issue-1996-08-22•Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-22
Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-22
issue-1996-08-22Federal Register final rules — 1996-08-22Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-21478 Alteration of VOR Federal Airways; Texas
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21478]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 93-ASW-5]
RIN 2120-AA66
Alteration of VOR Federal Airways; Texas
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 3, 1996, the FAA published a final rule realigning
eleven Federal airways supporting the Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, Metroplex
Plan. On August 12, 1996, a correction to the final rule was published
to correct the airspace designation for Federal Airway V-477. However,
the description for V-477 inadvertently omitted ``Leona'' from the
existing route. This action corrects that error.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 22, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bil Nelson, Airspace and Rules
Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 12, 1996, the FAA published a
final rule correcting the description of V-477 (61 FR 41736). However,
the description for V-477 inadvertently omitted ``Leona'' from the
existing route. This action corrects that error.
Correction of Final Rule
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the
airspace designation for V-477, published in the Federal Register on
August 12, 1996 (61 FR 41737); Federal Register Document 96-20510,
Column 1, is corrected as follows:
* * * * *
V-477 [Corrected]
From Humble, TX, via INT Humble 349 deg. and Leona, TX, 139 deg.
radials; Leona; to Cedar Creek, TX.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 1996.
Jeff Griffith,
Program Director for Air Traffic Airspace Management.
[FR Doc. 96-21478 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21476 Alteration of VOR Federal Airways; Texas
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21476]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 93-ASW-4]
RIN 2120-AA66
Alteration of VOR Federal Airways; Texas
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 3, 1996, the FAA published a final rule realigning
twelve Federal airways supporting the Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, Metroplex
Plan. On August 12, 1996, a correction to the final rule was published
to correct the airspace designations for Federal Airways V-63 and V-94.
However, the description for V-63 inadvertently referenced the ``Howard
MOA'' when it should have referenced the ``Howard West MOA.'' This
action corrects that error.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 22, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bil Nelson, Airspace and Rules Division, ATA-400, Office of Air Traffic
Airspace Management, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 12, 1996, the FAA published a
final rule correcting the description of V-63 and V-94 (61 FR 41736).
However, the description for V-63 inadvertently referenced the ``Howard
MOA'' when it should have referenced the ``Howard West MOA.'' This
action corrects that error.
Correction of Final Rule
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the
airspace designation for V-63, published in the Federal Register on
August 12, 1996 (61 FR 41736); Federal Register Document 96-20511,
Column 2, is corrected as follows:
* * * * *
V-63 [Corrected]
From Bonham, TX, via McAlester, OK; Razorback, AR; Springfield,
MO; Hallsville, MO; Quincy, IL; Burlington, IA; Moline, IL;
Davenport, IA; Rockford, IL; Janesville, WI; Badger, WI; Oshkosh,
WI; Stevens Point, WI; Wausau, WI; Rhinelander, WI, to Houghton, MI.
Excluding that airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL from 5 NM north
to 46 NM north of Quincy during the time that the Howard West MOA is
activated by NOTAM.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, 1996.
Jeff Griffith,
Program Director for Air Traffic Airspace Management.
[FR Doc. 96-21476 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21468 Bureau of Consular Affairs; Passport and Nationality Procedures Persons Authorized to Issue Passports and Adjudicate Nationality Abroad
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43310-43312]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21468]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 50 and 51
[Public Notice 2419]
Bureau of Consular Affairs; Passport and Nationality Procedures--
Persons Authorized to Issue Passports and Adjudicate Nationality Abroad
AGENCY: Bureau of Consular Affairs, State.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule amends existing nationality and passport regulations
to
[[Page 43311]]
allow designated U.S. citizen employees of the Department of State to
grant, issue and verify U.S. passports and to adjudicate U.S.
nationality claims in foreign countries. The extension of this
responsibility to designated United States citizen Department of State
employees will enable foreign service posts to provide more efficient
passport, citizenship and nationality service to the public. Consular
officers will be able to concentrate on managing consular resources,
but will still provide passport and citizenship services to U.S.
citizens as necessary. This rule also updates terminology relating to
Consular Reports of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of
America and clarifies the authority of consular Agents and others to
administer the oath for passport purposes.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 22, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carmen A. DiPlacido, or Michael Meszaros, Overseas Citizens Services,
Office of Policy, Review and Interagency Liaison, Department of State,
202-647-3666.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Secretary of State is authorized by 22
U.S.C. 211a to issue passports, and to cause passports to be issued in
foreign countries pursuant to rules prescribed by the President. The
President's rulemaking authority was delegated to the Secretary of
State in Executive Order No. 11295 (August 5, 1966) and is routinely
exercised by the Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs.
Section 127(a) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years
1994-1995, Pub. L. 103-236 (Apr. 30, 1994), and Section 1(b) of Pub. L.
103-415 (Oct. 25, 1994), amended 22 U.S.C. 211a to allow the Secretary
of State to designate certain United States citizen employees of the
Department of State stationed abroad to grant, issue and verify
passports in foreign countries. (Until now, these passport and
adjudicatory functions have been performed abroad only by diplomatic
and consular officers.) The authority to designate was delegated to the
Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs in Delegation of
Authority No. 214 (Sept. 20, 1994), and through these regulations will
be further delegated to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Overseas
Citizens Services.
The authority to grant, issue and verify passports implicitly
includes the authority to determine a passport applicant's U.S.
nationality and U.S. citizenship. Persons designated under the new
regulations will therefore generally determine claims to U.S.
nationality/citizenship (acquisition and loss) made by persons abroad
who apply for passports, registration as a U.S. citizen, cards of
identity or other travel documents. Designated persons will also
provide advice to consular officers with respect to issuance of
Consular Reports of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of
America (Consular Report of Birth Abroad).
Persons designated by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Overseas
Citizens Services must meet criteria relating to necessary training and
experience before authorization to perform adjudication
responsibilities. Consular officers will supervise all aspects of
nationality adjudication performed by persons designated under the new
regulations. The Consular Report of Birth Abroad will continue to be
solely issued by the consular officer, however, because at present such
documents are proof of citizenship under 22 U.S.C. section 2705 only
when so issued. The new authority permitting other U.S. citizen
employees to perform these functions will relieve consular officers of
some of their ministerial functions, so that they may focus more effort
on other demands of managing workloads at our overseas posts. Portions
of 22 CFR part 50 and 22 CFR part 51 are being amended to reflect this
new authority.
The regulations also update the text of regulations relating to the
issuance of Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United
States of America. The Consular Report of Birth Abroad was formerly
known as a registration of birth abroad. This outdated terminology is
replaced where it occurs. In addition, for security and anti-fraud
reasons, the regulation is being amended to limit the persons eligible
to apply for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad to the citizen's
parent(s) and the citizen's legal guardian. See 22 CFR 50.5.
The regulations (51.21) are also being amended to reflect that
consular agents and overseas notarial officers may administer the oaths
for passport purposes required by 22 U.S.C. 213, and for the Consular
Report of Birth Abroad.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 553(b)(A), these rules are being
promulgated without notice or comment because they are rules of agency
organization and procedure. These regulations are not expected to have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
In addition, they will not impose information collection requirements
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35. Nor do these final rules have federalism implications warranting
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment in accordance with E.O.
12612. These final rules have been reviewed as required by E.O. 12988.
These rules are exempt from review under E.O. 12866 but have been
reviewed and found to be consistent with the objectives thereof.
List of Subjects
22 CFR Part 50
Citizenship and naturalization.
22 CFR Part 51
Administrative practice and procedure, Passports and visas.
Accordingly, 22 CFR parts 50 and 51 are amended as follows:
PART 50--NATIONALITY PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 50 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 4, 63 Stat. 111, as amended, secs. 104s, 360, 66
Stat. 174, 273; 22 U.S.C. 211a, 22 U.S.C. 2658, 2705, 8 U.S.C. 1104,
1503.
2. Section 50.1 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 50.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
(g) Designated nationality examiner means a United States citizen
employee of the Department of State assigned or employed abroad
(permanently or temporarily) and designated by the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Overseas Citizen Services, to grant, issue and
verify U.S. passports. A designated nationality examiner may adjudicate
claims of acquisition and loss of United States nationality and
citizenship as required for the purpose of providing passport and
related services. The authority of designated nationality examiners
shall include the authority to examine, adjudicate, approve and deny
passport applications and applications for related services. The
authority of designated nationality examiners shall expire upon
termination of the employee's assignment for such duty and may also be
terminated at any time by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Overseas
Citizen Services.
3. Section 50.2 is amended by revising ``registration of birth'' to
read ``a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United
States of America'' and by adding the following four sentences after
the existing sentence:
Sec. 50.2 Determination of U.S. nationality of persons abroad.
* * * Such determinations of nationality may be made abroad by a
[[Page 43312]]
consular officer or a designated nationality examiner. A designated
nationality examiner may accept and approve/disapprove applications for
registration and accept and approve/disapprove applications for
passports and issue passports. Under the supervision of a consular
officer, designated nationality examiners shall accept, adjudicate,
disapprove and provisionally approve applications for the Consular
Report of Birth Abroad. A Consular Report of Birth Abroad may only be
issued by a consular officer, who will review a designated nationality
examiner's provisional approval of an application for such report and
issue the report if satisfied that the claim to nationality has been
established.
4. Section 50.3 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 50.3 Application for registration.
* * * * *
(b) The applicant shall execute the registration form prescribed by
the Department and shall submit the supporting evidence required by
subpart C of part 51 of this chapter. A diplomatic or consular officer
or a designated nationality examiner shall determine the period of time
for which the registration will be valid.
5. Section 50.5 is amended by revising the introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 50.5 Application for Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen
of the United States of America.
Upon application by the parent(s) or the child's legal guardian, a
consular officer or designated nationality examiner may accept and
adjudicate the application for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a
Citizen of the United States of America for a child born in their
consular district. In specific instances, the Department may authorize
consular officers and other designated employees to adjudicate the
application for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a child born
outside his/her consular district. Under the supervision of a consular
officer, designated nationality examiners shall accept, adjudicate,
disapprove and provisionally approve applications for the Consular
Report of Birth Abroad. The applicant shall be required to submit proof
of the child's birth, identity and citizenship meeting the evidence
requirements of subpart C of part 51 of this subchapter and shall
include:
* * * * *
6. Section 50.7 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 50.7 Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United
States of America.
(a) Upon application and the submission of satisfactory proof of
birth, identity and nationality, and at the time of the reporting of
the birth, the consular officer may issue to the parent or legal
guardian, when approved and upon payment of a prescribed fee, a
Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of
America.
(b) Amended and replacement Consular Reports of Birth Abroad of a
Citizen of the United States of America may be issued by the Department
of State's Passport Office upon written request and payment of the
required fee.
(c) When it reports a birth under Sec. 50.6, the Department shall
furnish the Consular Report of Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United
States of America to the parent or legal guardian upon application and
payment of required fees.
7. Section 50.8 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 50.8 Certification of Report of Birth Abroad of a United States
Citizen.
At any time subsequent to the issuance of a Consular Report of
Birth Abroad of a Citizen of the United States of America, when
requested and upon payment of the required fee, the Department of
State's Passport Office may issue to the citizen, the citizen's parent
or legal guardian a certificate entitled ``Certification of Report of
Birth Abroad of a United States Citizen.''
8. Section 50.9 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 50.9 Card of identity.
When authorized by the Department, consular offices or designated
nationality examiners may issue a card of identity for travel to the
United States to nationals of the United States being deported from a
foreign country, to nationals/citizens of the United States involved in
a common disaster abroad, or to a returning national of the United
States to whom passport services have been denied or withdrawn under
the provisions of this part or parts 51 or 53 of this subchapter.
9. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 22 U.S.C. 211a, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2658, 3926,
sec. 122(d)(3), Pub. L. 98-164, 97 Stat. 1017; 31 U.S.C. 9701, E.O.
11295, 36 FR 10603; 3 CFR, 1966-70 Comp., p. 570; Pub. L. 100-690,
sec. 129, Pub. L. 102-138, 105 Stat. 661; sec. 503, Pub. L. 102-140,
105 Stat. 820; Title V, Pub. L. 103-317, 108 Stat. 1724, unless
otherwise noted.
10. Section 51.1 is amended by adding paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 51.1 Definitions.
* * * * *
(h) Designated nationality examiner means a person designated under
Sec. 50.1(g) of this subchapter.
11. Section 51.21 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(6) as
follows:
Sec. 51.21 Execution of passport application.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) A diplomatic officer, a consular officer, an overseas
nationality examiner, a consular agent or a notarial officer abroad; or
* * * * *
Dated: July 25, 1996.
Mary A. Ryan,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs.
[FR Doc. 96-21468 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21455 Change in Disease Status of Spain Because of African Swine Fever
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43305-43307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21455]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
9 CFR Part 94
[Docket No. 96-025-2]
Change in Disease Status of Spain Because of African Swine Fever
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the regulations by declaring Spain free of
African swine fever. This action is appropriate because there have been
no confirmed outbreaks of African swine fever in Spain since September
1994. This rule relieves restrictions on the importation of pork and
pork products into the United States from Spain. However, because Spain
shares common land borders with countries affected by certain swine
diseases and because
[[Page 43306]]
Spain, as a member state of the European Union, has certain trade
practices that are less restrictive than are acceptable to the United
States, the importation into the United States of pork and pork
products from Spain continues to be subject to certain restrictions.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 6, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. John Cougill, Staff Veterinarian,
Products Program, National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS,
4700 River Road Unit 40, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231, (301) 734-8688; or
e-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the
regulations) govern the importation into the United States of specified
animals and animal products in order to prevent the introduction into
the United States of various animal diseases, including rinderpest,
foot-and-mouth disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, swine
vesicular disease, hog cholera, and African swine fever (ASF). These
are dangerous and destructive communicable diseases of ruminants and
swine.
Section 94.8 of the regulations provides that ASF exists or is
reasonably believed to exist in all the countries of Africa, Brazil,
Cuba, Haiti, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain. We will consider
declaring a country to be free of ASF if there have been no reported
cases of the disease in that country for at least the previous 1-year
period. The last case of ASF in Spain occurred in September 1994. The
Government of Spain has requested that the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) recognize Spain to be free of ASF.
On May 29, 1996, we published in the Federal Register (61 FR 26850-
26852, Docket No. 96-025-1) a proposal to amend the regulations by
removing Spain from the list of countries where ASF exists or is
reasonably believed to exist. This action would relieve certain
restrictions on the importation of pork and pork products into the
United States from Spain, including restrictions on the importation of
live swine and fresh pork and pork products, and would eliminate
requirements on the curing time for Spanish hams and other pork
products offered for importation into the United States from Spain.
We solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
July 29, 1996. We received 5 comments by that date. They were from
representatives of industry and a foreign government. All responses
were in favor of the provisions outlined in the proposed rule.
Therefore, based on the rationale set forth in the proposed rule,
we are adopting the provisions of the proposal as a final rule without
change.
Effective Date
This is a substantive rule that relieves restrictions and, pursuant
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, may be made effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. This rule removes Spain
from the list of countries where ASF exists or is reasonably believed
to exist. This action relieves certain restrictions on the importation
of pork and pork products into the United States from Spain, including
restrictions on the importation of live swine and fresh pork and pork
products, and eliminates requirements on the curing time for Spanish
hams and other pork products offered for importation into the United
States from Spain. We have determined that approximately 2 weeks are
needed to ensure that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
personnel at ports of entry receive official notice of this change in
the regulations. Therefore, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service has determined that this rule should be
effective 15 days after publication in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. For this
action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review
process required by Executive Order 12866.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., we have performed a Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, which is set out below, regarding the
impact of this rule on small entities.
In accordance with 21 U.S.C. 111-113, 114a, 115, 117, 120, 123, and
134a, the Secretary of Agriculture has the authority to promulgate
regulations and take measures to prevent the introduction into the
United States, and the interstate dissemination within the United
States, of communicable diseases of livestock and poultry.
This rule amends the regulations in part 94 by removing Spain from
the list of countries where ASF exists or is reasonably believed to
exist. This action relieves certain restrictions on the importation of
live swine, pork, and pork products into the United States from Spain.
However, because of Spain's proximity to France and Portugal (countries
affected by serious swine diseases) and Spain's trading practices as a
member state of the European Union, other requirements continue to
restrict the importation of pork and pork products from Spain.
In 1992, the majority (approximately 96.3 percent) of all hog and
pig farmers in the United States qualified as small entities. However,
we expect the impact of relieving restrictions on live swine imports
from Spain on these producers to be minimal because the swine industry
of Spain is relatively small compared to the market in the United
States. In 1994, swine production in Spain was estimated to be 26.7
million head, compared to swine production in the United States of over
100 million head. Also, in 1994, Spain exported a little more than 0.5
million live swine, or less than 2 percent of its total swine
production, and all of those animals were directed to countries in
Europe.
Total imports of live swine into the United States are very small
relative to domestic production. In 1993, only 1.75 million head were
imported into the United States. Due to transportation costs and other
factors, nearly all of the live swine imported into the United States
(more than 99.8 percent in 1993) are from Canada. Most of the live
swine that are imported from Western Europe into the United States are
imported in very small numbers, to be used for genetic improvements of
domestic stock. We expect that the importation of swine embryos and
semen will not increase as a result of this rule. Movement of swine
embryos and semen is limited because the technology is not as advanced
as it is for other species.
Like domestic swine producers, the majority of pork producers (97
percent of 1367 meat packing establishments and 98 percent of 1264
other processing plants, according to 1992 data) qualify as small
entities. We expect the effect of this rule on these entities will be
minimal because, while Spain produces a considerable amount of pork
(2.107 million metric tons in 1994), its total pork production amounts
to only about 26 percent of the total pork production of the United
States. Additionally, most of Spain's pork production is consumed
within Spain, as its population consumes pork at a rate greater than
1.6 times that of the U.S. population.
In 1994, Spain exported approximately 83,000 metric tons of pork,
but more than 97 percent of these exports were to European countries.
While Spanish exports of pork are growing and its imports of pork are
declining, Spain has historically been a net importer of pork. From
1991 to 1993, Spain imported well over twice as
[[Page 43307]]
much pork as it exported. Even if Spain were able to redirect all of
its exports of pork to the United States, it would constitute a small
portion of the domestic market, as U.S. pork production was 8 million
metric tons in 1994.
Since 1985, the United States has expanded its pork exports by more
than four times to reach 240,858 metric tons in 1994. Simultaneously,
the United States has decreased its pork imports, as exemplified by a
decrease of approximately 34 percent in 1994, and the trend is
continuing. In an average year, up to 90 percent of pork imported into
the United States comes from Canada and Denmark.
Domestic pork producers most likely to be affected by this rule are
a small number of domestic producers of specific specialty pork
products. We anticipate increased imports into the United States from
Spain of dry-cured, ready-to-eat ham; dry-cured, salted, boneless loin;
and dry-cured sausages, particularly Serrano ham. Most of these
products are similar to Parma and prosciutto hams and other cured pork
products being produced domestically and produced in other countries
for importation into the United States, but Serrano ham is a specialty
product with unique water content, color, aroma, and flavor.
Spain currently produces approximately 350,000 metric tons of all
types of cured ham per year. It is estimated that in 1994 more than
975,000 metric tons of all types of cured ham were produced in the
United States. While Spanish production of all types of cured ham
represents approximately 36 percent of U.S. cured ham production,
Spain's domestic consumption of cured pork is considerably higher than
consumption in the United States. About 40 percent of Spain's total
pork consumption consists of cured pork. In 1994, Spain exported only
4,135 metric tons of cured ham, which amounts to significantly less
than 1 percent of total U.S. production of cured pork. These exports
were directed primarily to France, Argentina, Portugal, and Germany.
From all indications, only a few of the largest 18 cured pork
producers in Spain, which account for 50 percent of Spanish production
of cured pork, have an interest in or a capability for penetrating the
U.S. market over the foreseeable future. Further, we estimate that the
maximum amount of cured pork products that Spain can expect to export
to the United States will likely not exceed 500 metric tons annually,
and this ceiling will likely not be reached for a period of about 5
years because the imports arriving in the United States from Spain will
still be required to meet Food Safety and Inspection Service standards
before entering the country.
We estimate that there are approximately 15 companies in the United
States producing significant amounts of specialty processed pork
products that will compete with the potential imports from Spain. A
small portion of these producers are very large, and these specialty
products constitute only a small fraction of their overall business.
Therefore, we expect the impact of this rule on these large companies
will be minimal. However, the small producers may be impacted by
additional imports. Yet, without specific information on (1) the
quantity of additional imports generated by the rule change, (2) the
quantity of domestic production, and (3) the degree to which Spanish
imports will displace other imports rather than domestic production,
the impact on small domestic producers cannot be predicted.
An alternative to this rule was to make no changes in the
regulations. We rejected this alternative because Spain has had no
reported cases of ASF since September 1994, and, therefore, we have no
scientific reason to continue considering Spain to be a country where
ASF exists.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and
regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no
retroactive effect; and (3) does not require administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains no new information collection or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 94
Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk,
Poultry and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 9 CFR part 94 is amended as follows:
PART 94--RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE, FOWL PEST (FOWL
PLAGUE), VELOGENIC VISCEROTROPIC NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE
FEVER, HOG CHOLERA, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY:
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 94 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 147a, 150ee, 161, 162, and 450; 19 U.S.C.
1306; 21 U.S.C. 111, 114a, 134a, 134b, 134c, 134f, 136, and 136a; 31
U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 4331, and 4332; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and
371.2(d).
Sec. 94.8 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 94.8, the introductory text is amended by removing the
words ``, and Spain'' and by adding the word ``and'' immediately
preceding the word ``Portugal''.
Done in Washington, DC, this 16th day of August 1996.
A. Strating,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21455 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21391 Fees for Official Inspection and Official Weighing Services
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43301-43305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21391]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 164 / Thursday, August 22, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 43301]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
7 CFR Part 800
RIN 0580-AA40
Fees for Official Inspection and Official Weighing Services
AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule and Withdrawal of Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS), of the Grain
Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), is changing
the way it collects user fees for official inspection and weighing
services performed in the United States under the United States Grain
Standards Act (USGSA), as amended. The new fee structure establishes
fees for specific services using hourly rates and/or unit fees. This
structure provides customers with information to better assess the cost
of specific services, and allows FGIS to pass savings (in the form of
fewer billable hours) to customers who invest in operational
efficiencies. The new fee structure includes a 4 percent increase to
recover salary increases.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Wollam, USDA, GIPSA, Room 0623
South Building, STOP 3649, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC
20250-3649, or telephone (202) 720-0292.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been determined to be significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by the Office
of Management and Budget.
The change in the way user fees are collected provides customers
with information to better assess the costs of specific inspection
services because the fees will be more service specific than under the
current hourly rate. Further, it allows savings to be passed on to
users of the service who invest in operational efficiencies. Currently,
applicants choose only those services they want, but individual service
costs are supported by hourly rates without segregation. Fiscal year
1993 financial and volume data were used in developing the new fee
structure. While certain fees are increased and new fees are
established, the revenue generated using fiscal year 1993 data is
equivalent to the $23,192,178 collected that year.
The new fee structure does include a 4 percent increase to recover
salary increases since 1993, and would have generated sufficient
revenue to cover costs for fiscal year 1994 and the costs for fiscal
year 1995. For information, fiscal year 1994 revenues were $20,662,062
with obligations of $21,415,400. For fiscal year 1995, revenues were
$23,382,253 with obligations of $24,015,289, and for the first half of
fiscal year 1996 revenues were $1,924,516 with obligations of
$1,916,609. Obligations include buyout costs, along with costs
associated with office consolidations.
Presently, users of the inspection service are charged on an hourly
basis. This hourly rate includes the salary and benefits for each
service representative providing the service, as well as a portion of
overhead and program support costs. The overall cost of a wide variety
of services, e.g., grading, weighing, wheat protein measurement,
soybean protein and oil measurement, and aflatoxin detection, are
averaged together and recovered through an hourly service rate. Under
the new system, customers will be charged a lower base hourly rate plus
a unit fee to cover the cost of the specific service they request, such
as wheat protein. Overhead and program costs will be recovered through
a per-metric-ton volume fee assessed on all grain loaded from a
facility.
This rule may have an economic impact on infrequent users of the
service. FGIS incurs difficulty balancing costs and revenue in some
locations where customers desire local FGIS service capacity but use
the service infrequently. The new fee schedule is designed to shift the
cost of non-revenue producing time to those users responsible for
incurring it. Consequently, infrequent users of the service may find
the net effect of the new hourly fees and per-metric-ton administrative
fee increases their total per-metric-ton cost for inspection service.
Conversely, highly efficient and/or high-volume users of the service
may realize a decrease in their per-metric-ton cost for inspection
service due to the reduced contract hourly rate and the use of an
administrative fee to cover overhead and program support expenses.
Most users of the official inspection and weighing services do not
meet the requirements for small entities. Further, FGIS is required by
statute to make services available and to recover costs of providing
such services as nearly as practicable. Therefore, James R. Baker,
Administrator, GIPSA, has determined that this final rule does not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Executive Order 12778
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778,
Civil Justice Reform. This action does not have a retroactive effect.
The USGSA provides in Sec. 87g that no subdivision may require or
impose any requirements or restrictions concerning the inspection,
weighing, or description of grain under the Act. Otherwise, this final
rule does not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies
unless they present irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are
no administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to any
judicial challenge to provisions of this rule.
Information Collection and Recordkeeping Requirements
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter
3504), the previously approved information collection and recordkeeping
requirements concerning applications for inspection and weighing
services have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget
under control number 0580-0013.
[[Page 43302]]
Background
On November 30, 1995, FGIS proposed in the Federal Register (60 FR
61499) to change the way it collects user fees for official inspection
and weighing services performed under the USGSA.
The USGSA fees for inspection and weighing services were last
increased and became effective on May 20, 1991 (56 FR 15803).
Currently, they appear in 7 CFR Sec. 800.71, Schedule A, Fees for
Official Inspection, Weighing, and Appeal Inspection Services Performed
in the United States.
FGIS is revising Sec. 800.71, Schedule A--Fees for Official
Inspection, Weighing, and Appeal Inspection Services Performed in the
United States. Instead of one schedule covering all services, there are
now three new tables. The new tables are: Table 1, ``Fees for Official
Services Performed at an Applicant's Facility in an Onsite FGIS
Laboratory;'' Table 2, ``Services Performed at Other Than an
Applicant's Facility in an FGIS Laboratory;'' and Table 3,
``Miscellaneous Services.''
Schedule A, Table 1. This table covers all services performed
onsite at an applicant's facility and continues the existing provision
for using contract and noncontract hourly rates. The hourly rates are
calculated to include only those costs directly related to labor and do
not include overhead. The current 1 year contract is retained, but
provisions are included for 3- and 6-month contracts. FGIS will
evaluate the use of 3- and 6-month contracts after 1-year to determine
if they shall be continued. The rate differences between 1-year, 6-
month, and 3-month contracts reflect the costs associated with
increased staff production under a contract.
1. Hourly Rates
The new hourly rates are divided into four categories related to
how FGIS employees are paid: regular time (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.), 10
percent night differential (6 p.m. to 6 a.m.), overtime at 1\1/2\ the
regular hourly rate (for applicant-caused or requested overtime), and
holiday rates at double the regular hourly rate (all hourly rates other
than those of regular time are calculated using only the average base
hourly rate; this does not include personnel benefits).
2. Additional Tests
Additional unit fees for certain tests such as Aflatoxin,
Vomitoxin, Soybean protein and/or oil, Sunflower oil, Wheat protein,
Waxy corn, and Class Y weighing are implemented. These fees will
recover additional costs incurred such as testing materials, equipment,
and hazardous waste disposal which are not recovered through the hourly
fee or administrative fee.
3. Administrative Fee
A per-metric-ton administrative charge is implemented to recover
the indirect costs of FGIS field offices and headquarters such as the
salaries and benefits for office management and support staff, and
rent. This charge is assessed on all outbound grain inspected and/or
weighed at an applicant's facility. Six levels of fees are implemented
ranging from 1 metric ton or less to over 7,000,001 metric tons with
fees decreasing as the number of metric tons inspected increases. The
charge is assessed in addition to the base hourly rate. At the
beginning of each fiscal year (October 1), all applicants pay the same
per-metric-ton fee. Once a level has been reached, the fee for
additional metric tons is reduced until the maximum volume level is
reached. Inspections performed on grain that cannot be captured as part
of the metric ton charge has a unit fee assessed in addition to the
hourly rate to recover overhead costs. Inspections such as submitted
samples, factor only, and sacked grain are included.
Schedule A, Table 2, covers fees for inspection and weighing
services where FGIS does not have an onsite laboratory at an
applicant's facility. The fees in this table are a mixture of hourly
rates and unit fees. They cover a vast array of specific services
presently provided under the current hourly rates. The hourly rates
applied in Table 2 are the appropriate rates from Table 1, unless
specific hourly rates are identified. Unit fees cover the time required
to perform the service plus a portion for overhead. The types of
service provided under these fees include inspection for grade and
factor for specific carriers probe sampled or sampled online,
additional services and testing (i.e., individual tests), Board appeals
and appeals, weighing (Class X and Y), and stowage examinations.
Schedule A, Table 3, provides fees to cover a variety of services
not included in the previous tables. As with Table 2, the change in the
fee structure from an hourly fee that recovers all costs to a service-
specific fee structure requires a listing of specific services
currently funded by the hourly rate. These service-specific fees are a
mixture of hourly rates and unit fees and apply to Grain Grading
Seminars, Certification of Diverter Samplers, Special Services, Scale
Testing and Certification, Evaluation of Weighing and Material Handling
Systems, National Type Evaluation Program (NTEP) Prototype Evaluation
(this hourly rate applies to scales, moisture meters and NIR
analyzers), NTEP Prototype Evaluation of Railroad Track Scales, Mass
Standards Calibration and Reverification, Special Projects, Foreign
Travel, Online Customized Data Export Grain Information System (EGIS)
Service, Samples Provided to Interested Parties, Divided-Lot
Certificates, Extra Copies of Certificates, Faxing, Special Mailing,
and Preparing Certificates Onsite.
Further, FGIS is establishing a unit fee to recover expenses
incurred when FGIS employees are requested to provide consulting
services outside the United States. Currently, there is no fee for
recovering costs of salary, travel, per diem, and related costs which
is not related to an official service provided on a shipment of grain
at the time of export from the United States. For example, an exporter
may ask for an FGIS microbiologist to consult with microbiologists in
an importing country to resolve adispute on the presence of grain
fungi; or a USDA cooperator may request an FGIS inspector to conduct
training for inspectors in an importing country.
FGIS is also changing Secs. 800.72 and 800.73 of the regulations to
further clarify the application of fees covered in Schedule A.
Specifically, service provided under Schedule A covers service provided
within 25 miles of the employee's assigned duty point. Travel, per
diem, and other related costs are assessed for providing service beyond
the 25-mile limit. A minimum fee is established for services identified
in Table 2 performed outside of normal business hours Monday through
Friday.
Comment Review
FGIS received four comments during the 60-day comment period. Two
comments were from grain handling trade associations, one from a State,
and one from a steamship association. Both comments from the grain
handling trade associations were generally supportive of the proposed
rule; however, one commented that under the current hourly fees FGIS
field office managers are encouraged to assign more employees to a
shift than may be prudent. The commentor went on to say that the
proposed fee structure does promote a more fair allocation of costs,
but does not go far enough to reduce direct labor costs through job
consolidation or by assigning supervisory personnel collateral duty for
performing additional tests in those situations where the shift
supervisor or journeyman grader are qualified or capable of doing the
additional test.
[[Page 43303]]
FGIS does not agree that its field office managers are over
staffing shifts under the current hourly fees. FGIS further believes
that direct labor costs will be reduced through the new lower hourly
rate fee structure which includes a lower hourly rate for online
supervisory personnel and the recovery of overhead through a per-
metric-ton administrative fee. FGIS does utilize its inspection
personnel to their maximum potential.
The comment from the State was entirely supportive and encouraged
FGIS to adopt a unit fee for direct services provided to the industry
with minimum hourly rates.
The comment from the steamship association requested that FGIS
maintain the current hourly rate with a small increase, that FGIS
increase the number of hours and personnel available for stowage
examinations, and that stowage examinations and stowage re-examinations
will cost more to the steamship line if the inspections are done in
different parts of the country.
FGIS has determined that changing the way it collects fees from an
hourly rate to a combination of reduced hourly rates and unit fees is
the most equitable way to recover its costs and provide the grain
industry quality service. FGIS agrees re-examining ship holds will cost
more to the steamship line if the inspections are done in different
parts of the country. Therefore, FGIS is modifying the provisions for
charging for stowage examinations when the initial examination was
performed at a different port. FGIS will not charge the minimum fee and
will charge the per hold charge if the ship has moved from one port to
another.
While the comment concerning FGIS increasing the hours and
personnel available for inspection is not within the scope of this
rulemaking, we do note that stowage examination is conducted generally
during daylight hours.
Withdrawal of Interim Final Rule
On January 8, 1993 (58 FR 3213), FGIS published an interim rule,
which would have implemented fee increases for official inspection and
weighing services, effective February 1, 1993. On January 21, 1993,
FGIS published in the Federal Register, a document indefinitely
postponing the fee increase. This action withdraws the interim final
rule published at 58 FR 3213.
October 1, 1996, Effective Date
The changes to the fee schedules made in this final rule are
effective October 1, 1996. That date corresponds to the beginning of
the 1997 fiscal year and the start of a new accounting cycle.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 800
Administrative practice and procedure; Grain.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 800 is amended
as follows:
PART 800--GENERAL REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 800 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Pub. L. 94-582, 90 Stat. 2867, as amended (7 U.S.C.
71 et seq.)
2. Section 800.71 is amended by revising Schedule A to read as
follows:
Sec. 800.71 Fees assessed by the Service.
(a) * * *
Schedule A.--Fees for Official Inspection and Weighing Services
Performed in the United States
Table 1.--Fees for Official Services Performed at an Applicant's Facility in an Onsite FGIS Laboratory \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday to Monday to
Friday (6 Friday (6 Saturday,
a.m. to 6 p.m. to 6 Sunday, and Holidays
p.m.) a.m.) Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\2\-----------------
(1) Inspection and Weighing Services Hourly Rates (per service representative)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-year contract............................................. $23.00 $24.80 $32.40 $39.00
6-month contract............................................ 25.00 26.80 34.40 43.60
3-month contract............................................ 28.00 29.80 37.40 46.60
Noncontract................................................. 33.00 35.00 42.80 52.60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Additional Tests (cost per test, assessed in addition to the hourly
rate) \3\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Aflatoxin (other than Thin Layer Chromatography)........... $8.50
(ii) Aflatoxin (Thin Layer Chromatography method).............. 20.00
(iii) Soybean protein and oil (one or both).................... 1.50
(iv) Wheat protein (per test).................................. 1.50
(v) Sunflower oil (per test)................................... 1.50
(vi) Vomitoxin (qualitative)................................... 7.50
(vii) Vomitoxin (quantitative)................................. 12.50
(viii) Waxy corn (per test).................................... 1.50
(ix) Fees for other tests not listed above will be based on the
lowest noncontract hourly rate.
(x) Other services
(a) Class Y Weighing (per carrier).........................
(1) Truck/container.................................... .30
(2) Railcar............................................ 1.25
(3) Barge.............................................. 2.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Administrative Fee (assessed in addition to all other applicable
fees, only one administrative fee will be assessed when inspection and
weighing services are performed on the same carrier).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) All outbound carriers (per-metric-ton) \4\
(a) 1-1,000,000............................................ $0.090
(b) 1,000,001-1,500,000.................................... 0.082
(c) 1,500,001-2,000,000.................................... 0.042
(d) 2,000,001-5,000,000.................................... 0.032
(e) 5,000,001-7,000,000.................................... 0.017
[[Page 43304]]
(f) 7,000,001-............................................. 0.002
(ii) Additional services (assessed in addition to all other
fees) \3\
(a) Submitted sample (per sample-grade and factor)......... 1.50
(b) Submitted sample--Factor only (per factor)............. 0.70
\1\ Fees apply for original inspection and weighing, reinspection, and
appeal inspection service include, but are not limited to, sampling,
grading, weighing, prior to loading stowage examinations, and
certifying results performed within 25 miles of an employee's assigned
duty station. Travel and related expenses will be charged for service
outside 25 miles as found in Sec. 800.72(a).
\2\ Overtime rates will be assessed for all hours in excess of 8
consecutive hours that result from an applicant scheduling or
requesting service beyond 8 hours, or if requests for additional
shifts exceed existing staffing.
\3\ Appeal and reinspection services will be assessed the same fee as
the original inspection service.
\4\ The administrative fee is assessed on an accumulated basis beginning
at the start of the Service's fiscal year (October 1 each year).
Table 2.--Services Performed at Other Than an Applicant's Facility in an
FGIS Laboratory \1\ \2\
(1) Original Inspection and Weighing (Class X) Services
(i) Sampling only (use hourly rates from Table 1)
(ii) Stationary lots (sampling, grade/factor, and
checkloading)
(a) Truck/trailer/container (per carrier).............. $17.60
(b) Railcar (per carrier).............................. $27.00
(c) Barge (per carrier)................................ $173.60
(d) Sacked grain (per hour per service representative
plus an administrative fee per hundredweight) (CWT)... $0.02
(iii) Lots sampled online during loading (sampling charge
under (i) above plus)
(a) Truck/trailer container (per carrier).............. $9.40
(b) Railcar (per carrier).............................. $18.80
(c) Barge (per carrier)................................ $107.60
(d) Sacked grain (per hour per service representative
plus an administrative fee per hundredweight) (CWT)... $0.02
(iv) Other services
(a) Submitted sample (per sample--grade and factor).... $10.00
(b) Warehouseman inspection (per sample)............... $17.00
(c) Factor only (per factor--maximum 2 factors)........ $4.10
(d) Checkloading/condition examination (use hourly
rates from Table 1, plus an administrative fee per
hundredweight if not previously assessed) (CWT)....... $0.02
(e) Reinspection (grade and factor only. Sampling
service additional, item (i) above.................... $11.00
(f) Class X Weighing (per hour per service
representative)....................................... $43.60
(v) Additional tests (excludes sampling)
(a) Aflatoxin (per test--other than TLC method)........ $25.00
(b) Aflatoxin (per test--TLC method)................... $100.50
(c) Soybean protein and oil (one or both).............. $7.80
(d) Wheat protein (per test)........................... $7.80
(e) Sunflower oil (per test)........................... $7.80
(f) Vomitoxin (qualitative)............................ $25.00
(g) Vomitoxin (quantitative)........................... $30.00
(h) Waxy corn (per test)............................... $9.00
(i) Canola (per test--00 dip test) $9.00
(j) Pesticide Residue Testing \3\
(1) Routine Compounds (per sample)................... $200.00
(2) Special Compounds (per service representative)... $100.00
(k) Fees for other tests not listed above will be based on
the lowest noncontract hourly rate from Table 1.
(2) Appeal inspection and review of weighing service.\4\
(i) Board Appeals and Appeals (grade and factor)........... $74.60
(a) Factor only (per factor--max 2 factors)............ $38.00
(b) Sampling service for Appeals additional (hourly
rates from Table 1)...................................
(ii) Additional tests (assessed in addition to all other
applicable fees)
(a) Aflatoxin (per test, other than TLC)............... $25.00
(b) Aflatoxin (TLC).................................... $110.00
(c) Soybean protein and oil (one or both).............. $15.30
(d) Wheat protein (per test)........................... $15.30
(e) Sunflower oil (per test)........................... $15.30
(f) Vomitoxin (per test--qualitative).................. $35.00
(g) Vomitoxin (per test--quantitative)................. $40.00
(h) Vomitoxin (per test--HPLC Board Appeal)............ $125.70
(i) Pesticide Residue Testing \3\..........................
(1) Routine Compounds (per sample)..................... $200.00
(2) Special Compounds (per service representative)..... $100.00
(j) Fees for other tests not listed above will be based
on the lowest noncontract hourly rate from Table 1.
(iii) Review of weighing (per hour per service
representative)........................................... $63.50
(3) Stowage examination (service-on- request)\3\
(i) Ship (per stowage space) (minimum $250 per ship)....... $50.00
(ii) Subsequent ship examinations (same as original)\5\
(minimum $150 per ship)
(iii) Barge (per examination).......................... $40.00
(iv) All other carriers (per examination).............. $15.00
\1\ Fees apply for original inspection and weighing, reinspection, and
appeal inspection service include, but are not limited to, sampling,
grading, weighing, prior to loading stowage examinations, and
certifying results performed within 25 miles of an employee's assigned
duty station. Travel and related expenses will be charged for service
outside 25 miles are found in Sec. 800.72 (a).
\2\ An additional charge will be assessed when the revenue from the
services in Schedule A, Table 2, does not cover what would have been
collected at the applicable hourly rate as provided in Sec. 800.72
(b).
\3\ If performed outside of normal business, 1\1/2\ times the applicable
unit fee will be charged.
\4\ If, at the request of the Service, a file sample is located and
forwarded by the Agency for an official appeal, the Agency may, upon
request, be reimbursed at the rate of $2.50 per sample by the Service.
\5\ If a ship has had, and passed, a stowage examination at one port
location but not loaded all holds examined, then moved to another port,
the subsequent stowage examination shall charged the minimum hold fee
but only the per hold unit charge.
Table 3.--Miscellaneous Services \1\
(1) Grain grading seminars (per hour per service
representative)............................................. $43.60
[[Page 43305]]
(2) Certification of diverter-type mechanical samplers (per
hour per service representative)............................ $43.60
(3) Special services (per hour per service representative):..
(i) Scale testing and certification...................... $43.60
(ii) Evaluation of weighing and material handling systems $43.60
(iii) NTEP Prototype evaluation (other than Railroad
Track Scales)........................................... $43.60
(iv) NTEP Prototype evaluation of Railroad Track Scales
(usage fee per day for test car)........................ $100.00
(v) Mass standards calibration and reverification........ $43.60
(vi) Special projects.................................... $43.60
(4) Foreign travel (per day per service representative)...... $416.00
(5) Online customized data EGIS service
(i) One data file per week for 1 year.................... $500.00
(ii) One data file per month for 1 year.................. $300.00
(6) Samples provided to interested parties (per sample)...... $2.50
(7) Divided-lot certificates (per certificate)............... $1.50
(8) Extra copies of certificates (per certificate)........... $1.50
(9) Faxing (per page)........................................ $1.50
(10) Special mailing (actual cost)...........................
(11) Preparing certificates onsite or during other than
normal business hours (use hourly rates from Table 1).
\1\ Any requested service that is not listed will be performed at the
applicable noncontract hourly rate.
\2\ Regular business hours-Monday thru Friday- service provided at other
than regular hours charged at the applicable overtime hourly rate.
* * * * *
3. Section 800.72 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 800.72 Explanation of additional service fees for services
performed in the United States only.
(a) When transportation of the service representative to the
service location (at other than a specified duty point) is more than 25
miles from an FGIS office, the actual transportation cost in addition
to the applicable hourly rate for each service representative will be
assessed from the FGIS office to the service point and return. When
commercial modes of transportation (e.g., airplanes) are required, the
actual expense incurred for the round-trip travel will be assessed.
When services are provided to more than one applicant, the travel and
other related charges will be prorated between applicants.
(b) In addition to a 2-hour minimum charge for service on
Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, an additional charge will be assessed
when the revenue from the services in Sec. 800.71, Schedule A, Table 2,
does not equal or exceed what would have been collected at the
applicable hourly rate. The additional charge will be the difference
between the actual unit fee revenue and the hourly fee revenue. Hours
accrued for travel and standby time shall apply in determining the
hours for the minimum fee.
4. Section 800.73 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 800.73 Computation and payment of service fees; general fee
information.
(a) Computing hourly rates. The applicable hourly rate will be
assessed in quarter hour increments for:
(1) Travel from the FGIS field office or assigned duty station to
the service point and return;
(2) The performance of the requested service, less mealtime.
(b) Application of fees when service is delayed or dismissed by the
applicant. The applicable hourly rate will be assessed for the entire
period of scheduled service when:
(1) Service has been requested at a specified location;
(2) A service representative is on duty and ready to provide
service but is unable to do so because of a delay not caused by the
Service; and
(3 FGIS officials determine that the service representative cannot
be utilized to provide service elsewhere without cost to the Service.
(c) Application of fees when an application for service is
withdrawn or dismissed. The applicable hourly rate will be assessed to
the applicant for the entire period of scheduled service if the request
is withdrawn or dismissed after the service representative departs for
the service point, or if the service request is not canceled by 2 p.m.,
local time, the business day preceding the date of scheduled service.
However, the applicable hourly rate will not be assessed to the
applicant if FGIS officials determine that the service representative
can be utilized elsewhere or released without cost to the Service.
(d) To whom fees are assessed. Fees for inspection, weighing, and
related services performed by service representatives, including
additional fees as provided in Sec. 800.72, shall be assessed to and
paid by the applicant for the service.
(e) Monthly payment of administrative fee. At the option of the
applicant, an agreement for 12 equal monthly payments may be entered
into for payment of the administrative fee. These monthly payments will
be based on the previous fiscal year's volume applied to the current
year's administrative fee schedule. If the volume of grain inspected is
more than the amount of grain agreed upon at the beginning of the
fiscal year, at the point the agreed upon volume is exceeded, the
current year's administrative fee schedule shall apply to the remaining
amount of grain for the rest of the fiscal year. If the volume of grain
inspected is less than the agreed upon amount, any excess monies paid
to the Service shall be applied to the next fiscal year's
administrative fee unless a request for a refund is made by the
applicant.
(f) Advance payment. As necessary, the Administrator may require
that fees shall be paid in advance of the performance of the requested
service. Any fees paid in excess of the amount due shall be used to
offset future billings, unless a request for a refund is made by the
applicant.
(g) Form of payment. Bills for fees assessed under the regulations
in this part for official services performed by FGIS shall be paid by
check, draft, or money order, payable to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.
Dated: August 16, 1996.
Shirley Watkins,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Marketing and Regulatory Programs.
[FR Doc. 96-21391 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-EN-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21376 Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Allowing Quota Shares and Individual Fishing Quota To Be Used on Smaller Vessels
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43312-43315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21376]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 960612171-6227-02; I.D. 060496A]
RIN 0648-AI57
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Allowing
Quota Shares and Individual Fishing Quota To Be Used on Smaller Vessels
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule to implement Amendment 42 to the
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska and
Amendment 42 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area, and a regulatory amendment
to the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program for fixed gear Pacific
halibut and sablefish fisheries in and off Alaska. These FMP and
regulatory amendments will allow quota shares (QS) and their associated
IFQ assigned to vessels in larger size categories to be used on smaller
vessels. This action is necessary to increase the flexibility of QS use
and transfer while maintaining the management goals of the IFQ Program.
It is intended to relieve certain restrictions in the IFQ Program.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 16, 1996.
[[Page 43313]]
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final rule and the Environmental Assessment/
Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/
FRFA) for this action may be obtained from Fisheries Management
Division, ATTN: Lori Gravel, Alaska Region, National Marine Fisheries
Service, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hale, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska groundfish
FMPs and their implementing regulations govern the sablefish fisheries
in Federal waters off Alaska. The FMPs were developed by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) under the authority of the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act). The
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act) authorizes the
Council to develop, and NMFS to implement, regulations to allocate
halibut fishing privileges among U.S. fishermen.
Under these authorities, the Council developed the IFQ Program, a
limited access system to manage the fixed gear Pacific halibut and
sablefish fisheries. NMFS approved the IFQ Program in November 1993 and
fully implemented it beginning in March 1995. The Magnuson Act and the
Halibut Act authorize amendments to the IFQ Program as necessary to
conserve and manage these fisheries. These amendments allow QS and IFQ
assigned to vessels in larger size categories to be used on smaller
vessels. A description of these amendments follows.
The IFQ Program assigns QS and IFQ to vessel categories specified
by length overall (LOA) and authorization to process IFQ species or not
as follows: Category A--which authorizes an IFQ cardholder to catch and
process IFQ species on a vessel of any length; Category B--which
authorizes an IFQ cardholder to catch IFQ species on a vessel greater
than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA; Category C--which authorizes an IFQ cardholder
to catch sablefish on a vessel less than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA, and catch halibut on a vessel less than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m)
but greater than 35 ft (10.7 m) LOA; or Category D--which authorizes an
IFQ cardholder to catch halibut on a vessel less than or equal to 35 ft
(10.7 m) LOA. Current regulations at Sec. 679.42(a) require that IFQ be
fished only on vessels in the category to which the pertinent QS have
been assigned.
An exception to this rule allows Category B, C, or D IFQ to be
fished on a Category A vessel provided its LOA is consistent with the
vessel category of the IFQ being fished and it neither processes any
species of fish nor concurrently fishes Category A IFQ with the use of
Category B, C, or D IFQ (Sec. 679.42(i)(2)(i)). The Council prohibited
QS transfer across vessel categories to preserve the social and
cultural character of the small boat fisheries prior to limited access.
During the first year of fishing under the IFQ Program in 1995, IFQ
fishermen and their representatives reported to the Council that the
prohibition against using or transferring QS across vessel categories
limited their ability to improve the profitability of their operations.
Many fishermen reported that they had received QS that represented far
fewer pounds than their recent catch history prior to the IFQ Program.
Small boat fishermen reported the scarcity of medium- and large-size QS
blocks greater than or equal to 5,000 lb (2.3 mt) available to smaller
vessels and requested that the Council enable them to purchase shares
from QS holders in larger vessel size categories. Also, Category B
vessel operators reported difficulties in using or marketing small
Category B blocks and requested the opportunity either to downsize
operations or to sell smaller QS blocks to owners of smaller vessels.
These amendments address the above concerns by allowing QS
initially assigned to a larger vessel category to be used on smaller
vessels, while continuing to prohibit the use of QS or its associated
IFQ assigned to smaller vessel categories on larger vessels. QS will
continue to be assigned to vessel categories by existing criteria at
Sec. 679.40(a)(5) (i) through (vi) and will retain original vessel
category assignments. However, halibut and sablefish QS and their
associated IFQ assigned to vessel Category B can be used on vessels of
any size; halibut QS assigned to vessel Category C likewise can be used
on vessels of categories C and D. The regulations continue to prohibit
the use of QS and IFQ on vessels larger than the maximum LOA of the
category to which the QS was originally assigned.
This rule does not apply to halibut in IFQ regulatory areas 2C or
to sablefish east of 140 deg. W. long. Halibut QS assigned to vessel
Category B in IFQ regulatory areas 2C and sablefish QS east of 140 deg.
W. long. are prohibited from use on vessels less than or equal to 60 ft
(18.3 m) LOA except in QS blocks equivalent to less than 5,000 lb (2.3
mt) based on the 1996 Total Allowable Catch (TAC).
For example, an individual who holds two blocks of QS assigned to
vessel Category B in regulatory area 2C (for halibut) or east of
140 deg. W. long. (for sablefish)--one block equivalent to 13,000 lb
(5.9 mt) and the other equivalent to 3000 lb (1.4 mt) (according to the
1996 TAC)--would be able to transfer the smaller QS block or use its
resulting IFQ on catcher vessels of any size, because the block is
equivalent to less than 5,000 lb (2.3 mt). The larger QS block, which
would result in IFQ of more than 5,000 lb (2.3 mt), would still be
prohibited from use on any vessel other than one in vessel Category B.
Unblocked QS of any amount assigned to vessel Category B in areas 2C
and east of 140 deg. W. long. would continue to be restricted to
transfer or use on vessels in Category B only.
Further information on the amendments may be found in the preamble
to the proposed rule (61 FR 32767, June 25, 1996). Written comments on
the proposed rule and associated amendments were invited through August
5, 1996, and August 6, 1996, respectively.
Changes From the Proposed Rule to the Final Rule
No substantive changes have been made in the final rule from the
proposed rule. Between publication of the proposed and final rules for
this action, the regulations governing fisheries in the Exclusive
Economic Zone off Alaska have been consolidated into one new CFR part
(50 CFR part 679) as part of the President's Regulatory Reform
Initiative (see 61 FR 31228, June 19, 1996). This final rule renumbers
and otherwise adjusts the changes contained herein to be consistent
with the new disposition of regulations in 50 CFR part 679.
Comments on the Proposed Rule
Sixteen letters of comment were received by NMFS regarding
Amendments 42/42. Fourteen letters provided comments in support of the
amendments. Of these, nine opposed the exception for halibut in
regulatory areas 2C and for sablefish east of 140 deg. W. long. Seven
letters requested that NMFS expedite the regulatory review process,
promoting the opportunity for fishermen with larger QS to take
advantage of this action during the summer weather. One letter provided
no comment. One letter indicated that these amendments would increase
costs for consumers as a result of smaller, rather than larger, vessels
delivering QS. These comments, which are summarized and responded to
below,
[[Page 43314]]
were considered in the formulation of this final rule.
Comment 1: The amendments should improve the profitability of
operations for fishermen in the IFQ Program.
Response: NMFS concurs in this comment. These amendments will
provide small boat owners opportunity to acquire QS initially assigned
to holders with larger vessels, and the amendments will make smaller
Category B blocks more marketable.
Comment 2: The exception for the regulatory areas 2C for halibut
and east of 140 deg. W. long. is unnecessary.
Response: The exception is necessary. The imbalance in distribution
of QS across vessel categories in these regulatory areas, with a
predominant amount of shares assigned for use on smaller vessels,
requires the exception to prevent excessive consolidation of QS among
owners of smaller vessels. This action nevertheless provides some
additional flexibility by allowing QS blocks equivalent to less than
5,000 lb (2.3 mt) to be used on smaller vessels.
Comment 3: These amendments will increase costs for consumers,
because more small vessels will deliver IFQ catch. The concept of scale
economies, in which a processing plant can spread its fixed costs over
more quantity permitting it to sell at better prices, is lost. These
amendments, therefore, will not be in the best interest of the local
economy, the region, or the nation.
Response: Although the commenter may be theoretically correct with
respect to any one processor, NMFS does not have information to compare
price information with fixed costs in the aggregate for all processors.
On balance, these amendments will benefit the Nation. National Standard
1 of the Magnuson Act requires measures, in part, to achieve the
optimum yield (OY) from each fishery for the U.S. fishing industry. The
determination of OY is a decisional mechanism for balancing the various
interests that comprise the national welfare. Among these interests are
social factors, including those relevant to small boat fisheries on
which local Alaskan communities often depend. NMFS finds that these
amendments promote these social factors, resulting in a positive
benefit to the Nation.
Comment 4: The majority of letters implored NMFS to expedite the
implementation of the amendments.
Response: NMFS notes the comment.
Classification
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS, determined that Amendment 42 to
the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska and
Amendment 42 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area are necessary for the
conservation and management of the groundfish and halibut fisheries off
Alaska and that they are consistent with the Magnuson Act and other
applicable laws.
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA finds that this
final rule relieves a restriction, because fishermen with vessels in
smaller size categories will be able to harvest, in 1996, QS and its
associated IFQ assigned to larger vessels prior to the advent of poorer
weather, thereby harvesting more of the available quota during safer
fishing conditions. A delayed effectiveness under 5 U.S.C. section
553(d)(1), therefore, is not required.
The Council prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) as part of the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR); NMFS prepared an
FRFA. These documents provide a statement of the need for and
objectives of this rule as stated in the preamble. A maximum of 8,614
small entities, including 6,640 halibut quota share holders and 1,974
sablefish quota share holders, may be affected by this rule. This rule
does not include any reporting or recordkeeping requirements. It is
designed to relieve certain restrictions in the IFQ program and open
new opportunities for owners of smaller vessels to improve the
profitability of their operations by increasing the quota share
holdings available for trade by 309 percent and the IFQ pounds
available for trade by 2,547 percent. The rule is expected to have a
positive economic impact on small entities consistent with the
objectives of the ITQ program. Alternative 1 (the status quo) was
rejected in favor of Alternative 3 (the preferred alternative) because
Alternative 3 increases the flexibility of the IFQ program and provides
additional economic opportunities to small entities. Alternative 2 (the
alternative that would not include the exception for IFQ halibut in
regulatory area 2C and for IFQ sablefish east of 140 deg. W. long.) was
rejected in favor of Alternative 3 because the preferred alternative
would avoid excessive concentration of quota share among owners of
smaller vessels, consistent with the objectives of the ITQ program;
nonetheless, Alternative 3 does provide some additional flexibility by
allowing quota share blocks of certain amounts to be used on smaller
vessels. Comments were received on the proposed rule, but none
discussed the IRFA or RIR specifically; those comments and responses to
them are summarized in the preamble. A copy of the FRFA is available
from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
E.O. 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Fisheries, Recordkeeping and Reporting.
Dated: August 16, 1996.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is
amended as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq. and 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 679.40, paragraph (a)(5)(ii) is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 679.40 Sablefish and halibut QS.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) Vessel categories. QS and its associated IFQ assigned to
vessel categories include:
(A) Category A QS and associated IFQ, which authorizes an IFQ
cardholder to harvest and process IFQ species on a vessel of any
length;
(B) Category B QS and associated IFQ, which authorizes an IFQ
cardholder to harvest IFQ species on a vessel of any length;
(C) Category C QS and associated IFQ, which authorizes an IFQ
cardholder to harvest IFQ species on a vessel less than or equal to 60
ft (18.3 m) LOA:
(D) Category D QS and associated IFQ, which authorizes an IFQ
cardholder to harvest IFQ halibut on a vessel less than or equal to 35
ft (10.7 m) LOA;
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 679.42, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 679.42 Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.
(a) IFQ regulatory area and vessel category. The QS or IFQ
specified for one IFQ regulatory area must not be used in a different
IFQ regulatory area. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this
section or in Sec. 679.41(i)(1) of this part, the IFQ assigned to one
vessel category must not be used to harvest IFQ species on a vessel of
a different vessel category. Notwithstanding Sec. 679.40(a)(5)(ii) of
this part, IFQ
[[Page 43315]]
assigned to vessel Category B must not be used on any vessel less than
or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA to harvest IFQ halibut in IFQ regulatory
area 2C or IFQ sablefish in the IFQ regulatory area east of 140 deg. W.
long. unless such IFQ derives from blocked QS units that result in IFQ
of less than 5,000 lb (2.3 mt), based on the 1996 TAC for fixed gear
specified for the IFQ halibut fishery and the IFQ sablefish fishery in
each of these two regulatory areas.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-21376 Filed 8-16-96; 4:22 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21375 Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream Aircraft Limited HP137 Mk1, Jetstream Series 200, and Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201 Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43307-43310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21375]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-CE-94-AD; Amendment 39-9722; AD 96-17-12]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream Aircraft Limited HP137 Mk1,
Jetstream Series 200, and Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes Airworthiness Directive (AD) 87-07-
01, which currently requires the following on Jetstream Aircraft
Limited (JAL) HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200, and Jetstream Model 3101
airplanes: repetitively inspecting the nose landing gear (NLG) top cap
assembly securing bolts for looseness or cracks, retorquing any loose
security bolt, and replacing any cracked security bolt. AD 87-07-01
also provides the option of incorporating an NLG modification as
terminating action for the repetitive inspections. A report of cracked
and loose bolts found on an airplane with the above-referenced NLG
modification prompted this action. This action:
[[Page 43308]]
retains the repetitive inspections required by AD 87-07-01; increases
the AD applicability to include Jetstream Model 3201 airplanes and
airplanes that have the NLG top cap assembly modified in accordance
with AD 87-07-01; requires replacing two of the NLG top cap assembly
securing bolts; and incorporates a new NLG top cap assembly that would
eliminate the repetitive inspection requirement of the AD. The actions
specified in this AD are intended to prevent failure of the NLG caused
by cracked or loose securing bolts, which, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to NLG collapse and damage to the airplane.
DATES: Effective October 21, 1996.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of October 21, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Service information that applies to this AD may be obtained
from Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Manager Product Support, Prestwick
Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW Scotland; telephone (44-292) 79888;
facsimile (44-292) 79703; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O.
Box 16029, Dulles International Airport, Washington, DC 20041-6029;
telephone (703) 406-1161; facsimile (703) 406-1469. This information
may also be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules
Docket 95-CE-94-AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Dorenda Baker, Program Officer,
Brussels Aircraft Certification Division, FAA, Europe, Africa, and
Middle East Office, c/o American Embassy, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium;
telephone (322) 508-2715; facsimile (322) 230-6899; or Mr. Jeffrey
Morfitt, Project Officer, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, FAA, 1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 426-6932; facsimile (816) 426-2169.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Events Leading to the AD
A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply to JAL HP137 Mk1,
Jetstream series 200, and Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201 airplanes that
do not have a modified NLG top cap assembly incorporated (Amendment JA
901040) was published in the Federal Register on March 22, 1996 (61 FR
11786). The action proposed to supersede AD 87-07-01 with a new AD that
would:
-- retain the requirement contained in AD 87-07-01 of repetitively
inspecting the NLG top cap assembly securing bolts for looseness,
retorquing any loose security bolt, and replacing any cracked security
bolt;
--require replacing two of the NLG top cap assembly securing bolts and
checking the other two NLG top cap assembly securing bolts for the
correct length; and
--require replacing (at a specified time) the NLG top cap assembly with
a part of improved design (Amendment JA 901040) as terminating action
for the repetitive inspections.
Accomplishment of the proposed actions would be in accordance with
Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB) 32-JA 901040, Revision No. 3, dated
August 9, 1995, and AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41, which
incorporates the following pages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages Revision level Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 15............ Revision No. 2.... Mar. 9, 1993.
4 and 10........................ Revision No. 1.... July 11, 1991.
3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14..... Original Issue.... Nov. 17, 1990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A report of cracked and loose bolts found on an airplane with the
above-referenced NLG modification prompted the proposal.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. One comment was received in support of
the proposed rule and no comments were received regarding the FAA's
determination of the cost to the public.
FAA's Determination
After careful review of all available information related to the
subject presented above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the
public interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed except for
minor editorial corrections. The FAA has determined that these minor
corrections will not change the meaning of the AD and will not add any
additional burden upon the public than was already proposed.
Cost Impact
The FAA estimates that 150 airplanes in the U.S. registry will be
affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 18 workhours
(inspection: 6 workhours; replacement: 12 workhours) to accomplish the
required actions, and that the average labor rate is approximately $60
an hour. Parts cost approximately $1,200 per airplane. Based on these
figures, the total cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators is
estimated to be $342,000 or $2,280 per airplane. This figure only takes
into account the cost of the required initial inspection and required
inspection-terminating modification and does not take into account the
cost of the required repetitive inspections. The FAA has no way of
determining the number of repetitive inspections each of the owners/
operators would incur over the life of the affected airplanes.
This figure is also based on the assumption that none of the
affected airplane owners/operators have accomplished the required
modification. This action eliminates the repetitive inspections
required by AD 87-07-01. The FAA has no way of determining the
operation levels of each individual operator of the affected airplanes,
and subsequently cannot determine the repetitive inspection costs that
will be eliminated by this action. The FAA estimates these costs to be
substantial over the long term.
In addition, JAL has informed the FAA that parts have been
distributed to owners/operators to equip approximately 62 of the
affected airplanes. Assuming that each set of parts has been installed
on an affected airplane, the cost impact of the required modification
upon the public will be reduced $141,360 from $342,000 to $200,640.
FAA's Aging Commuter-Class Aircraft Policy
This action is consistent with the FAA's aging commuter-class
airplane policy. This policy simply states that reliance on repetitive
inspections of critical areas on commuter-class airplanes carries an
unnecessary safety risk when a design change exists that could
eliminate or, in certain instances, reduce the number of those critical
inspections.
The intent of the FAA's aging commuter airplane program is to
ensure safe operation of commuter-class airplanes that are in
commercial service without adversely impacting private operators. Of
the approximately 150 airplanes in the U.S. registry that are affected
by this AD, the FAA has determined that approximately 95 percent are
operated in scheduled passenger service by 10 different operators.
[[Page 43309]]
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A copy of the final evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 87-07-01, Amendment 39-5582, and adding a new AD to read as
follows:
96-17-12 Jetstream Aircraft Limited: Amendment 39-9722; Docket No.
95-CE-94-AD. Supersedes AD 87-07-01, Amendment 39-5582.
Applicability: The following airplane models and serial numbers,
certificated in any category, that do not have a modified nose
landing gear (NLG) top cap assembly incorporated (Amendment JA
901040) in accordance with Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB) 32-JA
901040, Revision No. 3, dated August 9, 1995:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Serial numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HP137 Mk1................................. All serial numbers;
Jetstream series 200...................... All serial numbers;
Jetstream Model 3101...................... All serial numbers; and
Jetstream Model 3201...................... Serial numbers 790 through
854.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (f) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated in the body of this AD, unless
already accomplished.
To prevent failure of the NLG caused by cracked or loose
securing bolts, which, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
NLG collapse and damage to the airplane, accomplish the following:
Note 2: The paragraph structure of this AD is as follows:
Level 1: (a), (b), (c), etc.
Level 2: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Level 3: (i), (ii), (iii), etc.
Level 2 and Level 3 structures are designations of the Level 1
paragraph they immediately follow.
(a) Within the next 300 landings accumulated on the NLG after
the effective date of this AD, accomplish the following in
accordance with the applicable portion of the ACCOMPLISHMENT
INSTRUCTIONS section of Jetstream SB 32-JA 901040, Revision No. 3,
dated August 9, 1995, and AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41,
which incorporates the following pages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages Revision level Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 15............ Revision No. 2.... Mar. 9, 1993.
4 and 10........................ Revision No. 1.... July 11, 1991.
3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14..... Original Issue.... Nov. 17, 1990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Replace two of the NLG top cap assembly securing bolts, and
check the other two for correct length in accordance with part 1A of
the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS section of AP Precision Hydraulics
Ltd SB 32-41. Prior to further flight, replace any NLG top securing
bolt that is not the length specified in AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd
SB 32-41.
(2) Check the tightness of the four NLG top cap assembly
securing bolts and ensure that these bolts are not broken in
accordance with part 1b of the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS section
of AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41.
(i) Prior to further flight, retorque any bolts with incorrect
torque values.
(ii) If any bolts are broken or gaps are found as specified in
paragraph A.(4) of part 1b of the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS
section of AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41, prior to further
flight, replace the NLG in accordance with the applicable
maintenance manual.
(b) Within 1,200 landings after the actions required by
paragraph (a) of this AD (all paragraph designations), and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,200 landings, until the
modification required by paragraph (c) of this AD is incorporated,
check the tightness of the four NLG top cap assembly securing bolts
and ensure that these bolts are not broken in accordance with part
1b of the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS section of AP Precision
Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41.
(1) Prior to further flight, retorque any bolts with incorrect
torque values.
(2) If any bolts are broken or gaps are found as specified in
paragraph A.(4) of part 1b of the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS
section of AP Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41, prior to further
flight, replace the NLG in accordance with the applicable
maintenance manual.
(c) Upon accumulating 20,000 landings on the NLG or within the
next 2,500 landings accumulated on the NLG after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later, install a new NLG top cap
assembly or modify the existing NLG top cap assembly in accordance
with Part 2 of the ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS section of AP
Precision Hydraulics Ltd SB 32-41, which incorporates the following
pages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages Revision level Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 15............ Revision No. 2.... Mar. 9, 1993.
4 and 10........................ Revision No. 1.... July 11, 1991.
3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14..... Original Issue.... Nov. 17, 1990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Incorporating the modification required by paragraph (c) of
this AD is considered terminating action for the repetitive torque
checks required by this AD and may be incorporated at any time prior
to 20,000 landings on a NLG or within the next 2,500 landings
accumulated on the NLG after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later (at which time it must be incorporated).
(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
initial or repetitive compliance times that provides an equivalent
level of safety may be approved by the Manager, Brussels Aircraft
Certification Division, Europe, Africa, Middle East office, FAA, c/o
American Embassy, 1000 Brussels,
[[Page 43310]]
Belgium. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Brussels Aircraft Certification Division. Alternative
methods of compliance approved in accordance with AD 87-07-01
(superseded by this action) are not considered approved as
alternative methods of compliance with this AD.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Brussels Aircraft Certification Division.
(g) The replacements, check, retorque, and installation required
by this AD shall be done in accordance with Jetstream Service
Bulletin 32-JA 901040, Revision No. 3, dated August 9, 1995, and AP
Precision Hydraulics Ltd Service Bulletin 32-41, which incorporates
the following pages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pages Revision level Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 15............ Revision No. 2.... Mar. 9, 1993.
4 and 10........................ Revision No. 1.... July 11, 1991.
3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, and 14..... Original Issue.... Nov. 17, 1990.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of
the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51. Copies may be obtained from Jetstream Aircraft Limited,
Manager Product Support, Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW
Scotland; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian, P.O. Box 16029,
Dulles International Airport, Washington, DC. Copies may be
inspected at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief
Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at
the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW.,
suite 700, Washington, DC.
(h) This amendment (39-9722) supersedes AD 87-07-01, Amendment
39-5582.
(i) This amendment (39-9722) becomes effective on October 21,
1996.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on August 15, 1996.
Carolanne L. Cabrini,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-21375 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-21167 Deletion of Outdated References and Minor Change
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 164 (Thursday, August 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43406-43408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-21167]
[[Page 43405]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
_______________________________________________________________________
10 CFR Parts 2 and 51
Domestic Licensing: Technical Amendments; Final Rule and Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 164 / Thursday, August 22, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 43406]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 2 and 51
RIN 3150-AF43
Deletion of Outdated References and Minor Change
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to delete all references to Appendix C, of 10 CFR Part 2.
Appendix C ``General Statement of Policy and Procedures for Enforcement
Actions,'' was removed from the Code of Federal Regulations because it
is a Policy Statement, not a regulation, and the enforcement policy was
published as a Policy Statement on June 30, 1995. This direct final
rule also provides that the NRC may use discretion when determining
whether to require a written explanation or statement in reply to a
notice of violation. When the NRC believes that the licensee or other
person who receives the notice of violation has already adequately
addressed all the issues contained in that notice, at the discretion of
the NRC, further written responses may not be required.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 21, 1996, unless
significant adverse comments are received by the NRC. Comments should
be submitted by September 23, 1996. If the effective date is delayed,
timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC, 20555-0001. ATTN: Docketing and Service
Branch.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD,
between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays.
For information on submitting comments electronically, see the
discussion under Electronic Access in the Supplementary Information
Section.
Copies of comments received may be examined or copies for a fee, at
the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level),
Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M.L. Au, Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, telephone (301) 415-6181. E-Mail: INTERNET:[email protected]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The NRC has removed Appendix C, ``General Statement of Policy and
Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions,'' from 10 CFR Part 2 (60 FR
34380; June 30, 1995) inasmuch as the Enforcement Policy is a Policy
Statement, not a regulation. The enforcement policy, ``General
Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions--
Enforcement Policy,'' was published as a Policy Statement on June 30,
1995 (60 FR 34381). It was also published as NUREG-1600 in July 1995.
There are two sections (10 CFR 2.8(b) and 51.10(d)) in the Commission's
regulations that still reference Appendix C to Part 2. This rulemaking
deletes both outdated references.
This rulemaking also amends Sec. 2.201, ``Notice of Violation,'' to
provide that the NRC may use discretion when determining whether to
require a written explanation or statement in reply to a notice of
violation. When the NRC believes that the licensee or other person who
received the notice of violation has already adequately addressed all
the issues contained in that notice, further written responses may not
be required.
Discussion
I. Deletion of Outdated Reference to Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2
Section 2.8 Information Collection Requirements: OMB Approval
Section 2.8(a) currently states that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements
contained in Part 2. Section 2.8(b) states that the approved
information collection requirements appear in Appendix C to 10 CFR Part
2. Because Appendix C has been removed from Part 2, there are no longer
any information collection requirements in this part. Thus, Sec. 2.8 is
amended to state that there are no information collection requirements
contained in this part. It should be noted that any burden for the
information collections related to enforcement actions is currently
associated with the policy statement (June 30, 1995; 60 FR 34380),
rather than with Part 2.
Section 51.10 Purpose and Scope of Subpart; Application of Regulations
of Council on Environmental Quality
Section 51.10(d) currently states, ``These actions include issuance
of notices, orders, and denials of requests for action pursuant to
Subpart B of Part 2 of this chapter, matters covered by Part 15 and
Part 160 of this chapter, and any other matters covered by Appendix C
to Part 2 of this chapter.'' Because Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2 has
been deleted, this sentence is incorrect. Thus, Sec. 51.10(d) is
amended by deleting the reference to Appendix C to 10 CFR Part 2.
Enforcement-related actions identified in the former Appendix C to 10
CFR Part 2 will be added as examples to the list of actions in
Sec. 51.10(d).
II. Grant of Discretion to Commission To Require a Written
Explanation in Reply to a Notice of Violation
Section 2.201 Notice of Violation
Section 2.201(a) states that, in response to a notice of violation,
a licensee or other person subject to the jurisdiction of the
Commission to whom a notice of violation has been sent will be required
to submit a written statement in reply, including corrective steps that
have been taken, and the date when full compliance will be achieved.
However, when a licensee or other person has already adequately
addressed the issues contained in the notice of violation in writing,
the licensee or other person has already, in effect, responded to the
violation and a further written statement may be unnecessary.
Therefore, Sec. 2.201(a) is amended to replace the existing phrase
``will require'' with ``may require.'' This change grants the NRC
discretion when determining whether to require the submittal of a
written explanation or statement when the NRC believes that a licensee
or other person has already adequately addressed all the issues
contained in that notice of violation.
Electronic Access
Comments may be submitted electronically, in either ASCII text or
WordPerfect format (version 5.1 or later), by calling the NRC
Electronic Bulletin Board (BBS) on FedWorld. The bulletin board may be
accessed using a personal computer, a modem, and one of the commonly
available communications software packages, or directly via Internet.
If using a personal computer and modem, the NRC rulemaking
subsystem on FedWorld can be accessed directly by dialing the toll free
number 1-800-303-9672. Communication software parameters should be set
as follows: parity to none, data bits to 8, and stop bits to 1 (N,8,1).
Using ANSI or VT-100 terminal emulation, the NRC NUREGs and RegGuides
for Comment subsystem can then be accessed by selecting the ``Rules
Menu'' option from the ``NRC Main Menu.'' For further information
[[Page 43407]]
about options available for NRC at FedWorld, consult the ``Help/
Information Center'' from the ``NRC Main Menu.'' Users will find the
``FedWorld Online User's Guides'' particularly helpful. Many NRC
subsystems and data bases also have a ``Help/Information Center''
option that is tailored to the particular subsystem.
The NRC subsystem on FedWorld can also be accessed by a direct dial
phone number for the main FedWorld BBS, 703-321-3339, or by using
Telnet via Internet: fedworld.gov. If using 703-321-3339 to contact
FedWorld, the NRC subsystem will be accessed from the main FedWorld
menu by selecting the ``Regulatory, Government Administration and State
Systems,'' then selecting ``Regulatory Information Mall.'' At that
point, a menu will be displayed that has an option ``U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission'' that will take you to the NRC Online main menu.
The NRC Online area also can be accessed directly by typing ``/go nrc''
at a FedWorld command line. If you access NRC from FedWorld's main
menu, you may return to FedWorld by selecting the ``Return to
FedWorld'' option from the NRC Online Main Menu. However, if you access
NRC at FedWorld by using NRC's toll-free number, you will have full
access to all NRC systems but you will not have access to the main
FedWorld system.
If you contact FedWorld using Telnet, you will see the NRC area and
menus, including the Rules menu. Although you will be able to download
documents and leave messages, you will not be able to write comments or
upload files (comments). If you contact FedWorld using FTP, all files
can be accessed and downloaded but uploads are not allowed; all you
will see is a list of files without descriptions (normal Gopher look).
An index file listing all files within a subdirectory, with
descriptions, is included. There is a 15-minute limit for FTP access.
Although FedWorld can be accessed through the World Wide Web, like
FTP, that mode only provides access for downloading files and does not
display the NRC Rules Menu.
For more information on NRC bulletin boards call Mr. Arthur Davis,
Systems Integration and Development Branch, NRC, Washington, DC 20555,
telephone (301) 415-5780; e-mail AXD[email protected].
Procedural Background
Because NRC considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we
are approving it without seeking public comments on proposed
amendments. This action will become effective on October 21, 1996.
However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by September
23, 1996, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws this
action and will address the comments received in response to the
requested revisions which have been proposed for approval and are being
concurrently published in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register. Comments will be addressed in the final rule on this
proposal. The NRC will not initiate a second comment period on this
action.
Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
The NRC has determined that this direct final rule is the type of
action described as a categorical exclusion in Secs. 51.22(c)(1) and
51.22(c)(2). Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor
an environmental assessment has been prepared for this direct final
rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement for Direct Final Rule
This direct final rule does not contain a new or amended
information collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing information collections
were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, approval numbers
3150-0136 and 3150-0021.
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
Regulatory Analysis
This direct final rule deletes outdated references to an appendix
which previously has been deleted from the Commission regulations and
provides that the NRC may use discretion regarding the submittal of a
written response from a licensee if the NRC believes that the licensee
or other person has already adequately addressed all the issues
contained in a notice of violation. Deleting the outdated references
will have no impact on licensees, the NRC, or the public. The NRC's
discretion on requiring reports responding to a notice of violation
will reduce the burdens of preparing unnecessary reports by licensees
and of reviewing these reports by the NRC without compromising the
public health and safety. However, it is impossible to quantify the
amount of reduction in burden because the number of discretions to be
authorized cannot be estimated. Therefore, the burden under the direct
final rule would be at most equal, but probably less than, the burden
under the existing regulations. This constitutes the regulatory
analysis for the direct final rule.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act
In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a
major rule and has verified this determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does
not apply to this rule, because these amendments do not involve any
provisions that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR
50.109(a)(1). Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required for this
direct final rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 2
Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct
material, Classified information, Environmental protection, Nuclear
materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalties, Sex
discrimination, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste
treatment and disposal.
10 CFR Part 51
Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental Impact
statement, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of
1974 as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting the
following amendments to 10 CFR parts 2 and 51.
PART 2--RULES OF PRACTICE FOR DOMESTIC LICENSING PROCEEDINGS AND
ISSUANCE OF ORDERS
1. The authority citation for part 2 is revised as follows:
Authority: Secs. 161, 181, 68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2201, 2231); sec. 191, as amended, Pub. L. 87-615, 76 Stat.
409 (42 U.S.C. 2241); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C.
5841); 5 U.S.C. 552.
Section 2.101 also issued under secs. 53, 62, 63, 81, 103, 104,
105, 68 Stat. 930, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 938, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2135); sec. 114(f), Pub.
L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2213, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)); sec.
[[Page 43408]]
102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4332); sec.
301, 88 Stat. 1248 (42 U.S.C. 5871). Sections 2.102, 2.103, 2.104,
2.105, 2.721 also issued under secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 183, 189,
68 Stat. 936, 937, 938, 954, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133,
2134, 2135, 2233, 2239). Section 2.105 also issued under Pub. L. 97-
415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Sections 2.200-2.206 also
issued under secs. 161b, i, o, 182, 186, 234, 68 Stat. 948-951, 955,
83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b),(i),(o), 2236, 2282);
sec. 206, 88 Stat. 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5846). Sections 2.600-2.606 also
issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4332). Sections 2.700a, 2.719 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 554.
Sections 2.754, 2.760, 2.770, 2.780 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 557.
Section 2.764 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96
Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161). Section 2.790 also issued
under sec. 103, 68 Stat. 936, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133) and 5
U.S.C. 552. Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553.
Section 2.809 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 553 and sec. 29, Pub. L.
85-256, 71 Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2039). Subpart K also
issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub.
L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Subpart L also issued
under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Appendix A also
issued under sec. 6, Pub. L. 91-560, 84 Stat. 1473 (42 U.S.C. 2135).
Appendix B also issued under sec. 10, Pub. L. 99-240, 99 Stat. 1842
(42 U.S.C. 2021b et seq.).
2. Section 2.8 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.8 Information collection requirements: OMB approval.
This part contains no information collection requirements and
therefore is not subject to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
3. In Sec. 2.201, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 2.201 Notice of violation.
(a) In response to an alleged violation of any provision of the Act
or this chapter or the conditions of a license or an order issued by
the Commission, the Commission may serve on the licensee or other
person subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission a written notice
of violation; a separate notice may be omitted if an order pursuant to
Sec. 2.202 or demand for information pursuant to Sec. 2.204 is issued
that otherwise identifies the apparent violation. The notice of
violation will concisely state the alleged violation and may require
that the licensee or other person submit, within 20 days of the date of
the notice or other specified time, a written explanation or statement
in reply if the Commission believes that the licensee has not already
addressed all the issues contained in the notice of violation,
including:
(1) Corrective steps which have been taken by the licensee or other
person and the results achieved;
(2) Corrective steps which will be taken; and
(3) The date when full compliance will be achieved.
* * * * *
PART 51--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC
LICENSING AND RELATED REGULATORY FUNCTIONS
4. The authority citation for Part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 161, 68 Stat. 948, as amended, sec. 1701, 106
Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953, (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2297f); secs. 201, as
amended, 202, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841,
5842). Subpart A also issued under National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, secs. 102, 104, 105, 83 Stat. 853-854, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); and Pub. L. 95-604, Title II, 92 Stat.
3033-3041; and sec. 193, Pub. L. 101-575, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S.C.
2243). Sections 51.20, 51.30, 51.60, 51.80, and 51.97 also issued
under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241, and sec.
148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-223 (42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161,
10168). Section 51.22 also issued under sec. 274, 73 Stat. 688, as
amended by 92 Stat. 3036-3038 (42 U.S.C. 2021) and under Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982, sec. 121, 96 Stat. 2228 (42 U.S.C. 10141).
Sections 51.43, 51.67, and 51.109 also under Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, sec. 114(f), 96 Stat. 2216, as amended (42 U.S.C.
10134(f)).
5. In Sec. 51.10, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 51.10 Purpose and scope of subpart: Applications of regulations
of Council on Environmental Quality.
* * * * *
(d) Commission actions initiating or relating to administrative or
judicial civil or criminal enforcement actions or proceedings are not
subject to Section 102(2) of NEPA. These actions include issuance of
notices of violation, orders, and denials of requests for action
pursuant to subpart B of part 2 of this chapter; matters covered by
part 15 and part 160 of this chapter; and issuance of confirmatory
action letters, bulletins, generic letters, notices of deviation, and
notices of nonconformance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of August, 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James M. Taylor,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 96-21167 Filed 8-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.