Service 01; published 3-12-01 comments due by 5-7-01; submissions: located at 2305 Minton Road published 3-6-01 Arkansas; comments due by McDonnell Douglas; in West Melbourne, Florida, as 5-7-01; published 4-6-01 comments due by 5-7-01; the ‘‘Ronald W. Reagan Post published 3-6-01 TRANSPORTATION Office of West Melbourne, Sikorsky; comments due by LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS DEPARTMENT Florida’’. (Apr. 12, 2001; 115 5-7-01; published 3-6-01 Coast Guard This is a continuing list of Stat. 9) Airworthiness standards: Drawbridge operations: public bills from the current Last List March 21, 2001 Special conditions— session of Congress which Wisconsin; comments due Gulfstream Model GV have become Federal laws. It by 5-7-01; published 3-6- airplanes; comments may be used in conjunction 01 due by 5-7-01; with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws Public Laws Electronic Uninspected vessels: published 4-6-01 Update Service) on 202–523– Notification Service Towing vessels; fire Class E airspace; comments 6641. This list is also (PENS) suppression systems and due by 5-7-01; published 3- available online at http:// voyage planning; 23-01 www.nara.gov/fedreg. comments due by 5-8-01; PENS is a free electronic mail TREASURY DEPARTMENT The text of laws is not published 2-23-01 notification service of newly Alcohol, Tobacco and published in the Federal enacted public laws. To TRANSPORTATION Firearms Bureau Register but may be ordered subscribe, go to http:// DEPARTMENT in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual Alcohol, tobacco, and other hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ Federal Aviation pamphlet) form from the excise taxes: publaws-l.html or send E-mail Administration Superintendent of Documents, Tobacco products— to [email protected] Airworthiness directives: U.S. Government Printing Tobacco products and with the following text Office, Washington, DC 20402 Airbus; comments due by 5- cigarette papers and message: (phone, 202–512–1808). The 7-01; published 4-5-01 tubes shipped from text will also be made Bell; comments due by 5-7- Puerto Rico; on-site SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L available on the Internet from 01; published 3-8-01 supervision and forms Your Name. GPO Access at http:// Boeing; comments due by eliminated; cross www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ Note: This service is strictly 5-7-01; published 3-6-01 reference; comments index.html. Some laws may for E-mail notification of new due by 5-7-01; Boeing; correction; not yet be available. laws. The text of laws is not comments due by 5-7-01; published 3-8-01 available through this service. published 3-16-01 VETERANS AFFAIRS H.R. 132/P.L. 107–6 PENS cannot respond to Construcciones DEPARTMENT To designate the facility of the specific inquiries sent to this Aeronauticas, S.A. Board of Veterans Appeals: United States Postal Service address.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:05 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\07MYCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids v
CFR CHECKLIST Title Stock Number Price Revision Date 14 Parts: 1–59 ...... (869–044–00037–7) ...... 57.00 Jan. 1, 2001 This checklist, prepared by the Office of the Federal Register, is 60–139 ...... (869–042–00038–2) ...... 46.00 Jan. 1, 2000 published weekly. It is arranged in the order of CFR titles, stock 140–199 ...... (869–044–00039–3) ...... 26.00 Jan. 1, 2001 numbers, prices, and revision dates. 200–1199 ...... (869–044–00040–7) ...... 44.00 Jan. 1, 2001 An asterisk (*) precedes each entry that has been issued since last 1200–End ...... (869–044–00041–5) ...... 37.00 Jan. 1, 2001 week and which is now available for sale at the Government Printing 15 Parts: Office. 0–299 ...... (869–044–00042–3) ...... 36.00 Jan. 1, 2001 A checklist of current CFR volumes comprising a complete CFR set, 300–799 ...... (869–044–00043–1) ...... 54.00 Jan. 1, 2001 also appears in the latest issue of the LSA (List of CFR Sections 800–End ...... (869–044–00044–0) ...... 40.00 Jan. 1, 2001 Affected), which is revised monthly. 16 Parts: The CFR is available free on-line through the Government Printing 0–999 ...... (869–044–00045–8) ...... 45.00 Jan. 1, 2001 Office’s GPO Access Service at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/ 1000–End ...... (869–044–00046–6) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2001 index.html. For information about GPO Access call the GPO User Support Team at 1-888-293-6498 (toll free) or 202-512-1530. 17 Parts: 1–199 ...... (869–042–00048–0) ...... 32.00 Apr. 1, 2000 The annual rate for subscription to all revised paper volumes is 200–239 ...... (869–042–00049–8) ...... 38.00 Apr. 1, 2000 $951.00 domestic, $237.75 additional for foreign mailing. 240–End ...... (869–042–00050–1) ...... 49.00 Apr. 1, 2000 Mail orders to the Superintendent of Documents, Attn: New Orders, 18 Parts: P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. All orders must be 1–399 ...... (869–042–00051–0) ...... 54.00 Apr. 1, 2000 accompanied by remittance (check, money order, GPO Deposit 400–End ...... (869–042–00052–8) ...... 15.00 Apr. 1, 2000 Account, VISA, Master Card, or Discover). Charge orders may be telephoned to the GPO Order Desk, Monday through Friday, at (202) 19 Parts: 512–1800 from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. eastern time, or FAX your 1–140 ...... (869–042–00053–6) ...... 40.00 Apr. 1, 2000 charge orders to (202) 512-2250. 141–199 ...... (869–042–00054–4) ...... 40.00 Apr. 1, 2000 200–End ...... (869–042–00055–2) ...... 20.00 Apr. 1, 2000 Title Stock Number Price Revision Date 20 Parts: 1, 2 (2 Reserved) ...... (869–044–00001–6) ...... 6.50 4Jan. 1, 2001 1–399 ...... (869–042–00056–1) ...... 33.00 Apr. 1, 2000 3 (1997 Compilation 400–499 ...... (869–042–00057–9) ...... 56.00 Apr. 1, 2000 and Parts 100 and 500–End ...... (869–042–00058–7) ...... 58.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1 101) ...... (869–044–00002–4) ...... 36.00 Jan. 1, 2001 21 Parts: 4 ...... (869–044–00003–2) ...... 9.00 Jan. 1, 2001 1–99 ...... (869–042–00059–5) ...... 26.00 Apr. 1, 2000 100–169 ...... (869–042–00060–9) ...... 30.00 Apr. 1, 2000 5 Parts: 170–199 ...... (869–042–00061–7) ...... 29.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1–699 ...... (869–044–00004–1) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2001 200–299 ...... (869–042–00062–5) ...... 13.00 Apr. 1, 2000 700–1199 ...... (869–044–00005–9) ...... 44.00 Jan. 1, 2001 300–499 ...... (869–042–00063–3) ...... 20.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1200–End, 6 (6 500–599 ...... (869–042–00064–1) ...... 31.00 Apr. 1, 2000 Reserved) ...... (869–044–00006–7) ...... 55.00 Jan. 1, 2001 600–799 ...... (869–042–00065–0) ...... 10.00 Apr. 1, 2000 7 Parts: 800–1299 ...... (869–042–00066–8) ...... 38.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1–26 ...... (869–044–00007–5) ...... 40.00 4Jan. 1, 2001 1300–End ...... (869–042–00067–6) ...... 15.00 Apr. 1, 2000 27–52 ...... (869–044–00008–3) ...... 45.00 Jan. 1, 2001 22 Parts: 53–209 ...... (869–044–00009–1) ...... 34.00 Jan. 1, 2001 1–299 ...... (869–042–00068–4) ...... 54.00 Apr. 1, 2000 *210–299 ...... (869–044–00010–5) ...... 56.00 Jan. 1, 2001 300–End ...... (869–042–00069–2) ...... 31.00 Apr. 1, 2000 300–399 ...... (869–044–00011–3) ...... 38.00 Jan. 1, 2001 400–699 ...... (869–044–00012–1) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2001 23 ...... (869–042–00070–6) ...... 29.00 Apr. 1, 2000 700–899 ...... (869–044–00013–0) ...... 50.00 Jan. 1, 2001 24 Parts: 900–999 ...... (869–044–00014–8) ...... 54.00 Jan. 1, 2001 0–199 ...... (869–042–00071–4) ...... 40.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1000–1199 ...... (869–042–00015–3) ...... 18.00 Jan. 1, 2000 200–499 ...... (869–042–00072–2) ...... 37.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1200–1599 ...... (869–044–00016–4) ...... 55.00 Jan. 1, 2001 500–699 ...... (869–042–00073–1) ...... 20.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1600–1899 ...... (869–044–00017–2) ...... 57.00 Jan. 1, 2001 700–1699 ...... (869–042–00074–9) ...... 46.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1900–1939 ...... (869–044–00018–1) ...... 21.00 4Jan. 1, 2001 1700–End ...... (869–042–00075–7) ...... 18.00 5Apr. 1, 2000 4 1940–1949 ...... (869–044–00019–9) ...... 37.00 Jan. 1, 2001 25 ...... (869–042–00076–5) ...... 52.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1950–1999 ...... (869–044–00020–2) ...... 45.00 Jan. 1, 2001 2000–End ...... (869–044–00021–1) ...... 43.00 Jan. 1, 2001 26 Parts: §§ 1.0-1–1.60 ...... (869–042–00077–3) ...... 31.00 Apr. 1, 2000 8 ...... (869–044–00022–9) ...... 54.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.61–1.169 ...... (869–042–00078–1) ...... 56.00 Apr. 1, 2000 9 Parts: §§ 1.170–1.300 ...... (869–042–00079–0) ...... 38.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1–199 ...... (869–044–00023–7) ...... 55.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.301–1.400 ...... (869–042–00080–3) ...... 29.00 Apr. 1, 2000 200–End ...... (869–044–00024–5) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.401–1.440 ...... (869–042–00081–1) ...... 47.00 Apr. 1, 2000 §§ 1.441-1.500 ...... (869-042-00082-0) ...... 36.00 Apr. 1, 2000 10 Parts: §§ 1.501–1.640 ...... (869–042–00083–8) ...... 32.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1–50 ...... (869–044–00025–3) ...... 55.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.641–1.850 ...... (869–042–00084–6) ...... 41.00 Apr. 1, 2000 51–199 ...... (869–044–00026–1) ...... 52.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.851–1.907 ...... (869–042–00085–4) ...... 43.00 Apr. 1, 2000 *200–499 ...... (869–044–00027–0) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.908–1.1000 ...... (869–042–00086–2) ...... 41.00 Apr. 1, 2000 500–End ...... (869–044–00028–8) ...... 55.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.1001–1.1400 ...... (869–042–00087–1) ...... 45.00 Apr. 1, 2000 11 ...... (869–044–00029–6) ...... 31.00 Jan. 1, 2001 §§ 1.1401–End ...... (869–042–00088–9) ...... 66.00 Apr. 1, 2000 2–29 ...... (869–042–00089–7) ...... 45.00 Apr. 1, 2000 12 Parts: 30–39 ...... (869–042–00090–1) ...... 31.00 Apr. 1, 2000 1–199 ...... (869–044–00030–0) ...... 27.00 Jan. 1, 2001 40–49 ...... (869–042–00091–9) ...... 18.00 Apr. 1, 2000 200–219 ...... (869–044–00031–8) ...... 32.00 Jan. 1, 2001 50–299 ...... (869–042–00092–7) ...... 23.00 Apr. 1, 2000 220–299 ...... (869–044–00032–6) ...... 54.00 Jan. 1, 2001 300–499 ...... (869–042–00093–5) ...... 43.00 Apr. 1, 2000 300–499 ...... (869–044–00033–4) ...... 41.00 Jan. 1, 2001 500–599 ...... (869–042–00094–3) ...... 12.00 Apr. 1, 2000 500–599 ...... (869–044–00034–2) ...... 38.00 Jan. 1, 2001 600–End ...... (869–042–00095–1) ...... 12.00 Apr. 1, 2000 600–End ...... (869–044–00035–1) ...... 57.00 Jan. 1, 2001 27 Parts: 13 ...... (869–044–00036–9) ...... 45.00 Jan. 1, 2001 1–199 ...... (869–042–00096–0) ...... 59.00 Apr. 1, 2000
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:07 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4721 Sfmt 4721 E:\FR\FM\07MYCL.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCL vi Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids
Title Stock Number Price Revision Date Title Stock Number Price Revision Date 200–End ...... (869–042–00097–8) ...... 18.00 Apr. 1, 2000 260–265 ...... (869–042–00151–6) ...... 36.00 July 1, 2000 ...... 28 Parts: ...... 266–299 (869–042–00152–4) 35.00 July 1, 2000 300–399 ...... (869–042–00153–2) ...... 29.00 July 1, 2000 0-42 ...... (869–042–00098–6) ...... 43.00 July 1, 2000 400–424 ...... (869–042–00154–1) ...... 37.00 July 1, 2000 43-end ...... (869-042-00099-4) ...... 36.00 July 1, 2000 425–699 ...... (869–042–00155–9) ...... 48.00 July 1, 2000 29 Parts: 700–789 ...... (869–042–00156–7) ...... 46.00 July 1, 2000 0–99 ...... (869–042–00100–1) ...... 33.00 July 1, 2000 790–End ...... (869–042–00157–5) ...... 23.00 6July 1, 2000 100–499 ...... (869–042–00101–0) ...... 14.00 July 1, 2000 41 Chapters: 500–899 ...... (869–042–00102–8) ...... 47.00 July 1, 2000 1, 1–1 to 1–10 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 900–1899 ...... (869–042–00103–6) ...... 24.00 July 1, 2000 1, 1–11 to Appendix, 2 (2 Reserved) ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 1900–1910 (§§ 1900 to 3–6 ...... 14.00 3 July 1, 1984 6 1910.999) ...... (869–042–00104–4) ...... 46.00 July 1, 2000 7 ...... 6.00 3 July 1, 1984 1910 (§§ 1910.1000 to 8 ...... 4.50 3 July 1, 1984 6 end) ...... (869–042–00105–2) ...... 28.00 July 1, 2000 9 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 1911–1925 ...... (869–042–00106–1) ...... 20.00 July 1, 2000 10–17 ...... 9.50 3 July 1, 1984 6 1926 ...... (869–042–00107–9) ...... 30.00 July 1, 2000 18, Vol. I, Parts 1–5 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 1927–End ...... (869–042–00108–7) ...... 49.00 July 1, 2000 18, Vol. II, Parts 6–19 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 30 Parts: 18, Vol. III, Parts 20–52 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 1–199 ...... (869–042–00109–5) ...... 38.00 July 1, 2000 19–100 ...... 13.00 3 July 1, 1984 200–699 ...... (869–042–00110–9) ...... 33.00 July 1, 2000 1–100 ...... (869–042–00158–3) ...... 15.00 July 1, 2000 700–End ...... (869–042–00111–7) ...... 39.00 July 1, 2000 101 ...... (869–042–00159–1) ...... 37.00 July 1, 2000 102–200 ...... (869–042–00160–5) ...... 21.00 July 1, 2000 31 Parts: 201–End ...... (869–042–00161–3) ...... 16.00 July 1, 2000 0–199 ...... (869–042–00112–5) ...... 23.00 July 1, 2000 200–End ...... (869–042–00113–3) ...... 53.00 July 1, 2000 42 Parts: 1–399 ...... (869–042–00162–1) ...... 53.00 Oct. 1, 2000 32 Parts: 400–429 ...... (869–042–00163–0) ...... 55.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–39, Vol. I ...... 15.00 2 July 1, 1984 430–End ...... (869–042–00164–8) ...... 57.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–39, Vol. II ...... 19.00 2 July 1, 1984 1–39, Vol. III ...... 18.00 2 July 1, 1984 43 Parts: 1–190 ...... (869–042–00114–1) ...... 51.00 July 1, 2000 1–999 ...... (869–042–00165–6) ...... 45.00 Oct. 1, 2000 191–399 ...... (869–042–00115–0) ...... 62.00 July 1, 2000 1000–end ...... (869–042–00166–4) ...... 55.00 Oct. 1, 2000 400–629 ...... (869–042–00116–8) ...... 35.00 July 1, 2000 44 ...... (869–042–00167–2) ...... 45.00 Oct. 1, 2000 630–699 ...... (869–042–00117–6) ...... 25.00 July 1, 2000 700–799 ...... (869–042–00118–4) ...... 31.00 July 1, 2000 45 Parts: 800–End ...... (869–042–00119–2) ...... 32.00 July 1, 2000 1–199 ...... (869–042–00168–1) ...... 50.00 Oct. 1, 2000 200–499 ...... (869–042–00169–9) ...... 29.00 Oct. 1, 2000 33 Parts: 500–1199 ...... (869–042–00170–2) ...... 45.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–124 ...... (869–042–00120–6) ...... 35.00 July 1, 2000 1200–End ...... (869–042–00171–1) ...... 54.00 Oct. 1, 2000 125–199 ...... (869–042–00121–4) ...... 45.00 July 1, 2000 200–End ...... (869–042–00122–5) ...... 36.00 July 1, 2000 46 Parts: 1–40 ...... (869–042–00172–9) ...... 42.00 Oct. 1, 2000 34 Parts: 41–69 ...... (869–042–00173–7) ...... 34.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–299 ...... (869–042–00123–1) ...... 31.00 July 1, 2000 70–89 ...... (869–042–00174–5) ...... 13.00 Oct. 1, 2000 300–399 ...... (869–042–00124–9) ...... 28.00 July 1, 2000 90–139 ...... (869–042–00175–3) ...... 41.00 Oct. 1, 2000 400–End ...... (869–042–00125–7) ...... 54.00 July 1, 2000 140–155 ...... (869–042–00176–1) ...... 23.00 Oct. 1, 2000 35 ...... (869–042–00126–5) ...... 10.00 July 1, 2000 156–165 ...... (869–042–00177–0) ...... 31.00 Oct. 1, 2000 166–199 ...... (869–042–00178–8) ...... 42.00 Oct. 1, 2000 36 Parts 200–499 ...... (869–042–00179–6) ...... 36.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–199 ...... (869–042–00127–3) ...... 24.00 July 1, 2000 500–End ...... (869–042–00180–0) ...... 23.00 Oct. 1, 2000 200–299 ...... (869–042–00128–1) ...... 24.00 July 1, 2000 300–End ...... (869–042–00129–0) ...... 43.00 July 1, 2000 47 Parts: 0–19 ...... (869–042–00181–8) ...... 54.00 Oct. 1, 2000 37 (869–042–00130–3) ...... 32.00 July 1, 2000 20–39 ...... (869–042–00182–6) ...... 41.00 Oct. 1, 2000 38 Parts: 40–69 ...... (869–042–00183–4) ...... 41.00 Oct. 1, 2000 0–17 ...... (869–042–00131–1) ...... 40.00 July 1, 2000 70–79 ...... (869–042–00184–2) ...... 54.00 Oct. 1, 2000 18–End ...... (869–042–00132–0) ...... 47.00 July 1, 2000 80–End ...... (869–042–00185–1) ...... 54.00 Oct. 1, 2000 39 ...... (869–042–00133–8) ...... 28.00 July 1, 2000 48 Chapters: 1 (Parts 1–51) ...... (869–042–00186–9) ...... 57.00 Oct. 1, 2000 40 Parts: 1 (Parts 52–99) ...... (869–042–00187–7) ...... 45.00 Oct. 1, 2000 1–49 ...... (869–042–00134–6) ...... 37.00 July 1, 2000 2 (Parts 201–299) ...... (869–042–00188–5) ...... 53.00 Oct. 1, 2000 50–51 ...... (869–042–00135–4) ...... 28.00 July 1, 2000 3–6 ...... (869–042–00189–3) ...... 40.00 Oct. 1, 2000 52 (52.01–52.1018) ...... (869–042–00136–2) ...... 36.00 July 1, 2000 7–14 ...... (869–042–00190–7) ...... 52.00 Oct. 1, 2000 52 (52.1019–End) ...... (869–042–00137–1) ...... 44.00 July 1, 2000 15–28 ...... (869–042–00191–5) ...... 53.00 Oct. 1, 2000 53–59 ...... (869–042–00138–9) ...... 21.00 July 1, 2000 29–End ...... (869–042–00192–3) ...... 38.00 Oct. 1, 2000 60 ...... (869–042–00139–7) ...... 66.00 July 1, 2000 61–62 ...... (869–042–00140–1) ...... 23.00 July 1, 2000 49 Parts: 63 (63.1–63.1119) ...... (869–042–00141–9) ...... 66.00 July 1, 2000 1–99 ...... (869–042–00193–1) ...... 53.00 Oct. 1, 2000 63 (63.1200–End) ...... (869–042–00142–7) ...... 49.00 July 1, 2000 100–185 ...... (869–042–00194–0) ...... 57.00 Oct. 1, 2000 64–71 ...... (869–042–00143–5) ...... 12.00 July 1, 2000 186–199 ...... (869–042–00195–8) ...... 17.00 Oct. 1, 2000 72–80 ...... (869–042–00144–3) ...... 47.00 July 1, 2000 200–399 ...... (869–042–00196–6) ...... 57.00 Oct. 1, 2000 81–85 ...... (869–042–00145–1) ...... 36.00 July 1, 2000 400–999 ...... (869–042–00197–4) ...... 58.00 Oct. 1, 2000 86 ...... (869–042–00146–0) ...... 66.00 July 1, 2000 1000–1199 ...... (869–042–00198–2) ...... 25.00 Oct. 1, 2000 87-135 ...... (869–042–00146–8) ...... 66.00 July 1, 2000 1200–End ...... (869–042–00199–1) ...... 21.00 Oct. 1, 2000 136–149 ...... (869–042–00148–6) ...... 42.00 July 1, 2000 50 Parts: 150–189 ...... (869–042–00149–4) ...... 38.00 July 1, 2000 1–199 ...... (869–042–00200–8) ...... 55.00 Oct. 1, 2000 190–259 ...... (869–042–00150–8) ...... 25.00 July 1, 2000 200–599 ...... (869–042–00201–6) ...... 35.00 Oct. 1, 2000
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:07 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4721 Sfmt 4721 E:\FR\FM\07MYCL.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCL Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Reader Aids vii
Title Stock Number Price Revision Date 600–End ...... (869–042–00202–4) ...... 55.00 Oct. 1, 2000 CFR Index and Findings Aids ...... (869–042–00047–1) ...... 53.00 Jan. 1, 2000 Complete 2000 CFR set ...... 1,094.00 2000 Microfiche CFR Edition: Subscription (mailed as issued) ...... 290.00 1999 Individual copies ...... 1.00 1999 Complete set (one-time mailing) ...... 247.00 1997 Complete set (one-time mailing) ...... 264.00 1996 1 Because Title 3 is an annual compilation, this volume and all previous volumes should be retained as a permanent reference source. 2 The July 1, 1985 edition of 32 CFR Parts 1–189 contains a note only for Parts 1–39 inclusive. For the full text of the Defense Acquisition Regulations in Parts 1–39, consult the three CFR volumes issued as of July 1, 1984, containing those parts. 3 The July 1, 1985 edition of 41 CFR Chapters 1–100 contains a note only for Chapters 1 to 49 inclusive. For the full text of procurement regulations in Chapters 1 to 49, consult the eleven CFR volumes issued as of July 1, 1984 containing those chapters. 4 No amendments to this volume were promulgated during the period January 1, 2000, through January 1, 2001. The CFR volume issued as of January 1, 2000 should be retained. 5 No amendments to this volume were promulgated during the period April 1, 1999, through April 1, 2000. The CFR volume issued as of April 1, 1999 should be retained. 6 No amendments to this volume were promulgated during the period July 1, 1999, through July 1, 2000. The CFR volume issued as of July 1, 1999 should be retained..
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:07 May 04, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4721 Sfmt 4721 E:\FR\FM\07MYCL.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 07MYCL