issue-1996-01-04•Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-04
Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-04
issue-1996-01-04Federal Register final rules — 1996-01-04Regulation
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. 96-90 Rules Regarding Equal Opportunity
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 251-252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-90]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 268
[Docket No. R-0894]
Rules Regarding Equal Opportunity
AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the
Board) has amended its Rules Regarding Equal Opportunity (Rules) to
correct an ambiguity in the provision regarding access to the
investigative file. The Rules set out the complaint processing
procedures governing complaints by Board employees and applicants for
employment alleging discrimination in employment, and related matters.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Mills Williams, Senior Attorney
(202/452-3701), or Stephen L. Siciliano, Special Assistant to the
General Counsel for Administrative Law (202/452-3920), Legal Division,
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20551. For users of
Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact Dorothea
Thompson (202/452-3544).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The amendment to the Rules is hereby issued
as a final rule. The Board sought comments on the proposed amendment on
August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45385), and no comments were received. No
changes have been made in the amendment as proposed.
The Board's Rules Regarding Equal Opportunity (12 CFR part 268)
prior to this amendment provided that a person who files an
administrative complaint of discrimination under the Rules must be
given a copy of the investigative file relative to the complaint within
180 days after the filing of the complaint with the Board, unless the
time is otherwise extended. 12 CFR 268.207(f). The Rules further
provided that the ``Board may unilaterally extend the time period * * *
where it must sanitize a complaint file that may contain confidential
information of the Board under 12 CFR part 261, or other privileged
information of the Board * * *.'' 12 CFR 268.207(e). The corresponding
language in the federal sector complaint processing regulation of the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Commission) provides that an
``agency may unilaterally extend the time period * * * where it must
sanitize a complaint file that may contain information classified
pursuant to Executive Order 12356, or successor orders, as secret in
the interest of national defense or foreign policy * * *.'' 29 CFR
1614.108(e).
The Board's Rules require that, at the completion of an
investigation, the investigative file be made available to each
complainant. 12 CFR 268.207(f). It was and continues to be the Board's
intention to provide that confidential information of the Board that is
relevant to the complaint be included in the investigative file made
available to the complainant and to the complainant's personal
representative.
The Board was concerned, however, that the prior language of
Sec. 268.207(e) could be interpreted as preventing confidential Board
information that is relevant to a complainant from being included in
the investigative file and thus being made available to a complainant.
The Board believes that its Rules must make clear that, where relevant,
confidential information of the
[[Page 252]]
Board may be included in a complaint file. Accordingly, Sec. 268.207(e)
of the Rules has been amended to provide that the time period for
completing an investigation may be unilaterally extended by the Board
only where classified national security information must be sanitized.
This amendment conforms the Rules to the corresponding provision in the
complaint processing regulation of the Commission.
In addition, a new paragraph (Sec. 268.207(e)(2)) has been added to
Sec. 268.207(e) of the Board's Rules that expressly authorizes the
placement by the investigator, the EEO Programs Director, or another
appropriate officer of the Board of relevant confidential information
in the investigative file that is provided to a complainant and to his
or her personal representative.
The new paragraph contains a provision making clear that those who
have access to an investigative file, such as the complainant and the
complainant's personal representative, containing any confidential
information are subject to all applicable restrictions in existing law
governing the disclosure of such information, in particular, the
Board's Rules Regarding Availability of Information (12 CFR Part 261)
and, where applicable, the Privacy Act. This means that confidential
information in an investigatory file may be disclosed further only to
the extent permitted by such restrictions.
The Board notes, in this regard, that its restrictions on
unauthorized disclosure of confidential information by persons in
possession of such information bind all such persons, not merely those
who are employees of the Board. 12 CFR 261.8(c), 261.13(e), 261.14.
The Board's Rules Regarding Availability of Information (12 CFR 261
subpart C) provide a mechanism by which a person having confidential
information of the Board may request permission to disclose further
such information, however. Accordingly, application may be made to the
Board's General Counsel under 12 CFR 261.13 for approval of further
production or disclosure by a complainant or personal representative of
confidential information.
In addition, aside from confidential supervisory information, a
particular investigatory file may include information that is subject
to the Privacy Act. Such information also may not be disclosed to or by
the complainant unless disclosure is authorized consistent with the
requirements and/or prohibitions of the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C.
552a).1 Information subject to Executive Order 12356 may not at
any point be included in the investigatory file and would not be made
available to the complainant or to his/her personal representative.
\1\ Information subject to the Privacy Act may thereafter be
disclosed when necessary in accordance with the routine use
provision. 12 CFR 261a.10(b)(3). See Board System of Records, BGFRS-
5, Federal Reserve Regulatory Service para. 8-338. A federal
criminal statute regarding the unauthorized conversion of Board
property may restrict disclosure of confidential Board information
in certain cases unless authorization has been specifically given.
18 U.S.C. 641.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Board has made a technical correction to
Sec. 268.304(a)(3)(i)(A) by substituting a reference to Executive Order
No. 12356, dealing with national security classified information, for
the former reference (Executive Order No. 10450). The Board has
determined that this technical correction is not subject to provisions
of the Administrative Procedure Act regarding notice and public comment
because good cause exists to support the conclusion that notice and
public procedure thereon are unnecessary. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d).
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 268
Administrative practice and procedure, Aged, Civil rights, Equal
employment opportunity, Federal buildings and facilities, Federal
Reserve System, Government employees, Individuals with disabilities,
Religious discrimination, Sex discrimination, Wages.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board amends 12 CFR
part 268 as set forth below:
PART 268--RULES REGARDING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
1. The authority citation for part 268 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 244 and 248(i), (k) and (l).
2. In Sec. 268.207, paragraph (e) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 268.207 Investigation of complaints.
* * * * *
(e)(1) The Board shall complete its investigation within 180 days
of the date of the filing of an individual complaint or within the time
period contained in the determination of the Commission on review of a
dismissal pursuant to Sec. 268.206 of this part. By written agreement
within those time periods, the complainant and the Board may
voluntarily extend the time period for not more than an additional 90
days. The Board may unilaterally extend the time period or any period
of extension for not more than 30 days where it must sanitize an
investigative file that may contain information classified pursuant to
Executive Order No. 12356, or successor orders, as secret in the
interest of national defense or foreign policy, provided the Board
notifies the complainant of the extension.
(2) Confidential supervisory information, as defined in 12 CFR
261.2(b), and other confidential information of the Board may be
included in the investigative file by the investigator, the EEO
Programs Director, or another appropriate officer of the Board, where
such information is relevant to the complaint. Neither the complainant
nor the complainant's personal representative may make further
disclosure of such information, however, except in compliance with the
Board's Rules Regarding Availability of Information, 12 CFR part 261,
and where applicable, the Board's Rules Regarding Access to and Review
of Personal Information in Systems of Records, 12 CFR part 261a.
* * * * *
Sec. 268.304 [Amended]
3. In Sec. 268.304(a)(3)(i)(A), remove the words ``Executive Order
No. 10450 (3 CFR, 1949-1953 Comp., P. 936)'' and add in their place,
the words ``Executive Order No. 12356 (3 CFR, 1982 Comp.; p. 166)''.
By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, December 28, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 96-90 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-76 Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 250-251]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-76]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 3017
RIN 0503-AA12
Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension
AGENCY: Department of Agriculture (USDA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the USDA regulations that implement
Executive Order (E.O.) 12549, ``Debarment and Suspension.'' E.O. 12549
required executive departments and agencies to issue regulations,
consistent with guidelines issued by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), to establish governmentwide effect for an agency's
nonprocurement debarment and suspension actions. These changes will
enhance USDA participation in the governmentwide nonprocurement
debarment and suspension system by making appropriate modifications to
the coverage of the regulations and clarifying the relationship of the
regulations to other USDA procedures for establishing participant
ineligibility for specific programs.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gary W. Butler, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Office of the General
Counsel, (202) 720-2577.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of the Federal Government's
initiatives to curb fraud, waste, and abuse, E.O. 12549, ``Debarment
and Suspension,'' was signed on February 18, 1986. E.O. 12549 required
executive departments and agencies to issue regulations to establish
governmentwide effect for each agency's nonprocurement debarment and
suspension actions. Section 3 of E.O. 12549 required that such
regulations be consistent with guidelines issued by OMB.
On October 20, 1987, 20 executive departments and agencies
published a proposed common rule (52 FR 39035-39042) which implemented
the final OMB guidelines that had been published on May 29, 1987 (52 FR
20360-20369). USDA did not join the proposed common rule, but rather
published a proposed rule that addressed some problems peculiar to USDA
while being consistent with the OMB guidelines.
On May 26, 1988, 27 executive departments and agencies published a
final common rule (53 FR 19159-19211) and OMB adopted the final common
rule as its amended final guidelines. Upon reconsideration of the issue
of joining the common rule, USDA published a final rule on January 30,
1989 (54 FR 4729), which followed the text of the final common rule
published on May 26, 1988. However, USDA limited the scope of coverage
of the rule (7 CFR part 3017) to domestic assistance transactions and
added material generally to reflect internal organization and
procedures. Following extended consultations with OMB, USDA has
determined that the coverage of this rule should be amended by removing
the provision that limits the coverage of the rule to domestic
assistance transactions.
Accordingly, on September 26, 1995, USDA published in the Federal
Register (60 FR 49519-49523) a notice of proposed rule making (NPRM) to
amend 7 CFR part 3017 to make the scope of the USDA rule consistent
with the scope of the common rule as adopted by most other agencies.
USDA, however, proposed making additional specific exceptions from
coverage of the common rule, as implemented by USDA, that are deemed in
the public interest. The rational for such additional specific
exceptions from coverage was explained fully in the NPRM.
USDA solicited comments concerning our proposal for 60 days ending
November 27, 1995. We received no timely comments in response to the
NPRM. We, however, did receive one subsequent comment that was wholly
supportive of the USDA proposal. Therefore, based on the rationale set
forth in the NPRM, USDA is adopting the provisions of the proposal as
the final rule.
Impact Analysis
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be ``significant,'' and it has
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
requires that, for each rule with a ``significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,'' an analysis must be prepared
describing the rule's impact on small entities and identifying any
significant alternatives to the rule that would minimize the economic
impact on the small entities.
USDA certifies that these regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
USDA certifies that this rule will not impose any reporting or
recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,
44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 3017
Administrative practice and procedure, Grant administration, Grant
programs (Agriculture).
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, USDA amends 7 CFR part
3017 as follows:
PART 3017--GOVERNMENTWIDE DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION (NONPROCUREMENT)
AND GOVERNMENTWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE (GRANTS)
1. The authority citation for part 3017 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 41 U.S.C. 701 et seq.; E.O. 12549, 51
FR 6370, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp., p. 189.
2. Section 3017.110 is amended by revising paragraph (a) (3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 3017.110 Coverage.
(a) * * *
(3) Department of Agriculture covered transactions. (i) With
respect to paragraph (a)(1) of this section, for USDA's export and
foreign assistance programs, covered transactions will include only
primary covered transactions. Any lower tier transactions with respect
to UDSA's export and foreign assistance programs will not be
[[Page 251]]
considered lower tier covered transactions for the purposes of this
part. The export or substitution of Federal timber governed by the
Forest Resources Conservation and Shortage Relief Act of 1990, 16
U.S.C. 620 et seq. (the ``Export Act''), is specifically excluded from
the coverage of this rule. The Export Act provides separate statutory
authority to debar persons engaged in both primary covered transactions
and lower tier transactions.
(ii) With respect to paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) of this section, for
USDA's domestic food assistance programs, only the initial such
procurement contract and the first tier subcontract under that
procurement contract shall be considered lower tier covered
transactions.
(iii) With respect to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the
following USDA transactions also are not covered: transactions under
programs which provide statutory entitlements and make available loans
to individuals and entities in their capacity as producers of
agricultural commodities; transactions under conservation programs;
transactions under warehouse licensing programs; the receipt of
licenses, permits, certificates, and indemnification under regulatory
programs conducted in the interest of public health and safety and
animal and plant health and safety; the receipt of official grading and
inspection services, animal damage control services, public health and
safety inspection services, and animal and plant health and safety
inspection services; if the person is a State or local government, the
provision of official grading and inspection services, animal damage
control services, public health and safety inspection services, animal
and plant health and safety inspection services; and permits, licenses,
exchanges and other acquisitions of real property, rights of way, and
easements under natural resource management programs.
* * * * *
3. Section 3017.115 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 3017.115 Policy.
* * * * *
(d) In any case in which an administrative exclusion is considered
under an authority other than this part, USDA will initiate, where
appropriate, a debarment or suspension action under this part for the
protection of the entire Federal Government.
4. Section 3017.200 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 3017.200 Debarment or suspension.
* * * * *
(d) Department of Agriculture excepted transactions. With respect
to paragraph (c) of this section, the following USDA transactions also
are excepted: transactions under programs which provide statutory
entitlements and make available loans to individuals and entities in
their capacity as producers of agricultural commodities; transations
under conservation programs; transactions under warehouse licensing
programs; the receipt of licenses, permits, certificates, and
indemnification under regulatory programs conducted in the interest of
public health and safety and animal and plant health and safety; the
receipt of official grading and inspection services, animal damage
control services, public health and safety inspection services, and
animal and plant health and safety inspection services; if the person
is a State or local government, the provision of official grading and
inspection services, animal damage control services, public health and
safety inspection services, and animal and plant health and safety
inspection services; and permits, licenses, exchanges, and other
acquisitions of real property, rights of way, and easements under
natural resource management programs.
Dated: December 21, 1995.
Dan Glickman,
Secretary of Agriculture.
[FR Doc. 96-76 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-01-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-75 Plant Variety Protection Regulations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 247-248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-75]
========================================================================
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. 3 / Thursday, January 4, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 247]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 97
[Docket No. SD-95-001]
RIN 0581-AB39
Plant Variety Protection Regulations
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture is adopting as a final rule,
with minor changes, the interim final rule that revised the Plant
Variety Protection Regulations to conform to changes made in the Plant
Variety Protection Act (PVPA). The changes will add an additional
language option to the marking and labeling provisions for varieties
that have an application pending or have received a certificate of
protection. Other changes correct outdated information and provide
consistency in language.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marsha A. Stanton, Commissioner, Plant
Variety Protection Office, Telephone: (301)504-5518, FAX (301)504-5291.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Order 12866; Executive Order 12778
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The
rule has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866, and, therefore, has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
This rule has also been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have retroactive effect.
This rule will not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or
policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this
rule. There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted
prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.
II. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service, has determined
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities as defined by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). The fees provided for in this
document merely reflect a minimal increase in the costs currently borne
by those entities which utilize Plant Variety Protection services.
III. Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.) the information collection requirements included in 7 CFR
Part 97 have been approved previously by the Office of Management and
Budget and have been assigned OMB control number 0581-0055.
IV. Background Information
The Plant Variety Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.) (PVPA)
authorizes the Secretary to issue Certificates of Plant Variety
Protection which afford variety ownership rights similar to patent
rights. As a member of the International Union for the Protection of
New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) the United States participated in
negotiations which resulted in the March 19, 1991 UPOV Convention. The
PVPA was amended on October 6, 1994 to conform to the new UPOV
Convention and the amendments became effective on April 4, 1995. The
interim rule amending 7 CFR part 97 was published at 60 FR 17188 on
April 4, 1995 with a request for comments.
One hundred four comments were received. The majority of comments
recommended a change to Sections 97.140 and 97.141, which cover
optional marking and labeling provisions for varieties that have an
application pending or have received a certificate of protection. Under
the current regulations the labeling change suggested in the comments
could be stated; but, because of the number of comments, a specific
change to the final rule has been made. The final rule specifies that
owners may label varieties pending or granted protection under the 1994
revisions with ``PVPA 1994--Unauthorized Sales for Reproductive
Purposes Prohibited''.
Seven other non-substantive changes in the final rule have been
made. The following paragraphs outline the changes which were made to
correct grammar, provide consistency, or remove outdated references.
References to the Science Division in Sections 97.2 and 97.5(c)
have been changed to ``Science and Technology Division'' to reflect the
division's name change which was effective Oct. 1, 1995.
Section 97.3(c) is revised to correct the reference to the Federal
Seed Act. The obsolete Public Law number, P.L. 92-463, is removed.
Reference to the Federal Seed Act by name is maintained.
An outdated phone number is removed from second sentence of
footnote referred to in Section 97.5(b)(4). The phone number will not
be published as part of the regulations due to the difficulty of
corrections if the phone number changes.
In Section 97.6, which deals with the requirement that the
application must be accompanied by a seed sample or verification that a
viable cell culture will be deposited in a public depository, is
revised by adding language to require verification of deposit of self-
sterile (self-incompatible) parents of hybrids. The PVPA requires
deposition of viable seed or any propagating material necessary to
reproduce the variety. The extension of protection to tuber-propagated
and first generation hybrid varieties requires deposition of material
other than basic seed. Deposition of propagating material for tuber
crops was added in the interim final rule; however, language pertaining
to hybrids whose parents are self-sterile was inadvertently omitted.
The modification to the final rule will make deposit of material to
propagate these varieties consistent with that for other types of
varieties.
Section 97.19 is revised for grammatical purposes. The second
occurrence of ``the'' is removed.
Section 97.21 is revised to be consistent with other sections of
the rule requiring a payment of fee. A fee for extensions was added in
the interim rule in section 97.15.
Finally, the authority citation is revised and simplified.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found that good cause exists for
not
[[Page 248]]
postponing the effective date of this rule until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register because (1) the interim rule was
published in the Federal Register for public comment, (2) the changes
made in this final action are for clarity and are considered non-
substantive, and (3) no useful purpose would be accomplished in
delaying the effective date of this action.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 97
Novel Seed variety certification, Plant variety and protection.
Accordingly the interim rule amending 7 CFR Part 97, which was
published at 60 FR 17188 on April 4, 1995, is adopted as a final rule
with the following changes:
PART 97--PLANT VARIETY AND PROTECTION
1. The authority citation for Part 97 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: Plant Variety Protection Act, as amended, 7 U.S.C.
2321 et seq.; and Sec. 14, Plant Variety Protection Act amendments
of 1994, 7 U.S.C. 2401 note.
2. In Sec. 97.2, the definition for Office or Plant Variety
Protection Office is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 97.2 Meaning of words.
* * * * *
Office or Plant Variety Protection Office. The Plant Variety
Protection Office, Science and Technology Division, AMS, USDA.
* * * * *
Sec. 97.3 [Amended]
3. In Sec. 97.3, paragraph (c), the words ``(Pub. L. 92-463)'' are
removed.
4. In Sec. 97.5, paragraph (b)(4), footnote number (1) is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 97.5 General requirements.
* * * * *
\1\ Copies and translations of foreign laws and regulations will
be requested only if they are not in the files of the Plant Variety
Protection Office. Applicants may learn whether such a request will
be made by writing to the address given in paragraph (c) of this
section.
Sec. 97.5 [Amended]
5. In Sec. 97.5(c), the second sentence is amended by adding the
words ``and Technology'' after the word ``Science''.
6. In Sec. 97.6, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 97.6 Application for certificate.
* * * * *
(d) The applicant shall submit with the application:
(1) At least 2,500 seeds of the viable basic seed required to
reproduce the variety;
(2) With the application for a tuber propagated variety,
verification that a viable cell culture has been deposited in a public
depository approved by the Commissioner and will be maintained for the
duration of the certificate; or
(3) With the application for a hybrid from self-incompatible
parents, verification that a plot of vegetative material for each
parent has been established in a public depository approved by the
Commissioner and will be maintained for the duration of the
certificate.
Sec. 97.19 [Amended]
7. In Sec. 97.19, the introductory text is amended by removing
``the'' after the words ``Journal shall show''.
Sec. 97.21 [Amended]
8. In Sec. 97.21, the second sentence is amended by adding the
words ``and appropriate fee'' immediately following the words ``A
request for extension''.
9. In Sec. 97.140, the last sentence is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 97.140 After filing.
* * * * *
Where applicable, ``PVPA 1994'' or ``PVPA 1994--Unauthorized Sales for
Reproductive Purposes Prohibited'' may be added to the notice.
10. In Sec. 97.141, the last sentence is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 97.141 After issuance.
* * * * *
Where applicable, ``PVPA 1994'' or ``PVPA 1994--Unauthorized Sales for
Reproductive Purposes Prohibited'' may be added to the notice.
Dated: December 27, 1995.
Kenneth C. Clayton,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 96-75 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-74 Melons Grown in South Texas; Increased Expenses and Establishment of Assessment Rate
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 248-250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-74]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
[Docket No. FV95-979-1IFR; Amendment 1]
Melons Grown in South Texas; Increased Expenses and Establishment
of Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Amended interim final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule amends a previous interim final rule
which authorized administrative expenses for the South Texas Melon
Committee (Committee) under M.O. No. 979. This interim final rule
increases the level of authorized expenses and establishes an
assessment rate to generate funds to pay those expenses. Authorization
of this increased budget enables the Committee to incur expenses that
are reasonable and necessary to administer the program. Funds to
administer this program are derived from assessments on handlers.
DATES: Effective October 1, 1995, through September 30, 1996. Comments
received by February 5, 1996, will be considered prior to issuance of a
final rule.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
concerning this action. Comments must be sent in triplicate to the
Docket Clerk, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456,
room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456, FAX 202-720-5698. Comments
should reference the docket number and the date and page number of this
issue of the Federal Register and will be available for public
inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular business
hours.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Sue Clark, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.
Box 96456, room 2523-S, Washington, DC 20090-6456, telephone 202-720-
9918, or Belinda G. Garza, McAllen Marketing Field Office, Fruit and
Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1313 East Hackberry, McAllen, TX 78501,
telephone 210-682-2833.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement No. 156 and Order No. 979 (7 CFR part 979), regulating the
handling of melons grown in South Texas, hereinafter referred to as the
``order.'' The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing
Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter
referred to as the ``Act.''
The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This interim final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order
12778, Civil Justice Reform. Under the marketing order provisions now
in effect, South Texas melons are subject to assessments. It is
intended that the assessment rate as issued herein will be applicable
to all assessable melons handled during the 1995-96 fiscal period,
which began October 1, 1995,
[[Page 249]]
and ends September 30, 1996. This interim final rule will not preempt
any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present
an irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on
the petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the
petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States
in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or
her principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review
the Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is
filed not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this rule on small
entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in
that they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 40 producers of South Texas melons under
this marketing order, and approximately 19 handlers. Small agricultural
producers have been defined by the Small Business Administration (13
CFR 121.601) as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000, and
small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual
receipts are less than $5,000,000. The majority of South Texas melon
producers and handlers may be classified as small entities.
The budget of expenses for the 1995-96 fiscal period was prepared
by the South Texas Melon Committee, the agency responsible for local
administration of the marketing order, and submitted to the Department
of Agriculture for approval. The members of the Committee are producers
and handlers of South Texas melons. They are familiar with the
Committee's needs and with the costs of goods and services in their
local area and are thus in a position to formulate an appropriate
budget. The budget was formulated and discussed in a public meeting.
Thus, all directly affected persons have had an opportunity to
participate and provide input.
The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by
dividing anticipated expenses by expected shipments of South Texas
melons. Because that rate will be applied to actual shipments, it must
be established at a rate that will provide sufficient income to pay the
Committee's expenses.
Committee administrative expenses of $234,044 for personnel,
office, and compliance expenses were recommended in a mail vote. The
assessment rate and funding for the research projects were to be
recommended at a later Committee meeting. The Committee administrative
expenses of $234,044 were published in the Federal Register as an
interim final rule October 23, 1995 (60 FR 54294). That interim final
rule added Sec. 979.218, authorizing expenses for the Committee, and
provided that interested persons could file comments through November
22, 1995. No comments were filed.
The Committee subsequently met on December 12, 1995, and
unanimously recommended an increase of $1,000 for administrative
expenses, plus $160,115 in research expenses, for a total budget of
$395,159. Budget items for 1995-96 which have increased compared to
those budgeted for 1994-95 (in parentheses) are: Manager's salary,
$19,094 ($15,172), office salaries, $24,000 ($22,000), payroll taxes,
$4,000 ($3,100), insurance, $8,000 ($6,250), rent and utilities, $6,500
($6,000), supplies, $2,000 ($1,500), postage, $1,500 ($1,000),
telephone and telegraph, $4,000 ($2,500), furniture and fixtures,
$2,000 ($1,000), equipment rental and maintenance, $3,500 ($2,500),
contingencies, $6,000 ($5,278), Committee expenses, $2,000 ($700),
manager's travel, $5,000 ($3,000), variety evaluation, $10,875 ($9,186)
and $3,750 for deferred compensation (manager's retirement), which was
not a line item expense last year. Items which have decreased compared
to the amount budgeted for 1994-95 (in parentheses) are: field travel,
$4,000 ($5,000), and field salary, $5,500 ($8,000). All other items are
budgeted at last year's amounts, including $86,716 for a disease
management program, $18,700 for an insect management program, $32,674
for breeding and variety development, and $11,150 for control of melon
diseases.
The initial 1995-96 budget, published on October 23, 1995, did not
establish an assessment rate. Therefore, the Committee also unanimously
recommended an assessment rate of $0.07 per carton, the same as last
year. This rate, when applied to anticipated shipments of approximately
4,500,000 cartons, will yield $315,000 in assessment income, which,
along with $80,159 from the reserve, will be adequate to cover budgeted
expenses. Funds in the reserve as of October 31, 1995, were $398,821,
which is within the maximum permitted by the order of two fiscal
periods' expenses.
While this action will impose some additional costs on handlers,
the costs are in the form of uniform assessments on handlers. Some of
the additional costs may be passed on to producers. However, these
costs will be offset by the benefits derived from the operation of the
marketing order. Therefore, the Administrator of the AMS has determined
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
After consideration of all relevant matter presented, including the
information and recommendations submitted by the Committee and other
available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as
hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of
the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also found and determined upon good
cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public
interest to give preliminary notice prior to putting this rule into
effect and that good cause exists for not postponing the effective date
of this action until 30 days after publication in the Federal Register
because: (1) The Committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its
expenses which are incurred on a continuous basis; (2) the fiscal
period began on October 1, 1995, and the marketing order requires that
the rate of assessment for the fiscal period apply to all assessable
melons handled during the fiscal period; (3) handlers are aware of this
action which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public
meeting and is similar to that taken for the 1994-95 fiscal period; and
(4) this interim final rule provides a 30-day comment period, and all
comments timely received will be considered prior to finalization of
this action.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 979
Marketing agreements, Melons, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
[[Page 250]]
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 979 is
amended as follows:
PART 979--MELONS GROWN IN SOUTH TEXAS
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 979 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. Section 979.218 is revised to read as follows:
Note: This section will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Sec. 979.218 Expenses and assessment rate.
Expenses of $395,159 by the South Texas Melon Committee are
authorized and an assessment rate of $0.07 per carton is established
for the fiscal period ending September 30, 1996. Unexpended funds may
be carried over as a reserve.
Dated: December 27, 1995
Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,
Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricultural Marketing
Service
[FR Doc. 96-74 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-68 Modification of the Atlantic City International Airport Class C Airspace Area; NJ
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 255-257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-68]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Airspace Docket No. 94-AWA-3]
Modification of the Atlantic City International Airport Class C
Airspace Area; NJ
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment modifies the Class C airspace area at Atlantic
City International Airport, Atlantic City, NJ. This action deletes the
1-mile airspace exclusion around the Nordheim Flying K Airport due to
its closure, and returns this airspace to the surface area of the Class
C airspace. In addition, this action reduces controller workload.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, February 29, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William C. Nelson, Airspace and
Obstruction Evaluation Branch (ATP-240), Airspace-Rules and
Aeronautical Information Division, Air Traffic Rules and Procedures
Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-9295.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
History
On April 12, 1995, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to modify the Class C airspace
area at Atlantic City International Airport, Atlantic City, NJ (60 FR
18552). Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to
the FAA. No comments were received concerning the proposal. Except for
editorial changes, this amendment is the same as that proposed in the
notice. Class C airspace designations are published in paragraph 4000
of FAA Order 7400.9C dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16,
1995, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class C
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
The Rule
This amendment to part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR part 71) modifies the Class C airspace area at Atlantic City
International Airport, Atlantic City, NJ, by eliminating the 1-mile
radius airspace exclusion around the Nordheim Flying K Airport due to
its closure. This amendment will return this airspace to the surface
area of the Class C airspace.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
Proposed changes to Federal regulations must undergo several
economic analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires agencies
to analyze the economic effect of regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Office of Management and Budget directs agencies to assess
the effect of regulatory changes on international
[[Page 256]]
trade. In conducting these analyses, the FAA has determined that this
final rule is not ``a significant regulatory action'' as defined in the
Executive Order and the Department of Transportation Regulatory
Policies and Procedures.
This final rule will modify the Class C airspace area at Atlantic
City International Airport, Atlantic City, NJ. This action will delete
the 1-mile airspace exclusion around Nordheim Flying K Airport and
standardize air traffic operations.
Costs
The FAA has determined that the implementation of the final rule to
modify the Class C airspace area at Atlantic City International Airport
will result in little or no cost to either the agency or aircraft
operators. The elimination of the 1-mile airspace exclusion around the
Nordheim Flying K Airport will not reduce aviation safety nor increase
the risk of a mid-air collision because that airport is closed. Also,
the revision to aeronautical charts to reflect the airspace
modification will be part of the routine and periodic updating of
charts. Finally, the FAA will not incur any additional administrative
costs for either personnel or equipment.
Benefits
The final rule will generate benefits for system users and the FAA
primarily in the form of enhanced operational efficiency. The final
rule will provide additional controlled airspace for aircraft landing
and departing from the Atlantic City International Airport. Air traffic
controllers will gain operational efficiency as they will be able to
standardize traffic operations.
Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) was enacted by
Congress to ensure that small entities are not unnecessarily and
disproportionately burdened by Federal regulations. The RFA requires a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis if a final rule will have ``a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.'' FAA Order 2100.14A outlines the FAA's procedures and
criteria for implementing the RFA. Small entities are independently
owned and operated small businesses and small not-for-profit
organizations. A substantial number of small entities is defined as a
number that is 11 or more and which is more than one-third of the small
entities subject to this final rule.
The FAA determined that revising the Class C airspace area at
Atlantic City International Airport will not result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
determination was made because there are little or no costs associated
with this final rule.
International Trade Impact Assessment
This final rule will not constitute a barrier to international
trade, including the export of U.S. goods and services to foreign
countries and the import of foreign goods and services into the United
States. This final rule will not impose costs on aircraft operators or
aircraft manufacturers in the United States or foreign countries. The
modification of the Class C airspace area will only affect U.S.
terminal airspace operating procedures at and in the vicinity of
Atlantic City, NJ. This final rule will not have international trade
ramifications because it is a domestic airspace matter that will not
impose additional costs or requirements on affected entities.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.
Sec. 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16,
1995, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 4000--Subpart C--Class C Airspace
* * * * *
AEA NJ C Atlantic City International Airport, NJ [Revised]
Atlantic City International Airport, NJ
(Lat. 39 deg.27'27'' N., long. 74 deg.34'38'' W.)
That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
4,100 feet MSL within a 5-mile radius of the Atlantic City
International Airport; and that airspace extending upward from 1,300
feet MSL to and including 4,100 feet MSL within a 10-mile radius of
the airport.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 20, 1995.
Harold W. Becker,
Manager, Airspace-Rules and Aeronautical Information Division.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 257]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR04JA96.026
[FR Doc. 96-68 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-67 School Boards for Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 271-273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-67]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
32 CFR Part 69
[DoD Instruction 1342.jj]
School Boards for Department of Defense Domestic Dependent
Elementary and Secondary Schools
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD.
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule provides guidance to the Department of
Defense (DoD) Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools
(DDESS) implementing the National Defense Authorization Act in Fiscal
Year 1995, which provides for elected School Boards in DoD DDESS.
Pursuant to this legislation, school boards in DoD DDESS may
participate in the development and oversight of fiscal, personnel, and
educational policies, procedures, and programs for these schools. This
interim final rule provides guidance outlining the responsibilities,
operating procedures, composition, electorate and election procedures
for the DoD DDESS school boards.
DATES: This part is effective January 4, 1996. Written comments on this
interim final rule must be received by March 4, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Forward comments to the Office of the Director, DoD Domestic
Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools, 4040 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, VA 22203-1635.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Hector O. Nevarez at (703) 696-4373/4354.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because of the importance of providing
guidance for elected school boards, this interim final rule is being
issued. The public's comments are welcomed and will be carefully
considered in the issuance of a final rule. The Office of Management
and Budget has determined that this is a significant regulatory action.
However, since this rule is not ``economically significant'' as defined
in Executive Order 12866, the extensive analysis report is not
required, and the rule complies with the requirements of the Executive
Order. It has been determined that this rule is not subject to Public
Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. 601) because it
would not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The primary effect of this rule
will be a reduction in administrative costs and other burdens resulting
from the simplification and clarification of policies. It has been
determined that Public Law 109-13, ``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,''
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) does not apply because the rule does not impose
any reporting or recordkeeping requirements on persons or entities
outside the Federal Government.
List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 69
Elementary and secondary education, Government employees, Military
personnel.
Accordingly, Title 32, Chapter I, Subchapter C is amended to add
Part 69 to read as follows:
PART 69--SCHOOL BOARDS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DOMESTIC
DEPENDENT ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS
Sec.
69.1 Purpose.
69.2 Applicability and scope.
69.3 Definitions.
69.4 Policy.
69.5 Responsibilities.
69.6 Procedures.
Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2164.
Sec. 69.1 Purpose.
This part prescribes policies and procedures for the establishment
and operation of elected School Boards for schools operated by the
Department of Defense (DoD) under 10 U.S.C. 2164 and 32 CFR part 345.
Sec. 69.2 Applicability and scope.
This part applies to:
(a) The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Military
Departments, the Coast Guard when operating as a service of the
Department of the Navy or by agreement between DoD and the Department
of Transportation, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the
Unified and Specified Combatant Commands, the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense, the Uniformed Services University of the Health
Sciences, the Defense Agencies, and the DoD Field Activities.
(b) The schools (pre-kindergarten through grade 12) operated by the
DoD under 10 U.S.C. 2164 and 32 CFR part 345 within the Continental
United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Wake Island, Guam, American
Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands, known as
DoD DDESS Arrangements.
(c) This part does not apply to elected school boards established
under State or local law for DoD DDESS special arrangements.
Sec. 69.3 Definitions.
(a) Arrangements. Actions taken by the Secretary of Defense to
provide a free public education to dependent children under 10 U.S.C.
2164 through DoD DDESS arrangements or DoD DDESS special arrangements:
(1) DDESS arrangement. A school operated by the Department of
Defense under 10 U.S.C. 2164 and 32 CFR 345 to provide a free public
education for eligible children.
(2) DDESS special arrangement. An agreement, under 10 U.S.C. 2164,
between the Secretary of Defense, or designee, and a local public
education agency whereby a school or a school system operated by the
local public education agency provides educational services to eligible
dependent children of U.S. military personnel and federally employed
civilian personnel. Arrangements result in partial or total Federal
funding to the local public education agency for the educational
services provided.
(b) Parent. The biological father or mother of a child when
parental rights have not been legally terminated; a person who, by
order of a court of competent jurisdiction, has been declared the
father or mother of a child by adoption; the legal guardian of a child;
or a person in whose household a child resides, provided that such
person stands in loco parentis to that child and contributes at least
one-half of the child's support.
[[Page 272]]
Sec. 69.4 Policy.
(a) Each DoD DDESS arrangement shall have an elected school board,
established and operated in accordance with this part and other
pertinent guidance.
(b) Because members of DoD DDESS elected school boards are not
officers or employees of the United States appointed under the
Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution (Art. II, Sec. 2,
Cl. 2), they may not exercise discretionary governmental authority,
such as the taking of personnel actions or the establishment of
governmental policies. This Instruction clarifies the role of school
boards in the development and oversight of fiscal, personnel, and
educational policies, procedures, and programs for DoD DDESS
arrangements, subject to these constitutional limitations.
(c) The DoD DDESS chain of command for matters relating to school
arrangements operated under 10 U.S.C. 2164 and 32 CFR 345 shall be from
the Director, DoD DDESS, to the Superintendent of each school
arrangement. The Superintendent will inform the school board of all
matters affecting the operation of the local school arrangement. Direct
liaison among the school board, the Director, and the Superintendent is
authorized for all matters pertaining to the local school arrangement.
Sec. 69.5 Responsibilities.
The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management Policy
(ASD(FMP)), under the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness, shall:
(a) Make the final decision on all formal appeals to directives and
other guidance submitted by the school board or Superintendent.
(b) Ensure the Director, DoD DDESS, shall:
(1) Ensure the establishment of elected school boards in DoD DDESS
arrangements.
(2) Monitor compliance by the Superintendents and school boards
with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, and this
Instruction. In the event of suspected noncompliance, the Director, DoD
DDESS, shall take appropriate action, which will include notification
of the Superintendent and the school board president of the affected
DoD DDESS arrangement.
(3) Determine when the actions of a school board conflict with an
applicable statute, regulation, or other guidance or when there is a
conflict in the views of the school board and the Superintendent. When
such conflicts occur, the Director, DoD DDESS, shall assist the
Superintendent and the school board in resolving them or direct that
such actions be discontinued. Such disapprovals must be in writing to
the school board and the Superintendent concerned and shall state the
specific supporting reason or reasons.
(c) Ensure the school board for DoD DDESS arrangements shall:
(1) Participate in the development and oversight of fiscal,
personnel, and educational policies, procedures, and programs for the
DoD DDESS arrangement concerned, consistent with this part.
(2) Approve agendas and prepare minutes for school board meetings.
A copy of the approved minutes of school board meetings shall be
forwarded to the Director, DoD DDESS, within 10 working days after the
date the minutes are approved.
(3) Provide to the Director, DoD DDESS, names of applicants for a
vacancy in the Superintendent's position after a recruitment has been
accomplished. The school board shall submit to the Director, DoD DDESS,
a list of all applicants based on its review of the applications and
interviews (either in person or telephonically) of the applicants. The
list of applicants will be accompanied by the recommended choice of the
school board. The Director will select the Superintendent and will
submit written notice with justification to the school board if the
recommendation of the school board is not followed.
(4) Prepare an annual written on-site review of the
Superintendent's performance for consideration by the Director, DoD
DDESS. The written review shall be based on critical elements
recommended by the school board and Superintendent and approved by the
Director, DoD DDESS. The school board's review will be an official
attachment to the Superintendent's appraisal.
(5) Participate in the development of the school system's budget
for submission to the Director, DoD DDESS, for his or her approval as
endorsed by the school board; and participate in the oversight of the
approved budget, in conjunction with the Superintendent, as appropriate
for operation of the school arrangement.
(6) Invite the Superintendent or designee to attend all school
board meetings.
(7) Provide counsel to the Superintendent on the operation of the
school and the implementation of the approved budget.
(8) Channel communications with school employees to the DoD DDESS
Superintendent. Refer all applications, complaints, and other
communications, oral or written, to the DoD DDESS Arrangement
Superintendent.
(9) Participate in the development of school policies, rules, and
regulations, in conjunction with the Superintendent, and recommend
which policies shall be reflected in the School Policy Manual. At a
minimum, the Policy Manual, which shall be issued by the
Superintendent, shall include the following:
(i) A statement of the school philosophy.
(ii) The role and responsibilities of school administrative and
educational personnel.
(iii) Provisions for promulgation of an annual school calendar.
(iv) Provisions on instructional services, including policies for
development and adoption of curriculum and textbooks.
(v) Regulations affecting students, including attendance, grading,
promotion, retention, and graduation criteria, and the student code of
rights, responsibilities, and conduct.
(vi) School policy on community relations and noninstructional
services, including maintenance and custodial services, food services,
and student transportation.
(vii) School policy and legal limits on financial operations,
including accounting, disbursing, contracting, and procurement;
personnel operations, including conditions of employment, and labor
management regulations; and the processing of, and response to,
complaints.
(viii) Procedures providing for new school board member
orientation.
(ix) Any other matters determined by the school board and the
superintendent to be necessary.
(10) Under 10 U.S.C. 2164(b)(4)(B), prepare and submit formal
appeals to directives and other guidance that in the view of the school
board adversely impact the operation of the school system either
through the operation and management of DoD DDESS or a specific DoD
DDESS arrangement. Written formal appeals with justification and
supporting documentation shall be submitted by the school board or
Superintendent to ASD(FMP). The ASD(FMP) shall make the final decision
on all formal appeals. The Director, DoD DDESS, will provide the
appealing body written review of the findings relating to the merits of
the appeal. Formal appeals will be handled expeditiously by all parties
to minimize any adverse impact on the operation of the DoD DDESS
system.
(d) Ensure school board operating procedures are as follows:
[[Page 273]]
(1) The school board shall operate from a written agenda at all
meetings. Matters not placed on the agenda before the start of the
meeting, but approved by a majority of the school board present, may be
considered at the ongoing meeting and added to the agenda at that time.
(2) A majority of the total number of school board members
authorized shall constitute a quorum.
(3) School board meetings shall be conducted a minimum of 9 times a
year. The school board President or designee will provide school board
members timely notice of all meetings. All regularly scheduled school
board meetings will be open to the public. Executive session meetings
may be closed under 10 U.S.C. 2164(d)(6).
(4) The school board shall not be bound in any way be any action or
statement of an individual member or group of members of the board,
except when such action or statement is approved by a majority of the
school board members during a school board meeting.
(5) School board members are eligible for reimbursement for
official travel in accordance with the DoD Joint Travel Regulations and
guidance issued by the Director, DoD DDESS.
(6) School board members may be removed by the ASD(FMP), or
designee (who may not be below the level of a Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense) for dereliction of duty, malfeasance, or other
grounds for cause shown. The school board concerned may recommend such
removal with a two-thirds majority vote. Before a member may be
removed, the member shall be afforded due process, to include written
notification of the basis for the action, review of the evidence or
documentation considered by the school board, and an opportunity to
respond to the allegations.
Sec. 69.6 Procedures.
(a) Composition of school board. (1) The school board shall
recommend to the Director, DoD DDESS, the number of elected school
board voting members, which shall be no fewer than 3 and no more than
9, depending upon local needs. The members of the school board shall
select by majority vote of the total number of school board members
authorized at the beginning of each official school board term, one
member to act as President and another to act as Vice President. The
President and Vice President shall each serve for one year. The
President shall preside over school board meetings and provide
leadership for related activities and functions. The Vice President
shall serve in the absence of the President. If the position of
President is vacated for any reason, the Vice President shall be the
President until the next regularly scheduled school board election. The
resulting vacancy in the position of the Vice President shall be filled
by the majority vote of all members of the incumbent board.
(2) The DoD DDESS Arrangement Superintendent, or designee, shall
serve as a non-voting observer to all school board meetings. The
Installation Commander, or designee, shall serve as a non-voting
observer to the school board. The Installation Commander, or designee,
shall convey command concerns to the school board and the
Superintendent and keep the school board and the Superintendent
informed of changes and other matters within the host installation that
affect school expenditures or operations.
(3) The Antilles Consolidated School System (ACSS) School Board
shall be made up of representatives of the Ramey School, the schools on
the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station, and the schools on Fort Buchanan.
(4) School board members may not receive compensation for their
service on the school board.
(5) Members of the school board may not have any financial interest
in any company or organization doing business with the school system.
Waivers to this restriction may be granted on a case-by-case basis by
the Director, DoD DDESS, in coordination with the Office of General
Counsel of the Department of Defense.
(b) Electorate of the school board. The electorate for each school
board seat shall be composed of parents of the students attending the
school. Each member of the electorate shall have one vote.
(c) Election of school board members. (1) To be elected as a member
of the school board, an individual must be a resident of the military
installation in which the DoD DDESS arrangement is located, and in the
case of candidates for the ACSS School Board, satisfy the requirements
in paragraph (a)(3), of this section. Personnel employed by a DoD DDESS
arrangement may not serve as school board members.
(2) The term of office for elected members shall be 3 years, with a
maximum of 2 consecutive terms. The beginning of the term shall
coincide with local elections.
(3) When there is a sufficient number of school board vacancies
that result in not having a quorum, which is defined as a majority of
seats authorized, a special election shall be called by the DoD DDESS
Arrangement Superintendent or designee. A special election is an
election that is held between the regularly scheduled annual school
board election. The nomination and election procedures for a special
election shall be the same as those of regularly scheduled school board
elections. Individuals elected by special election shall serve until
the next regularly scheduled school board election. Vacancies may occur
due to the resignation, death, removal for cause, transfer, or
disenrollment of a school board member's child(ren) from the DoD DDESS
arrangement.
(4) Regularly scheduled school board elections shall be conducted
to coincide with local elections. Parents shall have adequate notice of
the time and place of the election. The election shall be by secret
ballot. All votes must be cast in person at the time and place of the
election. The candidate(s) receiving the greatest number of votes shall
be elected as school board member(s).
(5) Each candidate for school board membership must be nominated in
writing by at least one member of the electorate to be represented by
the candidate. Votes may be cast at the time of election for write-in
candidates who have not filed a nomination petition if the write-in
candidates otherwise are qualified to serve in the positions sought.
(6) The election process shall provide staggered terms for board
members, e.g., on the last day of the last month of each year, the term
for some board members will expire.
(7) The DoD DDESS Superintendent, in consultation with the school
board, shall be responsible for developing the plans for nominating
school board members and conducting the school board election and the
special election process. The DoD DDESS Superintendent shall announce
election results within 7 working days of the election.
Dated: December 27, 1995.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 96-67 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-56 Special Conditions; Hamilton Standard Model 568F Propeller
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 254-255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-56]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 35
[Docket No. 94-ANE-61; Special Condition No. 35-ANE-03]
Special Conditions; Hamilton Standard Model 568F Propeller
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for Hamilton Standard
Model 568F propeller. This propeller is constructed using all composite
blades, a novel and unusual design feature. Part 35 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (FAR's) currently does not address the
airworthiness considerations associated with propellers constructed
using all composite blades. These special conditions contain additional
safety standards which the Administrator finds necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the airworthiness
standards of part 35 of the FAR's.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martin Buckman, Engine and Propeller
Standards Staff, ANE-110, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, FAA, New England Region, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803-5229; telephone (617)
238-7112, fax (617) 238-7199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 26, 1994, Hamilton Standard applied for type
certification for a new Model 568F propeller. This propeller is
constructed using all composite blades, a novel and unusual design
feature. A Notice of Proposed Special Conditions was published in the
Federal Register on January 20, 1995 (60 FR 4116) for the Hamilton
Standard Model 568F propeller constructed with composite material.
Propellers constructed entirely of composite material have additional
airworthiness considerations not currently addressed by part 35 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). Those additional airworthiness
considerations associated with propellers constructed using all
composite blades are propeller integrity following a bird strike,
propeller integrity following a lightning strike, and propeller fatigue
strength when exposed to the deteriorating effects of in-service use
and the environment.
Type Certificate Basis
Under the provisions of Sec. 21.17 of the FAR's, Hamilton Standard
must show that the Model 568F propeller meets the requirements of the
applicable regulations in effect on the date of the application. Those
FAR's are Sec. 21.21 and part 35, effective February 1, 1965, as
amended.
The Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations in part 35, as amended, do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model 568F propeller because it is
constructed using composite material. Therefore, the Administrator
prescribes special conditions under the provisions of Sec. 21.16 of the
FAR's to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established in
the regulations.
Special conditions, as appropriate, are issued in accordance with
Sec. 11.49 of the FAR's after public notice and opportunity for
comment, as required by Secs. 11.28 and 11.29(b), and become part of
the type certification basis in accordance with Sec. 21.101(b)(2).
Novel or Unusual Design Features
Hamilton Standard Model 568F propeller incorporates propeller
blades constructed using composite material. This material has fibers
that are woven or aligned in specific directions to give the material
directional strength properties. These properties depend on the type of
fiber, the orientation and concentration of fiber, and matrix material.
Composite materials could exhibit multiple modes of failure. Propellers
constructed of composite material must demonstrate airworthiness when
considering these novel design features.
The requirements of part 35 of the FAR's were established to
address the airworthiness considerations associated with wood and metal
propellers used primarily on reciprocating engines. Propeller blades of
this type are generally thicker than composite blades, and have
demonstrated good service experience following a bird strike. Propeller
blades constructed using composite material are generally thinner when
used on turbine engines, and are typically installed on high
performance aircraft. High performance aircraft generally fly at high
airspeeds with correspondingly high impact forces associated with a
bird strike. Thus, composite propellers must demonstrate propeller
integrity following a bird strike.
In addition, part 35 of the FAR's do not currently require a
demonstration of propeller integrity following a lightning strike. No
safety considerations arise from lightning strikes on propellers
constructed of metal because the electrical current is safely conducted
through the metal blade without damage to the propeller. Fixed pitched,
wooden propellers are generally used on engines installed on small,
general aviation aircraft that typically do not encounter flying
conditions conducive to lightning strikes. Composite propeller blades,
however, may be used on turbine engines and high performance aircraft
which have an increased risk of lightning strikes. Composite blades may
not safely conduct or dissipate the electrical current from a lightning
strike. Severe damage can result if the propellers are not properly
protected. Therefore, composite blades must demonstrate propeller
integrity following a lightning strike. Information on testing for
lightning protection is set out in SAE Report AE4L, entitled,
``Lightning Test Waveforms and Techniques for Aerospace Vehicles and
Hardware,'' dated June 20, 1978.
Lastly, the current certification requirements address fatigue
evaluation only of metal propeller blades or hubs, and those metal
components of non-metallic blade assemblies. Allowable design stress
limits for composite blades must consider the deteriorating effects of
the environment and in-service use, particularly those effects from
temperature, moisture, erosion and chemical attack. Composite blades
also present new and different considerations for retention of the
blades in the propeller hub.
Discussion of Comments
Interested persons have been afforded the opportunity to
participate in the making of these special conditions. Due
consideration has been given to comments received.
One commenter is concerned that the terms ``reasonable and
foreseeable'' in paragraph (3) FATIGUE EVALUATION of the special
condition is a vague interpretation, and will result in large variation
in how this requirement is applied.
The FAA disagrees. The special conditions are written with the
accepted terminology from Sec. 35.37, Fatigue limit tests, of the
FAR's, which states that ``The fatigue evaluation must include
consideration of all reasonably foreseeable vibration load patterns.''
This terminology has been established because each propeller
installation presents a unique set of operating conditions that must be
incorporated
[[Page 255]]
into the fatigue evaluation. The inclusion of specific aircraft
operating conditions may result in the fatigue evaluation of operating
conditions of minor significance while leaving out conditions of major
significance.
One commenter agreed with the three proposed special conditions as
written and proposed two additional special conditions concerning ice
strikes due to ice shedding from the airframe and ice accretion due to
the heat transfer properties of composite materials.
The FAA disagrees with the addition of the two additional special
conditions for the following reasons. First, ice strikes due to ice
shedding from the airframe is a concern for pusher type installations.
The Hamilton Standard Model 568F propeller is a tractor configuration
and therefore normally will not be exposed to ice shedding from the
airframe. Second, heat transfer properties of the Hamilton Standard
Model 568F composite blade are similar to other composite shell and all
composite blades with deicing systems that have had a good service
history. In addition for propeller installations that require deicing,
the propeller manufacture provides a deicing system and the required
documentation to the airframer for compliance with the current
regulations.
Conclusion
This action affects only the Hamilton Standard Model 568F propeller
and future propeller models within this series. It is not a rule of
general application, and it affects only the manufacturer who applied
to the FAA for approval of this propeller model.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 35
Air Transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
PART 35--[AMENDED]
The authority citation continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704; 14 CFR
11.28, 21.16.
The Special Conditions
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issues the
following special conditions for the Hamilton Standard Model 568F
Propeller:
(a) For purposes of these special conditions, a hazardous condition
is considered to exist for each of the following conditions:
(1) Loss of the propeller blade, or a major portion of a blade.
(2) Overspeed of the propellers.
(3) Unintended movement of the blade below the established minimum
inflight blade angle, or to an angle that results in excessive drag.
(4) The inability to feather the propeller when necessary.
(b) In addition to the requirements of Federal Aviation Regulation
part 35, the following must be shown:
(1) BIRD STRIKE
For propeller of composite construction it must be shown that:
The propeller can withstand a 4 pound bird strike at the blade's
critical radial location when operating at takeoff RPM and liftoff (Vr)
speed of a typical aircraft, without giving rise to a hazardous
condition and while maintaining the capability to be feathered.
(2) LIGHTNING STRIKE
A lightning strike on a propeller of a composite construction shall
not result in a hazardous condition. The propeller shall be capable of
continued safe operation.
(3) FATIGUE EVALUATION
A fatigue evaluation must be provided and the fatigue limits
determined for each propeller hub, blade, and each primary load
carrying component of the propeller. The fatigue evaluation must
consider all known and reasonable foreseeable vibration and cyclic load
patterns that may be encountered in service. The fatigue limits must
account for the effects of in-service deterioration, such as impact
damage, nicks, grooves, galling, or bearing wear; for variations in
production material properties; for environmental effects such as
temperature, moisture, erosion, chemical attack, etc., that cause
deterioration.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on December 19, 1995.
James C. Jones,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-56 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-135 Small Airplane Airworthiness Review Program Amendment No. 3; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 252-254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-135]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 23
[Docket No. 26344; Amendment No. 23-43]
RIN 2120-AD30
Small Airplane Airworthiness Review Program Amendment No. 3;
Correction
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Correction; final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule contains corrections to the final regulation
(Amendment 23-43), which was published April 9, 1993 (58 FR 18958). The
regulation amended the powerplant and equipment airworthiness standards
for normal, utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes. This
[[Page 253]]
amendment replaces two paragraphs that were inadvertently deleted by
Amendment No. 23-43.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective January 4, 1996. Comments must
be submitted on or before April 3, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted in triplicate to: Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules
Docket (AGC-200), Docket No. 26344, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. Comments delivered must be marked Docket No.
26344. Comments may be inspected in Room 915G weekdays between 8:30
a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except on Federal holidays.
In addition, the FAA is maintaining a duplicate information docket
of comments in the Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, ACE-7,
Federal Aviation Administration, Central Region, 601 East 12th Street,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments in the duplicate information
docket may be inspected in the Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel
weekdays, except Federal holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Norman Vetter, ACE-111, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th
Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 426-5688.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting immediate flight safety and, thus, was not
preceded by notice and opportunity to comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified above. All communications
received on or before the closing date for comments will be considered,
and this rule may be amended in light of the comments received. Factual
information that supports the commenter's ideas and suggestions is
extremely helpful in determining whether additional rulemaking action
would be needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
rule will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 26344.'' The postcard will be date stamped and returned
to the commenter.
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.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation and that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further that this action
involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is determined that
this emergency regulation otherwise would be significant under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final regulatory evaluation will
be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket (otherwise, an evaluation is
not required). A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules
Docket.
Availability
Any person may obtain a copy of this amendment by submitting a
request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public
Affairs, Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-200, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-3484.
Communications must identify the amendment number.
Persons interested in being placed on the mailing list for future
NPRM's and rules should request, from the above office, a copy of
Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Distribution
System, which describes the application procedure.
Background
The final regulations that are the subject of this amendment,
Amendment 23-43 (58 FR 18958, April 9, 1993), inadvertently removed
paragraphs Sec. 23.965 (b)(4) and (b)(5). These paragraphs were never
intended to be removed and their removal was not proposed in the NPRM
for Amendment 23-43.
Need for Correction
As published, the final regulations contain inadvertently deleted
paragraphs 23.965 (b)(4) and (b)(5), which contain substantive
requirements that were not intended to be removed and are considered
essential to aviation safety.
Discussion of Amendments
Section 23.965
The FAA proposed to amend paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of
Sec. 23.965 in Amendment 23-43. However, the amendatory language
removed paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5). This amendment corrects the error
by reinserting those paragraphs into the regulations.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.
The Amendments
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 23 to read as follows:
PART 23--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, ACROBATIC, AND
COMMUTER CATEGORY AIRPLANES
1. The authority citation for part 23 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701; 49 U.S.C. 106(g).
2. Section 23.965, paragraph (b), is amended by adding paragraphs
(b)(4) and (b)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 23.965 Fuel tank tests.
(b) * * *
(4) Under paragraph (b)(3) (ii) and (iii) of this section, the time
of test must be adjusted to accomplish the same number of vibration
cycles that would be accomplished in 25 hours at the frequency
specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(5) During the test, the tank assembly must be rocked at a rate of
16 to 20 complete cycles per minute, through an angle of 15 deg. on
either side of the horizontal (30 deg. total), about an axis parallel
to the axis of the fuselage, for 25 hours.
[[Page 254]]
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 28, 1995.
Michael Gallagher,
Acting Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-135 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-133 Search Warrants
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 257-258]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-133]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 258]]
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Customs Service
19 CFR Part 162
[T.D. 96-6]
RIN 1515-AB72
Search Warrants
AGENCY: Customs Service, Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document amends the Customs Regulations by removing a
regulation limiting the authority of Customs officers to whom search
warrants are issued. The current regulation restricts such officers
from removing letters, documents and other records in certain
circumstances. The regulation is inconsistent with the current state of
the law.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lars-Erik Hjelm, Office of the Chief
Counsel, at 202-927-6900.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 162.14 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 162.14) provides
that Customs officers to whom a search warrant is issued may not remove
letters, other documents and records during the execution of the
warrant, unless such letters, other documents and records are
instruments of crime which are seized pursuant to a lawful arrest. When
it was drafted, the statutory basis for this regulation was found in
section 595 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1595). Until 1986,
section 595 only authorized Customs to obtain warrants for merchandise.
In 1986, section 595 was expanded to allow Customs to seize ``. . .
any document . . . which is evidence of a violation . . . of any . . .
law enforced or administered by the United States Customs Service.''
Pub. L. 99-570, Title III, Sec. 3122, 100 Stat. 3207-87.
In addition to section 595, section 589 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1589a(2)), provides expanded authority for Customs officers
with warrants to seize documents. Section 589 provides Customs officers
with authority to execute and serve any warrant issued under the
authority of the United States. As a search warrant issued under Rule
41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (Fed. R. Crim. P., Rule
41, 18 U.S.C. App.) can now be issued for, among other things,
documents constituting evidence of crimes (See United States v.
Thompson, 495 F. 2d 165 (D.C. Cir 1974); United States v. Michaelian,
803 F. 2d 1042 (9th Cir. 1986)), it is clear that section 589 read in
conjunction with Rule 41 provides Customs officers with authority to
search for and seize documentary evidence. Further, the Supreme Court
has made it clear that officers may seize incriminating evidence during
the course of a lawful search. Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128
(1990).
Inasmuch as section 162.14 of the Customs Regulations, no longer
reflects the state of the law regarding the search and seizure
authority of Customs officers, Customs proposed removing the regulation
in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published in the Federal Register on
July 12, 1995 (60 FR 35881). A correction document regarding the notice
was published in the Federal Register (60 FR 37856) on July 24, 1995.
Determination
No comments were received in response to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking. After further review, Customs has determined to proceed
with the removal of section 162.14, Customs Regulations (19 CFR
162.14).
Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866
Pursuant to the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and based upon the information set forth above, it
is certified that the removal of Sec. 162.14 will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, the amendment is not subject to the regulatory analysis or
other requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
This document does not meet the criteria for a ``significant
regulatory action'' as specified in Executive Order 12866.
Drafting Information
The principal author of this document was Janet L. Johnson,
Regulations Branch. However, personnel from other offices participated
in its development.
List of Subjects in Part 162
Administrative practice and procedure, Customs duties and
inspection, Drug traffic control, Exports, Law enforcement, Marijuana,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Search warrants,
Seizures and forfeitures.
Amendment to the Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 162 of the Customs
Regulations is amended as set forth below.
PART 162--RECORDKEEPING, INSPECTION, SEARCH AND SEIZURE
1. The general authority for part 162 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 66, 1624.
Sec. 162.14 [Removed]
2. Section 162.14 is removed.
William F. Riley,
Acting Commissioner of Customs.
Approved: December 28, 1995.
John P. Simpson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 96-133 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-131 Information Reporting for Discharges of Indebtedness
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 262-271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-131]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
26 CFR Parts 1 and 602
[TD 8654]
RIN 1545-AS21
Information Reporting for Discharges of Indebtedness
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations relating to the
information reporting requirements of applicable financial entities for
discharges of indebtedness. The final regulations reflect changes to
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Code) made by section 13252 of the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (the Act). The final
regulations affect certain financial institutions and federal executive
agencies.
DATES: These regulations are effective December 22, 1996.
For dates of applicability, see Sec. 1.6050P-1(h).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon L. Hall (timing and amount of
discharge) at (202) 622-4930 or Michael F. Schmit (other issues) at
(202) 622-4960, both of the Office of Assistant Chief Counsel (Income
Tax and Accounting). Neither telephone number is toll-free.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collection of information contained in these final regulations
has been reviewed and approved by the Office of Management and Budget
in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507) under
control number 1545-1419. Responses to this collection of information
are required for the IRS to monitor whether discharged debtors are
properly complying with tax laws respecting cancellations of
indebtedness.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of
information displays a valid control number.
The time estimates for the reporting requirements contained in
these final regulations are reflected in the burden estimates for Form
1099-C.
Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and
suggestions for reducing this burden should be sent to the Internal
Revenue Service, Attn: IRS Reports Clearance Officer, T:FP, Washington,
DC 20224, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Attn: Desk
Officer for the Department of Treasury, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503.
Books or records relating to this collection of information must be
retained as long as their contents may become material in the
administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and
tax information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
Background
Section 6050P was added to the Code by section 13252 of the Act.
Section 6050P requires certain financial entities to report discharges
of indebtedness of $600 or more during any calendar year, and requires
reporting entities to make a return at such time and in such form as
the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.
On December 27, 1993, temporary regulations (TD 8506) relating to
the reporting of discharge of indebtedness under section 6050P were
published in the Federal Register (58 FR 68301). A notice of proposed
rulemaking (IA-63-93) cross-referencing the temporary regulations was
published in the Federal Register for the same day (58 FR 68337).
Written comments were received in response to the notice of
proposed rulemaking. Fourteen speakers provided testimony at a public
hearing held on March 30, 1994. In response to the comments and
testimony, the IRS and Treasury issued Notice 94-73 (1994-2 C.B. 553),
providing interim relief from penalties for failure to comply with
certain of the reporting requirements of the temporary regulations. The
Notice provided that, with respect to a discharge of indebtedness
occurring before the later of January 1, 1995, or the effective date of
the final regulations under section 6050P, no penalties would be
imposed for the failure to report a discharge of indebtedness:
(a) Under title 11 of the United States Code;
(b) Resulting from the expiration of the statute of limitations for
collection of an indebtedness;
(c) For an amount other than principal in the case of indebtedness
arising in
[[Page 263]]
connection with a lending transaction; or
(d) For a person other than the primary (or first-named) debtor in
the case of indebtedness incurred before January 1, 1995, that involves
multiple debtors.
After consideration of all the comments, the proposed regulations
under section 6050P are adopted, as revised by this Treasury decision,
effective for discharges of indebtedness occurring after December 21,
1996. The temporary regulations and interim relief from penalties
provided in Notice 94-73 remain in effect through December 21, 1996, at
which time the temporary regulations are removed. However, no penalties
will be imposed for the failure to report a discharge of indebtedness
occurring after December 21, 1996, and before January 1, 1997, if the
failure to report would have qualified for penalty relief under Notice
94-73 had the discharge occurred prior to December 22, 1996.
Additionally, the final regulations provide that a financial entity
subject to section 6050P may, at its discretion, apply any of the
provisions of the final regulations to any discharge of indebtedness
occurring on or after January 1, 1996, and before December 22, 1996.
The comments and revisions to the proposed regulations are discussed
below.
At the request of commentators, the IRS and Treasury are
considering the issuance of guidance providing uniform procedures for
requesting extensions of time within which to file information returns
with the IRS and related statements to taxpayers. This guidance, if
issued, would apply to the information reporting requirements set forth
in this Treasury decision.
Explanation of Revisions and Summary of Comments
1. Identifiable Events
Comments were received relating to the issue of when an
indebtedness is discharged for purposes of section 6050P. Under the
temporary and proposed regulations, indebtedness is considered
discharged, and reporting is required, upon the occurrence of an
identifiable event indicating that the indebtedness will never have to
be repaid by the debtor, taking into account all of the facts and
circumstances. The temporary and proposed regulations list three
identifiable events, but make clear that the three items do not
represent an exclusive list of events requiring reporting.
Commentators objected to this facts and circumstances test, and
stated that the final regulations should instead provide an exclusive
list of reporting events. The comments indicated that creditors do not
have the resources to weigh all the facts and circumstances in order to
determine whether a debt will never have to be repaid by the debtor.
In response to these comments, the final regulations provide that,
for purposes of section 6050P, indebtedness is considered discharged,
and reporting is required, only upon the occurrence of certain
identifiable events. The regulations contain an exclusive list of eight
identifiable events, and provide that, in the absence of the occurrence
of one of these events, a Form 1099-C is not required to be filed.
A. Discharges of Indebtedness in Bankruptcy
Commentators objected to the requirement in the temporary and
proposed regulations relating to the reporting of a discharge of
indebtedness in bankruptcy. The commentators stated that the obligation
to report debts discharged in bankruptcy was extremely burdensome due
to the large number of information returns that these bankruptcies
would generate. These commentators also stated that some lenders do not
receive information regarding a debtor's bankruptcy discharge in the
normal course of business.
Commentators also objected to the requirement to report debts
discharged in bankruptcy because income from a discharge in bankruptcy
is excludable under section 108(a)(1)(A). Additionally, while
acknowledging that section 108(b) generally requires the reduction of
tax attributes for amounts of cancellation of indebtedness income
excluded under section 108(a), these commentators indicated that the
majority of bankruptcies involve consumer debt, the discharge of which
is unlikely to give rise to attribute reduction. Thus, they contended
that the reporting of consumer debts discharged in bankruptcy will not
further the purposes of section 6050P.
Finally, based on language in section 6050P, commentators contended
that the IRS and Treasury lacked authority to require reporting in
bankruptcy. Under section 6050P(a), ``any applicable financial entity
which discharges . . . the indebtedness of any person'' is subject to
the rules of section 6050P. Commentators argued that creditors should
not be subject to the rules of section 6050P for debts discharged in
bankruptcy because it is the bankruptcy court, not the creditor, that
discharges the debt.
In promulgating the temporary regulations, the IRS and Treasury
fully considered the issue of whether bankruptcy discharges could be
excluded from the reporting requirement. The legislative history to
section 6050P states that ``information returns are required regardless
of whether the debtor is subject to tax on the discharged debt. For
example, Congress does not expect reporting financial institutions and
agencies to determine whether the debtor qualifies for an exclusion
under section 108.'' H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 213, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. 1,
671 (1993). This language indicates that Congress intended that
discharges resulting in excluded income (such as bankruptcy discharges)
be reported.
Accordingly, the IRS and Treasury do not believe that a requirement
to report debts discharged in bankruptcy is outside the scope of
section 6050P. In enacting section 6050P, Congress intended to increase
debtor compliance in reporting discharges of indebtedness. With respect
to the tax consequences to the debtor, it generally makes no difference
whether the debt is voluntarily discharged by the financial entity, or
discharged by a court order. Further, the creditor is receiving an
amount that is less than the amount of the outstanding indebtedness
whether the debt is voluntarily discharged or ordered to be discharged
by a court. Thus, the language ``any applicable financial entity which
discharges . . . indebtedness'' should not be narrowly construed to
exclude instances in which a debt is ordered to be discharged or is
discharged by operation of law.
The IRS and Treasury believe that an objective of the legislative
history quoted above is that information reporting under section 6050P
not impose an undue burden on filers by requiring determinations
regarding whether discharges result in income to debtors. However, the
legislative history does not preclude an exception for certain
discharges in appropriate circumstances. Accordingly, in response to
the above concerns of the commentators, the final regulations provide
an exception from reporting in the case of certain bankruptcy
discharges. Under the final regulations, indebtedness discharged in
bankruptcy is required to be reported only if the creditor knows that
the debtor incurred the indebtedness for business or investment
purposes. Therefore, reporting is not required for consumer debts
discharged in bankruptcy or in cases in which the creditor is not aware
of the purpose for the borrowing or that purpose is not clear.
Information relating to whether a debt was incurred for business or
investment purposes will
[[Page 264]]
be available to a creditor in some cases, such as those in which loan
documents require the borrower to state the purpose of the loan. This
limited reporting of debts discharged in bankruptcy will exclude
information returns relating to consumer debt, while retaining
reporting for those discharges most likely to involve the reduction of
tax attributes under section 108(b). Pursuant to Notice 94-73, no
penalties will be imposed for the failure to report any indebtedness
discharged before December 22, 1996, in bankruptcy. Additionally, no
penalties will be imposed for the failure to report any indebtedness
discharged after December 21, 1996, and before January 1, 1997, in
bankruptcy, since the failure to report would have qualified for
penalty relief under Notice 94-73 had the discharge occurred prior to
December 22, 1996.
B. Expiration of Statute of Limitations for Collection
Under the temporary and proposed regulations, an identifiable event
includes a cancellation or extinguishment by operation of law that
renders a debt unenforceable, such as the expiration of the statute of
limitations for collection of an indebtedness.
Comments were received relating to the requirement to report
indebtedness discharged as a result of the expiration of the statute of
limitations. Commentators argued that expiration of the statute of
limitations should not be an identifiable event because of the
recordkeeping and other administrative burdens that are created by such
a rule. Commentators noted that the statute of limitations for
collection of debt varies from state to state, and that debtors may
relocate and be subject to the rules of multiple jurisdictions.
Further, they contended, an isolated payment by a debtor will
frequently restart the running of the statute of limitations. According
to the commentators, making lenders track the expiration of the statute
of limitations for reporting purposes would require special computer
applications not needed for any other creditor function, require legal
expertise in the collection department, and be very costly.
As a legal matter, commentators argued that the statute of
limitations is an affirmative defense, and affects only judicial
enforceability of the obligation. Most commentators indicated that
collection activity routinely continues after the expiration of the
statute of limitations. The temporary and proposed regulations list
collection activity on the part of the creditor as a factor to be
considered in determining whether debt has been discharged. Thus, even
under the temporary and proposed regulations, expiration of the statute
of limitations would rarely mark the date on which debt is considered
discharged, because collection activity routinely continues after that
date.
In response to these comments, the final regulations provide that
expiration of the statute of limitations for collection of an
indebtedness is an identifiable event for which a Form 1099-C is
required to be filed only if, and at such time as, a debtor's
affirmative defense of the expiration of the statute of limitations is
upheld in a final judgment or decision of a judicial proceeding, and
the period for appealing the judgment or decision has expired.
C. Other Discharges by Operation of Law
As stated above, the temporary and proposed regulations provide
that an identifiable event includes a cancellation or extinguishment by
operation of law that renders a debt unenforceable (such as the
expiration of the statute of limitations for collection of the
indebtedness). The temporary and proposed regulations do not specify
all of the circumstances requiring reporting under this identifiable
event.
In order to further the goal of providing an exclusive list of
reporting events, the final regulations specify those discharges
occurring by operation of law that are required to be reported under
section 6050P. In addition to the statute of limitations identifiable
event previously discussed, the events relating to operation of law
that must be reported are (i) a cancellation or extinguishment of an
indebtedness that renders a debt unenforceable in a receivership,
foreclosure, or similar proceeding in a federal or State court, as
described in section 368(a)(3)(A)(ii); (ii) a cancellation or
extinguishment of an indebtedness upon the expiration of a statutory
period for filing a claim or commencing a deficiency judgment
proceeding; (iii) a cancellation or extinguishment of an indebtedness
that renders a debt unenforceable pursuant to a probate or similar
proceeding; and (iv) a cancellation or extinguishment of an
indebtedness pursuant to an election of foreclosure remedies by a
creditor that statutorily extinguishes or bars the creditor's right to
pursue collection of the indebtedness. This final event relating to an
election of foreclosure remedies will require reporting only where a
mortgage lender or holder is barred by local law from pursuing a
deficiency judgment or note collection proceeding following exercise of
a power of sale contained in a mortgage or deed of trust.
A discharge of indebtedness occurring by operation of law not
enumerated above is not required to be reported under the final
regulations.
D. Collection Activity
Commentators indicated that the temporary and proposed regulations
were unclear regarding the effect of continuing collection activity on
the requirement to report under section 6050P. The temporary and
proposed regulations provide that collection activity is one of the
facts and circumstances to be taken into account in determining whether
a discharge of indebtedness has occurred. The commentators argued that
the final regulations should clarify that reporting is not required
prior to termination of collection efforts on the part of the creditor.
In response to these comments, the final regulations address the
effect of collection efforts on the requirement to report under section
6050P. Under the final regulations, an identifiable event occurs and
reporting is required upon a decision by the creditor, or the
application of a defined policy of the creditor, to discontinue
collection activity and discharge indebtedness. For this purpose, a
defined policy may be either a written policy or a creditor's
established business practice.
Additionally, under the final regulations, there is a rebuttable
presumption that an identifiable event has occurred during a calendar
year if a creditor has not received a payment on an indebtedness at any
time during a 36-month testing period ending at the close of the year.
This presumption is rebutted by the creditor if the creditor (or a
third-party collection agency on behalf of the creditor) has engaged in
significant, bona fide collection activity at any time during the 12-
month period ending at the close of the calendar year, or if facts and
circumstances existing as of January 31 of the calendar year following
expiration of the 36-month testing period indicate that the
indebtedness has not been discharged. Under the final regulations,
significant, bona fide collection activity does not include merely
nominal or ministerial collection action, such as an automated mailing.
Further, facts and circumstances indicating that an indebtedness has
not been discharged include the existence of a lien relating to the
indebtedness against the debtor (to the extent of the value of the
security), or the sale or packaging for sale of the indebtedness by the
creditor.
[[Page 265]]
E. Other Reportable Discharges
Under the temporary and proposed regulations, an identifiable event
includes an agreement between the applicable financial entity and the
debtor to discharge an indebtedness, provided that the last event
necessary to effectuate the discharge has occurred. The final
regulations retain this reporting requirement, restating that an
identifiable event includes a discharge of indebtedness pursuant to an
agreement between an applicable financial entity and a debtor to
discharge indebtedness at less than full consideration. As under the
temporary regulations, this identifiable event will not occur until the
last event necessary to effectuate the discharge has occurred.
The final regulations also provide that a discharge of indebtedness
occurring before the date on which an identifiable event occurs may, at
the creditor's discretion, be reported under section 6050P.
2. Definition of Indebtedness
Commentators objected to the broad definition of indebtedness
provided in the temporary and proposed regulations. The temporary and
proposed regulations provide that, for purposes of reporting the amount
of indebtedness discharged, an indebtedness is any amount owed to the
creditor including principal, interest, penalties, fees, administrative
costs, and fines, to the extent the amount constitutes an indebtedness
under section 61(a)(12). Commentators argued that this definition is
overly broad and should be amended to include principal only (or the
primary indebtedness in the case of a non-lending transaction). In
response to these comments, the final regulations provide certain
exceptions relating to the reporting of amounts other than stated
principal.
A. Reporting of Interest
Commentators offered two main objections to the reporting of
interest. First, commentators stated that reporting interest was
burdensome because interest is not tracked by lenders once indebtedness
is written off or placed on nonaccrual status on the lender's books.
Second, commentators suggested that reporting of interest would be of
marginal benefit to the IRS because in many cases discharged interest
may be excluded from gross income under sections 108(e)(2) and 111.
In response to these comments, and in an effort to reduce the
information reporting burden on affected filers, the final regulations
do not require the reporting of amounts of discharged interest (whether
or not arising in connection with a lending transaction), despite the
fact that some discharged interest will give rise to gross income.
However, at the option of the applicable financial entity, interest may
be included in the amount reported. Additionally, as provided in Notice
94-73, in the case of a discharge of indebtedness before December 22,
1996, no penalties will be imposed for failure to report an amount
other than principal in the case of indebtedness arising in connection
with a lending transaction.
B. Penalties, Fees, Administrative Costs, and Fines
Commentators also argued that, like interest, penalties, fees,
administrative costs, and fines are not tracked by lenders once an
indebtedness is written off on the books of the lender. Thus, they
contended, tracking these amounts would require additional computer
programming and recordkeeping, and would be very costly. With respect
to lending transactions, the IRS and Treasury have concluded that the
benefits that would be derived from requiring the reporting of
penalties, fees, administrative costs, and fines are outweighed by the
burden associated with the requirement. Accordingly, the final
regulations provide that, in the case of a lending transaction, only
discharged amounts of stated principal are required to be reported. In
the case of non-lending transactions, the amount owed, such as a fee,
fine, or penalty, is reportable if discharged.
3. Reporting for Multiple Debtors
Commentators recommended that the multiple debtor rules of the
temporary and proposed regulations be amended so that reporting is
required only with respect to the primary or first-named debtor on the
lender's account. The rationale for this approach is that, in general,
lenders track loans involving multiple debtors only by the name of the
borrower of record, and thus, the information required to be reported
under section 6050P (e.g., the name, address, and taxpayer
identification number (TIN)) for debtors other than the primary debtor
is generally not available to lenders. In addition, the commentators
pointed out that most other information return regulations require
reporting only with respect to a single taxpayer (e.g., Sec. 1.6050H-1
requires reporting only with respect to one designated interest payor
even if multiple debtors are liable on a mortgage). Finally, these
commentators stated that the majority of multiple debtor situations
involve a husband and wife who will likely file a joint return, and
therefore, requiring reporting for each debtor is not necessary.
The IRS and Treasury believe, however, that requiring reporting for
multiple debtors is consistent with section 6050P(a)(1), which provides
that the reporting of a name, address, and TIN is required for each
person whose indebtedness was discharged. Further, while reporting with
respect to only one taxpayer is required under many information
reporting sections of the Code, section 6050J, which is comparable to
section 6050P in that it relates to the reporting of acquisitions and
abandonments of property securing indebtedness, requires reporting for
each person who is a borrower with respect to the secured indebtedness.
Moreover, in Notice 94-73, the IRS addressed the concerns of
commentators by providing that no penalties would be imposed for
failure to report a discharge of indebtedness for other than the
primary (or first-named) debtor in the case of indebtedness incurred
before January 1, 1995, thus allowing creditors time to begin
collecting the necessary information for all debtors in the case of
indebtedness incurred after December 31, 1994. The final regulations
incorporate this relief.
In order to reduce the information reporting burden on applicable
financial entities, the final regulations contain two exceptions
relating to multiple debtor reporting. In the case of indebtedness of
less than $10,000 incurred on or after January 1, 1995, that involves
multiple debtors, reporting is required only for the primary (or first-
named) debtor. Additionally, to avoid duplication, the final
regulations provide a husband/wife exception to the requirement for
reporting in the case of multiple debtors. Under this exception, only
one Form 1099-C must be prepared if the creditor knows, or has reason
to know, that the co-obligors were husband and wife living at the same
address when the indebtedness was incurred, and does not know or have
reason to know that such circumstances have changed at the time of the
discharge. These two exceptions apply to discharges of indebtedness
after December 31, 1994.
The final regulations retain the rule of the temporary and proposed
regulations relating to the amount to be reported with respect to each
joint and several debtor.
4. Multiple Creditors/Lending Pools/REMICs
Commentators indicated that further guidance should be provided in
the final regulations regarding section
[[Page 266]]
6050P reporting obligations in the case of participation loans, lending
pools, and other multiple-creditor situations. In response to these
comments, the final regulations provide a general rule that, in the
case of an indebtedness owned (or treated as owned for federal income
tax purposes) by more than one creditor, each creditor that is an
applicable financial entity must comply with the reporting requirements
of this section with respect to any discharge of indebtedness of $600
or more allocable to such creditor. A creditor will be considered to
have complied with the requirements of this section if a lead bank or
other designee of the creditor complies on its behalf.
Comments were received advocating an exception from reporting for
discharges of certain widely-owned securitized indebtedness. The
commentators reasoned that the owners of widely-held securitized
indebtedness will generally have no knowledge regarding when a
discharge occurs, or the amount of discharged debt allocable to each
owner. Further, commentators suggested that it is likely that a
significant portion of such securitized indebtedness may be owned by
persons that are not applicable financial entities and, therefore, are
not subject to section 6050P.
The IRS and Treasury believe, however, that it would be
inconsistent with the purpose of section 6050P to provide a general
exception from reporting for such securitized indebtedness. Section
6050P is intended to increase the likelihood that a debtor will comply
with the tax laws relating to discharge of indebtedness by requiring
the reporting of that event to the IRS. The fact that indebtedness has
been securitized and sold to numerous owners generally does not affect
the tax consequences to the debtor upon a discharge of that
indebtedness. Thus, the IRS and Treasury do not believe that a
discharge of indebtedness should be excepted from section 6050P
reporting simply because that indebtedness was part of a securitization
arrangement.
Commentators also argued that the discharge of an indebtedness held
by a real estate mortgage investment conduit (REMIC) should not be
required to be reported under section 6050P. Because a REMIC is not an
applicable financial entity, commentators contended that section 6050P
should not apply upon a discharge of indebtedness held by a REMIC.
However, section 860F(e) provides that, for purposes of subtitle F
of the Code (Procedure and Administration, including section 6050P), a
REMIC is treated as a partnership and holders of residual interests in
the REMIC are treated as partners. Under the final regulations,
indebtedness owned by a partnership is treated as owned by the
partners. Thus, arguably a discharge of REMIC indebtedness should be
treated similar to partnership indebtedness and thus should be reported
to the extent the residual owners of the REMIC are applicable financial
entities.
Because the IRS and Treasury believe that further study of these
issues is warranted, the final regulations reserve on the application
of section 6050P to discharges of indebtedness held (1) in a pass-
through securitized indebtedness arrangement, or (2) by a REMIC. For
this purpose, a pass-through securitized indebtedness arrangement is
any arrangement whereby one or more debt obligations are pooled and
held for twenty or more persons whose interests in the debt obligations
are undivided co-ownership interests that are freely transferrable. Co-
ownership interests that are actively traded personal property (as
defined in Sec. 1.1092(d)-1) are presumed to be freely transferrable
and held by twenty or more persons. Pending issuance of further
guidance, no penalties will be imposed for failure to report a
discharge of indebtedness held under these circumstances. This relief
from penalties does not extend to arrangements formed for a principal
purpose of avoiding the reporting requirements of this section. The IRS
and Treasury welcome comments regarding compliance with section 6050P
in the case of pass-through securitized indebtedness arrangements and
REMICs.
5. Coordination of Form 1099-A and Form 1099-C
The legislative history to section 6050P indicates that Congress
intended that the IRS and Treasury coordinate reporting under section
6050P with the reporting required under section 6050J. Section 6050J
requires information relating to foreclosures and abandonments of
secured property to be reported on Form 1099-A.
The final regulations provide that if, in the same calendar year, a
discharge of indebtedness reportable under section 6050P occurs in
connection with a foreclosure or abandonment of secured property
reportable under section 6050J, it is not necessary to file both a Form
1099-A and a Form 1099-C for the same debtor. Under the final
regulations, the filing requirements of section 6050J will be satisfied
with respect to a debtor if, in lieu of filing a Form 1099-A, a Form
1099-C is filed in accordance with the instructions for the filing of
that form. This coordinated filing provision applies to discharges of
indebtedness after December 31, 1994.
6. Direct or Indirect Subsidiary
Commentators requested that the final regulations include a
definition of a direct or indirect subsidiary for purposes of section
6050P. Section 6050P(c)(1)(C) provides that the definition of
applicable financial entity includes a direct or indirect subsidiary of
an entity described in section 6050P(c)(1)(A). In response to these
comments, the final regulations provide that, for purposes of section
6050P(c)(1)(C), the term direct or indirect subsidiary means a
corporation in a chain of corporations beginning with the entity
described in section 6050P(c)(1)(A), if at least 50 percent of the
total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote,
or at least 50 percent of the total value of all classes of stock, of
such corporation is directly owned by the entity described in section
6050P(c)(1)(A), or by one or more other corporations in the chain.
7. Other Exceptions From Reporting
The IRS and Treasury received numerous comments advocating that the
final regulations include exceptions from reporting with respect to
certain discharges of indebtedness.
A. Reporting for Non-U.S. Debtors
Comments were received relating to the inclusion in final
regulations of an exception for reporting discharges of indebtedness of
certain foreign debtors. These comments noted that, in some cases,
discharges of indebtedness that involve such debtors will not result in
income that is taxable in the United States.
On the other hand, there clearly are cases in which a foreign
person may be subject to U.S. tax with respect to a discharge of
indebtedness. Because there is no clear guidance on which financial
institutions may rely for purposes of determining whether a foreign
person would be subject to U.S. tax with respect to cancellation of
indebtedness income, it is not appropriate to provide a general
exception for foreign persons. However, the IRS and Treasury are
continuing to study the issue of whether reporting is necessary in the
case of foreign debtors whose debt is discharged by foreign branches of
U.S. financial institutions. Accordingly, pending the issuance of
further guidance, no penalties will be imposed if an applicable
financial entity fails to report a discharge of indebtedness of a
foreign debtor by a foreign branch of the entity.
[[Page 267]]
B. Reporting Where Debt Is Acquired by Related Persons
Comments were received requesting that the final regulations
clarify whether reporting is required in circumstances in which there
is a deemed discharge of indebtedness pursuant to the regulations under
section 108(e)(4). Section 108(e)(4) and implementing regulations (see
Sec. 1.108-2) provide that the acquisition of outstanding indebtedness
by a person related to the debtor from a person who is not related to
the debtor is treated as if the debtor had acquired the indebtedness
and may result in a realization by the debtor of income from discharge
of indebtedness. Commentators indicated that applicable financial
entities often will be unaware that the conditions of section 108(e)(4)
have been satisfied and that the debtor's indebtedness is considered to
have been discharged. In response to these comments, the final
regulations provide that no reporting is required under section 6050P
in the case of a discharge of indebtedness under section 108(e)(4)
unless the disposition of the indebtedness by the creditor was made
with a view to avoiding the reporting requirements of this section.
C. Reporting for Guarantors of Indebtedness
Commentators also requested guidance on whether, and under what
circumstances, a Form 1099-C must be filed for a guarantor of an
indebtedness when the underlying indebtedness is discharged. The final
regulations provide that, in the case of guaranteed debt, a guarantor
is not treated as a debtor for purposes of reporting under section
6050P. Thus, reporting for guarantors is not required.
D. Reporting for Non-lending Transactions
A number of comments were received advocating an exception in the
final regulations for discharges of indebtedness where the indebtedness
is incurred in a non-lending transaction. Advocates of this exception
argued that the primary reason applicable financial entities, and not
all trade or businesses, were made subject to section 6050P is that
financial entities have extensive involvement in lending transactions
where the majority of discharges of indebtedness will occur.
Commentators argued that when an applicable financial entity is a
creditor as a result of a non-lending transaction, it should be treated
in the same manner as a non-applicable financial entity with respect to
that indebtedness, and not be subject to section 6050P if a discharge
occurs.
Neither the language of section 6050P nor its legislative history
provides any indication that Congress intended for discharges of non-
lending indebtedness to be excluded from reporting. Moreover, it makes
no difference in determining whether a debtor has income under section
61(a)(12) that the indebtedness was incurred in a non-lending
transaction. Accordingly, the final regulations do not adopt this
suggestion.
E. Reporting of Disputed Liabilities
The temporary and proposed regulations do not address the reporting
requirements under section 6050P in the case of the settlement of a
disputed liability. The preamble to the temporary regulations solicited
public comment relating to this issue. Several commentators urged that
the final regulations include an exception from reporting for
settlements of bona fide disputed liabilities.
The determination regarding whether the settlement of a disputed
liability results in discharge of indebtedness income under section
61(a)(12) is inherently factual. Thus, it continues to be the position
of the IRS and Treasury that this issue should be addressed on a case-
by-case basis, rather than by these final regulations. Therefore, the
final regulations do not provide an exception from reporting for
disputed liabilities. Instead, resolution of the question of whether
there may have been a discharge of indebtedness reportable under this
section remains the obligation of the applicable financial entity. The
IRS and Treasury recognize that a creditor and debtor may take
inconsistent positions on this issue. The IRS does not intend to impose
penalties for good faith failures to report settlements that constitute
discharges of indebtedness.
8. Miscellaneous Comments
Comments were also received relating to whether applicable
financial entities have any information reporting obligations in
instances where payments are received on previously discharged debts.
In response to those inquiries, the final regulations clarify that no
additional reporting or Form 1099-C correction is required if a
creditor receives a payment of all or a portion of a discharged debt
that has been reported to the IRS for a prior calendar year.
Comments were received respecting the TIN solicitation requirements
of the temporary and proposed regulations. In response to those
comments, the final regulations provide that a reasonable effort
(rather than all reasonable efforts) must be made to obtain the correct
name/TIN combination of the person whose indebtedness is discharged.
The IRS and Treasury received a number of other comments in
addition to those summarized above. Some of the suggestions contained
in the comments have been adopted in the final regulations. Other
suggested changes were not adopted primarily because those suggestions
were inconsistent with the purpose of the statute and its legislative
history.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a
significant regulatory action as defined in EO 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It also has been determined that
section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5)
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) do not apply to
these regulations, and, therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code,
the notice of proposed rulemaking preceding these regulations was
submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its impact on small business.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these regulations are Sharon L. Hall and
Michael F. Schmit, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel (Income Tax
and Accounting), IRS. However, other personnel from the IRS and
Treasury Department participated in their development.
List of Subjects
26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
26 CFR Part 602
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 602 are amended as follows:
PART 1--INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 is amended by
removing the entry for Sec. 1.6050P-1T and adding an entry in numerical
order to read as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. * * *
Section 1.6050P-1 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 6050P. * * *
[[Page 268]]
Par. 2. Sections 1.6050P-0 and 1.6050P-1 are added to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.6050P-0 Table of contents.
This section lists the major captions that appear in Sec. 1.6050P-
1.
Sec. 1.6050P-1 Information reporting for discharges of
indebtedness by certain financial entities
(a) Reporting requirement.
(1) In general.
(2) No aggregation.
(3) Amounts not includible in income.
(4) Time and place for reporting.
(i) In general.
(ii) Indebtedness discharged in bankruptcy.
(b) Date of discharge.
(1) In general.
(2) Identifiable events.
(i) In general.
(ii) Statute of limitations.
(iii) Decision to discontinue collection activity; creditor's
defined policy.
(iv) Expiration of non-payment testing period.
(3) Permitted reporting.
(c) Indebtedness.
(d) Exceptions from reporting requirement.
(1) Certain bankruptcy discharges.
(i) In general.
(ii) Business or investment debt.
(2) Interest.
(3) Non-principal amounts in lending transactions.
(4) Indebtedness of foreign persons held by foreign branches of U.S.
financial institutions.
(i) Reporting requirements.
(ii) Definition.
(5) Acquisition of indebtedness by related party.
(6) Releases.
(7) Guarantors and sureties.
(e) Additional rules.
(1) Multiple debtors.
(i) In general.
(ii) Amount to be reported.
(2) Multiple creditors.
(i) In general.
(ii) Partnerships.
(iii) Pass-through securitized indebtedness arrangement.
(A) Reporting requirements.
(B) Definition.
(iv) REMICs.
(3) Coordination with reporting under section 6050J.
(4) Direct or indirect subsidiary.
(5) Use of magnetic media.
(6) TIN solicitation requirement.
(i) In general.
(ii) Manner of soliciting TIN.
(7) Recordkeeping requirements.
(8) No multiple reporting.
(f) Requirement to furnish statement.
(1) In general.
(2) Furnishing copy of Form 1099-C.
(3) Time and place for furnishing statement.
(g) Penalties.
(h) Effective dates.
(1) In general.
(2) Earlier application.
Sec. 1.6050P-1 Information reporting for discharges of indebtedness by
certain financial entities.
(a) Reporting requirement--(1) In general. Except as provided in
paragraph (d) of this section, any applicable financial entity (as
defined in section 6050P(c)(1)) that discharges an indebtedness of any
person (within the meaning of section 7701(a)(1)) of at least $600
during a calendar year must file an information return on Form 1099-C
with the Internal Revenue Service. Solely for purposes of the reporting
requirements of section 6050P and this section, a discharge of
indebtedness is deemed to have occurred, except as provided in
paragraph (b)(3) of this section, if and only if there has occurred an
identifiable event described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section,
whether or not an actual discharge of indebtedness has occurred on or
before the date on which the identifiable event has occurred. The
return must include the following information--
(i) The name, address, and taxpayer identification number (TIN), as
defined in section 7701(a)(41), of each person for which there was an
identifiable event during the calendar year;
(ii) The date on which the identifiable event occurred, as
described in paragraph (b) of this section;
(iii) The amount of indebtedness discharged, as described in
paragraph (c) of this section;
(iv) An indication whether the identifiable event was a discharge
of indebtedness in a bankruptcy, if known; and
(v) Any other information required by Form 1099-C or its
instructions, or current revenue procedures.
(2) No aggregation. For purposes of reporting under this section,
multiple discharges of indebtedness of less than $600 are not required
to be aggregated unless such separate discharges are pursuant to a plan
to evade the reporting requirements of this section.
(3) Amounts not includible in income. Except as otherwise provided
in this section, discharged indebtedness must be reported regardless of
whether the debtor is subject to tax on the discharged debt under
sections 61 and 108 or otherwise by applicable law.
(4) Time and place for reporting--(i) In general. Except as
provided in paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section, returns required by
this section must be filed with the Internal Revenue Service office
designated in the instructions for Form 1099-C on or before February 28
of the year following the calendar year in which the identifiable event
occurs.
(ii) Indebtedness discharged in bankruptcy. Indebtedness discharged
in bankruptcy that is required to be reported under this section must
be reported for the later of the calendar year in which the amount of
discharged indebtedness first becomes ascertainable, or the calendar
year in which the identifiable event occurs.
(b) Date of discharge--(1) In general. Solely for purposes of this
section, except as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this section,
indebtedness is discharged on the date of the occurrence of an
identifiable event specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
(2) Identifiable events--(i) In general. An identifiable event is--
(A) A discharge of indebtedness under title 11 of the United States
Code (bankruptcy);
(B) A cancellation or extinguishment of an indebtedness that
renders a debt unenforceable in a receivership, foreclosure, or similar
proceeding in a federal or State court, as described in section
368(a)(3)(A)(ii) (other than a discharge described in paragraph
(b)(2)(i)(A) of this section);
(C) A cancellation or extinguishment of an indebtedness upon the
expiration of the statute of limitations for collection of an
indebtedness, subject to the limitations described in paragraph
(b)(2)(ii) of this section, or upon the expiration of a statutory
period for filing a claim or commencing a deficiency judgment
proceeding;
(D) A cancellation or extinguishment of an indebtedness pursuant to
an election of foreclosure remedies by a creditor that statutorily
extinguishes or bars the creditor's right to pursue collection of the
indebtedness;
(E) A cancellation or extinguishment of an indebtedness that
renders a debt unenforceable pursuant to a probate or similar
proceeding;
(F) A discharge of indebtedness pursuant to an agreement between an
applicable financial entity and a debtor to discharge indebtedness at
less than full consideration;
(G) A discharge of indebtedness pursuant to a decision by the
creditor, or the application of a defined policy of the creditor, to
discontinue collection activity and discharge debt; or
(H) The expiration of the non-payment testing period, as described
in paragraph (b)(2)(iv) of this section.
(ii) Statute of limitations. In the case of an expiration of the
statute of limitations for collection of an indebtedness, an
identifiable event occurs under paragraph (b)(2)(i)(C) of this section
only if, and at such time as, a debtor's affirmative statute of
limitations defense is upheld in a final judgment or decision of a
judicial proceeding, and the period for
[[Page 269]]
appealing the judgment or decision has expired.
(iii) Decision to discontinue collection activity; creditor's
defined policy. For purposes of the identifiable event described in
paragraph (b)(2)(i)(G) of this section, a creditor's defined policy
includes both a written policy of the creditor and the creditor's
established business practice. Thus, for example, a creditor's
established practice to discontinue collection activity and abandon
debts upon expiration of a particular non-payment period is considered
a defined policy for purposes of paragraph (b)(2)(i)(G) of this
section.
(iv) Expiration of non-payment testing period. There is a
rebuttable presumption that an identifiable event under paragraph
(b)(2)(i)(H) of this section has occurred during a calendar year if a
creditor has not received a payment on an indebtedness at any time
during a testing period (as defined in this paragraph (b)(2)(iv))
ending at the close of the year. The testing period is a 36-month
period increased by the number of calendar months during all or part of
which the creditor was precluded from engaging in collection activity
by a stay in bankruptcy or similar bar under state or local law. The
presumption that an identifiable event has occurred may be rebutted by
the creditor if the creditor (or a third-party collection agency on
behalf of the creditor) has engaged in significant, bona fide
collection activity at any time during the 12-month period ending at
the close of the calendar year, or if facts and circumstances existing
as of January 31 of the calendar year following expiration of the 36-
month period indicate that the indebtedness has not been discharged.
For purposes of this paragraph (b)(2)(iv)--
(A) Significant, bona fide collection activity does not include
merely nominal or ministerial collection action, such as an automated
mailing;
(B) Facts and circumstances indicating that an indebtedness has not
been discharged include the existence of a lien relating to the
indebtedness against the debtor (to the extent of the value of the
security), or the sale or packaging for sale of the indebtedness by the
creditor; and
(C) In no event will an identifiable event described in paragraph
(b)(2)(i)(H) of this section occur prior to December 31, 1997.
(3) Permitted reporting. If a discharge of indebtedness occurs
before the date on which an identifiable event occurs, the discharge
may, at the creditor's discretion, be reported under this section.
(c) Indebtedness. For purposes of this section, indebtedness means
any amount owed to an applicable financial entity, including stated
principal, fees, stated interest, penalties, administrative costs and
fines. The amount of indebtedness discharged may represent all, or only
a part, of the total amount owed to the applicable financial entity.
(d) Exceptions from reporting requirement--(1) Certain bankruptcy
discharges--(i) In general. Reporting is required under this section in
the case of a discharge of indebtedness in bankruptcy only if the
creditor knows from information included in the reporting entity's
books and records pertaining to the indebtedness that the debt was
incurred for business or investment purposes as defined in paragraph
(d)(1)(ii) of this section.
(ii) Business or investment debt. Indebtedness is considered
incurred for business purposes if it is incurred in connection with the
conduct of any trade or business other than the trade or business of
performing services as an employee. Indebtedness is considered incurred
for investment purposes if it is incurred to purchase property held for
investment, as defined in section 163(d)(5).
(2) Interest. The discharge of an amount of indebtedness that is
interest is not required to be reported under this section.
(3) Non-principal amounts in lending transactions. In the case of a
lending transaction, the discharge of an amount other than stated
principal is not required to be reported under this section. For this
purpose, a lending transaction is any transaction in which a lender
loans money to, or makes advances on behalf of, a borrower (including
revolving credits and lines of credit).
(4) Indebtedness of foreign debtors held by foreign branches of
U.S. financial institutions--(i) Reporting requirements. [Reserved]
(ii) Definition. An indebtedness held by a foreign branch of a U.S.
financial institution is described in this paragraph (d)(4) only if--
(A) The financial institution is engaged through a branch or office
in the active conduct of a banking or similar business outside the
United States;
(B) The branch or office is a permanent place of business that is
regularly maintained, occupied, and used to carry on a banking or
similar financial business;
(C) The business is conducted by at least one employee of the
branch or office who is regularly in attendance at such place of
business during normal working hours;
(D) The indebtedness is extended outside of the United States by
the branch or office in connection with that trade or business; and
(E) The financial institution does not know or have reason to know
that the debtor is a United States person.
(5) Acquisition of indebtedness by related party. No reporting is
required under this section in the case of a deemed discharge of
indebtedness under section 108(e)(4) (relating to the acquisition of an
indebtedness by a person related to the debtor), unless the disposition
of the indebtedness by the creditor was made with a view to avoiding
the reporting requirements of this section.
(6) Releases. The release of a co-obligor is not required to be
reported under this section if the remaining debtors remain liable for
the full amount of any unpaid indebtedness.
(7) Guarantors and sureties. Solely for purposes of the reporting
requirements of this section, a guarantor is not a debtor. Thus, in the
case of guaranteed indebtedness, reporting under this section is not
required with respect to a guarantor, whether or not there has been a
default and demand for payment made upon the guarantor.
(e) Additional rules--(1) Multiple debtors--(i) In general. In the
case of indebtedness of $10,000 or more incurred on or after January 1,
1995, that involves more than one debtor, a reporting entity is subject
to the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section for each debtor
discharged from such indebtedness. In the case of indebtedness incurred
prior to January 1, 1995, and indebtedness of less than $10,000
incurred on or after January 1, 1995, involving multiple debtors,
reporting under this section is required only with respect to the
primary (or first-named) debtor. Additionally, only one return of
information is required under this section if the reporting entity
knows, or has reason to know, that co-obligors were husband and wife
living at the same address when an indebtedness was incurred, and does
not know or have reason to know that such circumstances have changed at
the date of a discharge of the indebtedness. This paragraph (e)(1)
applies to discharges of indebtedness after December 31, 1994.
(ii) Amount to be reported. In the case of multiple debtors jointly
and severally liable on an indebtedness, the amount of discharged
indebtedness required to be reported under this section with respect to
each debtor is the total amount of indebtedness discharged. For this
[[Page 270]]
purpose, multiple debtors are presumed to be jointly and severally
liable on an indebtedness in the absence of clear and convincing
evidence to the contrary.
(2) Multiple creditors--(i) In general. Except as otherwise
provided in this paragraph (e)(2), if indebtedness is owned (or treated
as owned for federal income tax purposes) by more than one creditor,
each creditor that is an applicable financial entity must comply with
the reporting requirements of this section with respect to any
discharge of indebtedness of $600 or more allocable to such creditor. A
creditor will be considered to have complied with the requirements of
this section if a lead bank, fund administrator, or other designee of
the creditor complies on its behalf in any reasonable manner, such as
by filing a single return reporting the aggregate amount of
indebtedness discharged, or by filing a return with respect to the
portion of the discharged indebtedness allocable to the creditor. For
purposes of this paragraph (e)(2)(i), any reasonable method may be used
to determine the portion of discharged indebtedness allocable to each
creditor.
(ii) Partnerships. For purposes of paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this
section, indebtedness owned by a partnership is treated as owned by the
partners.
(iii) Pass-through securitized indebtedness arrangement--(A)
Reporting requirements. [Reserved]
(B) Definition. For purposes of this paragraph (e)(2)(iii), a pass-
through securitized indebtedness arrangement is any arrangement whereby
one or more debt obligations are pooled and held for twenty or more
persons whose interests in the debt obligations are undivided co-
ownership interests that are freely transferrable. Co-ownership
interests that are actively traded personal property (as defined in
Sec. 1.1092(d)-1) are presumed to be freely transferrable and held by
twenty or more persons.
(iv) REMICs. [Reserved]
(3) Coordination with reporting under section 6050J. If, in the
same calendar year, a discharge of indebtedness reportable under
section 6050P occurs in connection with a transaction also reportable
under section 6050J (relating to foreclosures and abandonments of
secured property), an applicable financial entity need not file both a
Form 1099-A and a Form 1099-C with respect to the same debtor. The
filing requirements of section 6050J will be satisfied with respect to
a borrower if, in lieu of filing Form 1099-A, a Form 1099-C is filed in
accordance with the instructions for the filing of that form. This
paragraph (e)(3) applies to discharges of indebtedness after December
31, 1994.
(4) Direct or indirect subsidiary. For purposes of section
6050P(c)(1)(C), the term direct or indirect subsidiary means a
corporation in a chain of corporations beginning with an entity
described in section 6050P(c)(1)(A), if at least 50 percent of the
total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote,
or at least 50 percent of the total value of all classes of stock, of
such corporation is directly owned by the entity described in section
6050P(c)(1)(A), or by one or more other corporations in the chain.
(5) Use of magnetic media. Any return required under this section
must be filed on magnetic media to the extent required by section
6011(e) and the regulations thereunder. A failure to file on magnetic
media when required constitutes a failure to file an information return
under section 6721. Any person not required by section 6011(e) to file
returns on magnetic media may request permission to do so under
applicable regulations and revenue procedures.
(6) TIN solicitation requirement--(i) In general. For purposes of
reporting under this section, a reasonable effort must be made to
obtain the correct name/taxpayer identification number (TIN)
combination of a person whose indebtedness is discharged. A TIN
obtained at the time an indebtedness is incurred satisfies the
requirement of this section, unless the entity required to file knows
that such TIN is incorrect. If the TIN is not obtained prior to the
occurrence of an identifiable event, it must be requested of the debtor
for purposes of satisfying the requirement of this paragraph (e)(6).
(ii) Manner of soliciting TIN. Solicitations made in the manner
described in Sec. 301.6724-1(e)(1)(i) and (2) of this chapter will be
deemed to have satisfied the reasonable effort requirement set forth in
paragraph (e)(6)(i) of this section. A TIN solicitation made after the
occurrence of an identifiable event must clearly notify the debtor that
the Internal Revenue Service requires the debtor to furnish its TIN,
and that failure to furnish such TIN may subject the debtor to a $50
penalty imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. A TIN provided under
this section is not required to be certified under penalties of
perjury.
(7) Recordkeeping requirements. Any applicable financial entity
required to file a return with the Internal Revenue Service under this
section must also retain a copy of the return, or have the ability to
reconstruct the data required to be included on the return under
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, for at least four years from the date
such return is required to be filed under paragraph (a)(4) of this
section.
(8) No multiple reporting. If discharged indebtedness is reported
under this section, no further reporting under this section is required
for the amount so reported, notwithstanding that a subsequent
identifiable event occurs with respect to the same amount. Further, no
additional reporting or Form 1099-C correction is required if a
creditor receives a payment of all or a portion of a discharged
indebtedness reported under this section for a prior calendar year.
(f) Requirement to furnish statement--(1) In general. Any
applicable financial entity required to file a return under this
section must furnish to each person whose name is shown on such return
a written statement that includes the following information--
(i) The information required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section;
(ii) The name, address, and TIN of the applicable financial entity
required to file a return under paragraph (a) of this section;
(iii) A legend identifying the statement as important tax
information that is being furnished to the Internal Revenue Service;
and
(iv) Any other information required by Form 1099-C or its
instructions, or current revenue procedures.
(2) Furnishing copy of Form 1099-C. The requirement to provide a
statement to the debtor will be satisfied if the applicable financial
entity furnishes copy B of the Form 1099-C or a substitute statement
that complies with the requirements of the current revenue procedure
for substitute Forms 1099.
(3) Time and place for furnishing statement. The statement required
by this paragraph (f) must be furnished to the debtor on or before
January 31 of the year following the calendar year in which the
identifiable event occurs. The statement will be considered furnished
to the debtor if it is mailed to the debtor's last known address.
(g) Penalties. For penalties for failure to comply with the
requirements of this section, see sections 6721 through 6724.
(h) Effective dates--(1) In general. The rules in this section
apply to discharges of indebtedness after December 21, 1996, except
paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(3) of this section, which apply to discharges
of indebtedness after December 31, 1994.
(2) Earlier application. Notwithstanding the provisions of
paragraph (h)(1) of this section, an applicable financial entity may,
at its discretion, apply any of the provisions of this section to any
discharge of indebtedness occurring on or after
[[Page 271]]
January 1, 1996, and before December 22, 1996.
Secs. 1.6050P-0T and 1.6050P-1T [Removed]
Par. 3. Sections 1.6050P-0T and 1.6050P-1T are removed.
PART 602--OMB CONTROL NUMBERS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
Par. 4. The authority citation for part 602 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805.
Sec. 602.101 [Amended]
Par. 5. In Sec. 602.101, paragraph (c) is amended by removing the
entry for 1.6050P-1T and adding an entry in numerical order in the
table to read ``1.6050P-1..........1545-1419''.
Margaret Milner Richardson,
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
Approved: December 12, 1995.
Leslie Samuels,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 96-131 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-126 Inmate Work and Performance Pay Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 378-379]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-126]
[[Page 377]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Justice
_______________________________________________________________________
Bureau of Prisons
_______________________________________________________________________
28 CFR Part 545
Inmate Work and Performance Pay Program; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 3 / Thursday, January 4, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 378]]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Prisons
28 CFR Part 545
[BOP-1027-F]
RIN 1120-AA29
Inmate Work and Performance Pay Program
AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau of Prisons is amending its
regulations on inmate work and performance pay in conformance with
revised provisions governing drug abuse treatment programs and pretrial
inmates. In addition to making these conforming amendments, the Bureau
is also revising various terms defined in the regulations, updating
examples cited, and adding exception procedures pertinent to pay
reduction and work evaluation. This amendment is intended to provide
for the more efficient operation of Bureau institution work programs.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Office of General Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, HOLC Room 754,
320 First Street, NW., Washington, DC 20534.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy Nanovic, Office of General
Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 514-6655.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Bureau of Prisons is amending its
regulations on Inmate Work and Performance Pay. A final rule on this
subject was published in the Federal Register on October 1, 1984 (49 FR
38915) and was amended on May 21, 1991 (56 FR 23478) and July 10, 1991
(56 FR 31530). A proposed rule on the conforming provisions of the drug
abuse treatment programs was published January 7, 1994 (59 FR 1240),
and a final rule for those provisions was published October 21, 1994
(59 FR 53342). A final rule for the conforming amendments to the
provisions on pretrial inmates was published November 22, 1994 (59 FR
60284).
The January 7, 1994 proposed rule on drug abuse treatment programs
(28 CFR 550, subpart F) included conforming amendments to inmate work/
program assignment (Sec. 545.23(a)) and to eligibility for performance
pay (Sec. 545.25(d)). No comment was received on these provisions.
These conforming amendments are being adopted as final with the
following adjustments. Paragraph (a) of Sec. 545.20 is revised in order
to conform to recommended Federal Register codification practice, to
include reference to drug treatment programming, and to make consistent
reference to education (rather than educational) program. In
Sec. 545.21, paragraph (f) is revised to include reference to drug
treatment programming and education programs. As proposed,
Sec. 545.23(a) was to be amended by revising the last sentence to
include reference to the drug treatment program. This reference is more
accurately stated in the second sentence, and the Literacy Program is
given as an example of program involvement mandated by either Bureau
policy or statute. For ease of reference, the entire paragraph is
revised. In Sec. 545.24(d), the reference to ``educational'' has been
revised as ``education''. The provision on eligibility for performance
pay in proposed Sec. 545.25(d) has been revised for the sake of
simplification. Paragraph (a)(2) of Sec. 545.25 has been revised to
include the acronym for General Education Development in the reference
to the Bureau's literacy program. There is no change in the intent of
these two paragraphs. In Sec. 545.26, paragraph (e)(1) is revised to
include reference to education programs. Section 545.28 is being
revised as an administrative measure to allow for the payment of the
limited financial incentives authorized by the provisions of the drug
abuse treatment programs (Sec. 550.57(a)(1)).
The November 22, 1994 final rule on pretrial inmates removed
references to waiver of separation because the decision to maintain
separation in instances where the design, structure, and operation of
the institution may make separation not practicable is made by staff.
Section 545.23(b) accordingly has been revised to remove similar
reference.
Changes to the definitions in Sec. 545.21 include the following.
The definition of inmate in paragraph (a) has been removed, because
this definition is covered more generally in 28 CFR 500.1. A new
paragraph (a) has been added to define the phrase ``physically and
mentally able.'' Paragraph (c) has been revised to include Federal
Prison Industries' acronym rather than its trade name. Paragraphs (d)
through (g) have been redesignated as paragraphs (e) through (h) in
order to add a new definition for ``commissary assignment.'' This
assignment, also referenced in newly revised Sec. 545.23(a), operates
under the Bureau's Trust Fund Division.
In Sec. 545.26, the Bureau is adding a provision in paragraph (d)
to make exception for a reduction in inmate pay based upon absence from
a scheduled assignment. This exception provides the Bureau the
flexibility to continue payment in instances where the Assistant
Director, Correctional Programs Division deems this advisable. In
paragraph (e), the Bureau is adding a similar provision with respect to
work evaluations. This exception may be invoked at independent camps in
instances where, in order to conserve staff resources, staff may
monitor an inmate's performance on a periodic basis rather than a
monthly basis when the inmate has received exceptional evaluations over
an extended period.
Because the additions to the proposed regulations either relieve a
restriction on the inmate or are administrative in nature, the Bureau
finds good cause for exempting the provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking,
the opportunity for public comment, and a delay in the effective date.
Members of the public may submit comments concerning this rule by
writing to the previously cited address. These comments will be
considered but will receive no response in the Federal Register.
The Bureau of Prisons has determined that this rule is not a
significant regulatory action for the purpose of E.O. 12866, and
accordingly this rule was not reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget. After review of the law and regulations, the Director, Bureau
of Prisons has certified that this rule, for the purpose of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354), does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 545
Prisoners.
Kathleen M. Hawk,
Director, Bureau of Prisons.
Accordingly, pursuant to the rulemaking authority vested in the
Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and delegated to the Director,
Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR 0.96(p), part 545 in subchapter C of 28
CFR, chapter V is amended as set forth below.
SUBCHAPTER C--INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT
PART 545--WORK AND COMPENSATION
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR 545 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 3013, 3571, 3572, 3621, 3622,
3624, 3663, 4001, 4042, 4081, 4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses
committed on or after November 1, 1987), 4126, 5006-5024 (Repealed
October 12, 1984 as to offenses committed after that
[[Page 379]]
date), 5039; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510; 28 CFR 0.95-0.99.
2. In Sec. 545.20, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 545.20 Purpose and scope.
(a) The Bureau of Prisons operates an inmate work program within
its institutions. To the extent practicable, the work program:
(1) Reduces inmate idleness, while allowing the inmate to improve
and/or develop useful job skills, work habits, and experiences that
will assist in post-release employment; and
(2) Ensures that activities necessary to maintain the day-to-day
operation of the institution are completed.
Sentenced inmates who are physically and mentally able to work are
required to participate in the work program. When approved by the
Warden or designee, drug treatment programming, education, or
vocational training may be substituted for all or part of the work
program.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 545.21, paragraphs (a) and (c) are revised, paragraphs
(d) through (g) are redesignated as paragraphs (e) through (h), and a
new paragraph (d) is added and newly designated paragraph (f) is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 545.21 Definitions.
(a) Physically and mentally able. For purposes of this rule, this
shall include inmates with disabilities who, with or without reasonable
accommodation, can perform the essential function of the work
assignment.
* * * * *
(c) Industry assignment. A Federal Prison Industries (FPI) work
assignment.
(d) Commissary assignment. A Trust Fund work assignment.
* * * * *
(f) Part-time work assignment. A work assignment to which an inmate
is assigned for only a portion of the scheduled work day. Part-time
work assignments are ordinarily made in conjunction with drug treatment
programming, education, and/or vocational training programs.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 545.23, paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 545.23 Inmate Work/Program Assignment.
(a) Each sentenced inmate who is physically and mentally able is to
be assigned to an institutional, industrial, or commissary work
program. Exception shall be made to allow for inmate participation in
an education, vocational, or drug abuse treatment program, on either a
full or part-time basis, where this involvement is mandated by Bureau
policy or statute (for example, the Literacy Program). Where such
participation is not required by either policy or statute, exception
may be made to allow an inmate to participate in an education,
vocational, or drug abuse treatment program rather than work full-time
upon the request of the inmate and approval of the Warden or designee.
(b) A pretrial inmate may not be required to work in any assignment
or area other than housekeeping tasks in the inmate's own cell and in
the community living area, unless the pretrial inmate has signed a
waiver of his or her right not to work (see 28 CFR part 551, subpart
J).
* * * * *
Sec. 545.24 [Amended]
5. In Sec. 545.24, paragraph (d) is amended by revising in the
first sentence the word ``educational'' to read ``education''.
6. In Sec. 545.25, paragraph (a)(2) is revised and a new paragraph
(d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 545.25 Eligibility for performance pay.
(a) * * *
(2) Literacy program (GED) participation;
* * * * *
(d) An inmate who refuses participation, withdraws, is expelled, or
otherwise fails attendance or examination requirements of the drug
abuse education course shall be held at the lowest pay grade (Grade 4).
7. In Sec. 545.26, paragraphs (d), (e) introductory text, and
(e)(1) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 545.26 Performance pay provisions.
* * * * *
(d) An inmate is eligible to receive performance pay only for those
hours during which the inmate is actually performing satisfactory work
or actively participating in an education or vocational training
program. Absences from an inmate's scheduled assignment for such
reasons as call-outs, visits, sick call, interviews, or making
telephone calls shall be deducted from the monthly number of hours
worked and will accordingly reduce the amount of pay received by the
inmate. Any exception to such reduction in pay must be approved by the
Assistant Director, Correctional Programs Division, Central Office.
(e) Work Evaluation. At the end of each month the work detail/
program supervisor shall compute on an evaluation form the hours worked
by the inmate and the pay to be awarded. The supervisor shall also rate
the inmate's performance over the past month in each of several
categories. For example, an inmate may be rated in such categories as
quality of work, quantity of work, initiative, ability to learn,
dependability, response to supervision and instruction, safety and care
of equipment, ability to work with others, and overall job proficiency.
Any exception to the work performance evaluation procedures cited above
requires approval of the Assistant Director, Correctional Programs
Division, Central Office.
(1) An inmate shall receive performance pay only for those hours
during which the inmate is satisfactorily performing work or is
actively participating in an education/vocational program.
* * * * *
8. Section 545.28 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 545.28 Achievement awards.
(a) With prior approval of the Education Department, each inmate
who completes the Literacy program, Vocational Training, or related
trades classroom work that is part of a certified apprenticeship
program may be granted an achievement award from performance pay funds.
(b) With prior approval of the Psychology Services Department, each
inmate who is making satisfactory progress or completes a residential
drug treatment program may also be granted an achievement award from
performance pay funds.
[FR Doc. 96-126 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-05-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-123 New Animal Drugs and Related Products; Change of Sponsor
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-123]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 522
New Animal Drugs and Related Products; Change of Sponsor
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect a change of sponsor for a new animal drug
application (NADA) from Fort Dodge Laboratories to Wildlife
Laboratories, Inc.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. McKay, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-102), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-0213.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fort Dodge Laboratories, Fort Dodge, IA
50501, has informed FDA that it has transferred ownership of, and all
rights and interests in approved NADA 47-870 (Etorphine hydrochloride
injection) to Wildlife Laboratories, Inc., 1401 Duff Dr., suite 600,
Fort Collins, CO 80524. This NADA was originally owned by American
Cyanamid Co. and transferred to Fort Dodge Laboratories but was
inadvertently not codified in the regulations. Accordingly, FDA is
amending the regulations in 21 CFR 522.883 to reflect the change of
sponsor.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522
-Animal drugs.
-Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and
under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 522 is
amended as follows:
PART 522--IMPLANTATION OR INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 522 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 360b).
Sec. 522.883 [Amended]
2. Section 522.883 Etorphine hydrochloride injection is amended in
paragraph (c) by removing ``010042'' and adding in its place
``053923''.
Dated: December 22, 1995.
Robert C. Livingston,
Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. 96-123 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-122 New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor Name and Address
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 258-259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-122]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 510
New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor Name and Address
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect a change of sponsor name and address from
American Cyanamid Co. to American Cyanamid, Division of American Home
Products.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. McKay, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-102), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-0213.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: American Cyanamid Co., Berdan Ave., Wayne,
NJ 07470, has informed FDA of a change of sponsor name and address to
American Cyanamid, Division of American Home Products, P.O. Box 1339,
Fort Dodge, IA 50501. Accordingly, the agency is amending the
regulations in 21 CFR 510.600(c)(1) and (c)(2) to reflect the change of
sponsor name and address.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 510
Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 510 is
amended as follows:
[[Page 259]]
PART 510--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 510 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 512, 701, 721 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 360b, 371, 379e).
2. Section 510.600 is amended in the table in paragraph (c)(1) by
removing the entry for ``American Cyanamid Co.'' and by adding in its
place a new entry for ``American Cyanamid, Division of America Home
Products,'' and in the table in paragraph (c)(2) in the entry for
``010042'' by revising the sponsor name and address to read as follows:
Sec. 510.600 Names, addresses, and drug labeler codes of sponsors of
approved applications.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firm name and address Drug labeler code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
American Cyanamid, Division of American
Home Products, P.O. Box 1339, Fort
Dodge, IA 50501......................... 010042
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug labeler code Firm name and address
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
010042............................................................... American Cyanamid, Division of American
Home Products, P.O. Box 1339, Fort
Dodge, IA 50501.
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: December 22, 1995.
Robert C. Livingston,
Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. 96-122 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-121 New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor Address
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 259-260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-121]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 510
New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor Address
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect a change of sponsor address for TRINADA,
Inc.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 4, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. McKay, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-102), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-0213.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TRINADA, Inc., P.O. Box 129, Lewisburg, OH
45338, has informed FDA that it has changed its address to One
Executive Dr., P.O. Box 1399, Fort Lee, NJ 07024. Accordingly, the
agency is amending the regulations in 21 CFR 510.600(c)(1) and (c)(2)
to reflect the change of sponsor address.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 510
Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR part 510 is
amended as follows:
PART 510--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 510 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 512, 701, 721 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 360b, 371, 379e).
2. Section 510.600 is amended in the table in paragraph (c)(1) by
revising the sponsor address for ``TRINADA, Inc.,'' and in the table in
paragraph (c)(2) in the entry for ``058690'' by revising the sponsor
address to read as follows:
Sec. 510.600 Names, addresses, and drug labeler codes of sponsors of
approved applications.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firm name and address---- Drug labeler code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
TRINADA, Inc., One Executive Dr., P.O. Box
1399, Fort Lee, NJ 07024...................... 058690
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 260]]
(2) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug labeler code---- Firm name and address
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
058690------................................................... TRINADA, Inc., One Executive Dr., P.O. Box
1399, Fort Lee, NJ 07024.
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: December 22, 1995.
Robert C. Livingston,
Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. 96-121 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-114 Automatic Extension of Time for Filing Individual Income Tax Returns
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 260-262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-114]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Parts 1, 301, and 602
[TD 8651]
RIN 1545-AS05
Automatic Extension of Time for Filing Individual Income Tax
Returns
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Temporary regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains temporary regulations that reflect new
simpler procedures for an individual to obtain an automatic extension
of time to file an individual income tax return. The text of the
temporary regulations also serves as the text of the cross reference
notice of proposed rulemaking on this subject in the Proposed Rules
section of this issue of the Federal Register.
DATES: These regulations are effective January 4, 1996.
For dates of applicability, see Sec. 1.6081-4T and Sec. 301.6651-
1T.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret A. Owens, (202) 622-6232 (not
a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Paperwork Reduction Act
These regulations are being issued without prior notice and public
procedure pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553).
For this reason, the collection of information contained in these
regulations has been reviewed and, pending receipt and evaluation of
public comments, approved by the Office of Management and Budget under
control number 1545-1479. Responses to this collection of information
are required to obtain a benefit (an automatic 4-month extension of
time to file an individual income tax return).
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of
information displays a valid control number.
For further information concerning the collection of information,
and where to submit comments on the collection of information and the
accuracy of the estimated burden, and suggestions for reducing this
burden, please refer to the preamble to the cross-referencing notice of
proposed rulemaking published in the Proposed Rules section of this
issue of the Federal Register.
Books or records relating to a collection of information must be
retained as long as their contents may become material in the
administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and
tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
Background
This document amends the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR Part 1)
under section 6081 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to implement
Notice 93-22 (1993-1 C.B. 305). Notice 93-22, released April 7, 1993,
grants relief to individuals who want an automatic 4-month extension of
time to file an individual income tax return but who are unable to pay
by the due date for the return the tax properly estimated to be due.
The notice allows these individuals to obtain an automatic 4-month
extension of time to file their individual
[[Page 261]]
income tax returns for taxable years ending on or after December 31,
1992, by filing Form 4868, Application for Automatic Extension of Time
to File U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, without an accompanying
remittance. Individuals may rely on Notice 93-22 for taxable years
ending on or after December 31, 1992 and before December 31, 1995.
Notice 93-22 also advised taxpayers that the regulations under section
6081 will be amended to reflect this change in the procedure for an
individual to obtain an automatic 4-month extension of time to file. In
addition, this document amends the Regulations on Procedure and
Administration (26 CFR Part 301) (relating to an automatic extension of
time for filing an individual income tax return).
Explanation of Provisions
Under Sec. 1.6081-4, an individual required to file an income tax
return is allowed an automatic 4-month extension of time to file if (a)
an application is prepared on Form 4868, (b) the application is signed
by the individual or a person duly authorized by the individual, (c)
the application is filed on or before the date the return is due, (d)
the application shows the full amount properly estimated as tax, and
(e) the application is accompanied by full remittance of the amount
properly estimated as tax that is unpaid as of the date prescribed for
the filing of the return.
These temporary regulations provide that individuals may obtain an
automatic 4-month extension of time to file an individual income tax
return without remitting the unpaid amount of any tax properly
estimated to be due with the application for extension of time to file.
Under these temporary regulations, an individual's inability to pay is
not a condition for obtaining an automatic 4-month extension. However,
taxpayers are encouraged to make payments, as large as possible, in
order to reduce interest and penalties required by law.
In addition, these temporary regulations provide that the IRS may
prescribe other manners for submitting an application in lieu of a
paper application on Form 4868.
The temporary regulations remove the regulatory requirement that
applications for an automatic 4-month extension be signed. Thus,
notwithstanding the 1995 Form 4868 instructions, an unsigned
application will be processed. In addition, the Commissioner may
prescribe additional methods of obtaining an extension of time to file
that do not require a signature.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that these temporary regulations are not a
significant regulatory action as defined in EO 12866. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that
section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5)
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) do not apply to
these regulations and, therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code,
a copy of these regulations will be submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on their
impact on small business.
Drafting Information. The principal author of these regulations
is Margaret A. Owens, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel (Income
Tax & Accounting), IRS. However, other personnel from the IRS and
the Treasury Department participated in their development.
List of Subjects
26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
26 CFR Part 301
Employment taxes, Estate taxes, Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income
taxes, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
26 CFR Part 602
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1, 301, and 602 are amended as follows:
PART 1--INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in
part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. * * *
Par. 2. Section 1.6081-4 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
Sec. 1.6081-4 Automatic extension of time for filing individual income
tax returns.
(a) [Reserved] For further guidance see Sec. 1.6081-4T(a).
* * * * *
Par. 3. Section 1.6081-4T is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1.6081-4T Automatic extension of time for filing individual
income tax returns--taxable years ending on or after December 31, 1995
(temporary).
(a) In general--(1) Period of extension. An individual who is
required to file an individual income tax return for any taxable year
ending on or after December 31, 1995, will be allowed an automatic 4-
month extension of time to file the return after the date prescribed
for filing the return provided the requirements contained in paragraphs
(a)(2), (3), and (4) of this section are met. In the case of an
individual described in Sec. 1.6081-5(a)(5) or (6), the automatic 4-
month extension will run concurrently with the extension of time to
file granted pursuant to Sec. 1.6081-5.
(2) Manner for submitting an application. An application must be
submitted--
(i) On Form 4868, Application for Automatic Extension of Time to
File U.S. Individual Income Tax Return; or
(ii) In any other manner as may be prescribed by the Commissioner.
(3) Time and place for filing application. Except in the case of an
individual described in Sec. 1.6081-5(a)(5) or (6), the application
must be filed on or before the date prescribed for filing the
individual income tax return. In the case of an individual described in
Sec. 1.6081-5(a)(5) or (6), the application must be filed on or before
the expiration of the extension of time to file granted pursuant to
Sec. 1.6081-5. The application must be filed with the IRS office
designated in the application's instructions.
(4) Proper estimate of tax. An application for extension must show
the full amount properly estimated as tax for the taxable year.
(5) Allowance of extension. Upon properly preparing and timely
filing an application, the 4-month extension will be considered as
allowed. Except in undue hardship cases, no extension of time for
filing an individual income tax return will be granted under
Sec. 1.6081-1 until an automatic extension has been allowed pursuant to
the provisions of this paragraph (a).
(b) and (c) [Reserved].
(d) Penalties. See section 6651 and the regulations under that
section for the additions to tax for failure to file an individual
income tax return or failure to pay the amount shown as tax on the
return. In particular, see Sec. 301.6651-1(c)(3) of this chapter
(relating to a presumption of reasonable cause in certain circumstances
involving an automatic extension of time for filing an individual
income tax return).
[[Page 262]]
PART 301--PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION
Par. 4. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read in
part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. * * *
Par. 5. Section 301.6651-1 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(3)
to read as follows:
Sec. 301.6651-1 Failure to file tax return or to pay tax.
* * * * *
(c)(3) [Reserved] For further guidance see Sec. 301.6651-1T(c)(3).
* * * * *
Par. 6. Section 301.6651-1T is added to read as follows:
Sec. 301.6651-1T Failure to file tax return or to pay tax--taxable
years ending on or after December 31, 1995 (temporary).
(a) through (c)(2) [Reserved].
(c)(3) If, for a taxable year ending on or after December 31, 1995,
an individual taxpayer satisfies the requirements of Sec. 1.6081-4T(a)
of this chapter (relating to an automatic extension of time for filing
an individual income tax return), reasonable cause shall be presumed,
for the period of the extension of time to file, with respect to any
underpayment of tax if--
(i) The excess of the amount of tax shown on the individual income
tax return over the amount of tax paid on or before the regular due
date of the return (by virtue of taxes withheld by the employer,
estimated tax payments, and any payment with an application for
extension of time to file pursuant to Sec. 1.6081-4T of this chapter)
is no greater than 10 percent of the amount of tax shown on the
individual income tax return; and
(ii) Any balance due shown on the individual income tax return is
remitted with the return.
PART 602--OMB CONTROL NUMBERS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
Par. 7. The authority citation for part 602 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805.
Sec. 602.101 [Amended]
Par. 8. In Sec. 602.101, paragraph (c) is amended by adding an
entry in numerical order to the table to read ``1.6081-4T. . . .1545-
1479''.
Margaret Milner Richardson,
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
Approved: December 20, 1995.
Leslie Samuels,
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 96-114 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-105 Revision of Department of Transportation Acquisition Regulation
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 273-274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-105]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
48 CFR Parts 1215, 1252, and 1253
RIN 2105-AC-32
Revision of Department of Transportation Acquisition Regulation
AGENCY: Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 274]]
SUMMARY: This final rule completes the rulemaking necessary to issue
revisions to the Transportation Acquisition Regulation (TAR) which were
published in the November 3, 1995 Federal Register (60 FR 55801) as an
interim final rule with a request for comments.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine Wheeler, Office of Acquisition
and Grant Management, M-61, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590: (202) 366-4272.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On November 3, 1995, revisions to the TAR were published in the
Federal Register (60 FR 55801) as an interim final rule. Comments were
solicited from interested parties, including the public and other
Federal agencies and none were received. The interim final rule
established a public comment period which closed on December 4, 1995.
This notice finalizes that rulemaking.
B. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
The Department has determined that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
because the basic policies remain unchanged and only editorial
corrections or administrative changes are being made.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply because the changes to
the TAR do not impose additional record keeping information collection
requirements, or additional collections of information from offerors,
contractors, or members of the public which require the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1215, 1252, and 1253
Government procurement.
The interim final rule amending 12 CFR parts 1215, 1252, and 1253
which was published at 60 FR 55801 on November 3, 1995, is adopted as a
final rule without change.
This final rule is issued under delegated authority under 49 CFR
part 1.59(q). This authority has been redelegated to the Senior
Procurement Executive.
Issued this 22nd day of December 1995, at Washington, DC.
David J. Litman,
Senior Procurement Executive.
[FR Doc. 96-105 Filed 1-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 95-31584 Summer Flounder Fishery; Final Specifications for 1996; Technical Amendment
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 291-292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31584]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 625
[Docket No. 951116270-5308-02; I.D. 110195B]
Summer Flounder Fishery; Final Specifications for 1996; Technical
Amendment
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final specifications for the 1996 summer flounder fishery;
final rule, technical amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues the final specifications for the 1996 summer
flounder fishery, which include commercial catch quotas and mesh size
requirements, and revises the applicable regulations to accurately
reflect the intent of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council
regarding the ``cap'' on the harvest limit. The intent of this document
is to comply with implementing regulations for the fishery that require
NMFS to publish measures for the upcoming fishing year that will
prevent overfishing of the summer flounder resource, and to modify the
language specifying the ``cap'' on the annual harvest limit.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 29, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Environmental Assessment and supporting
documents used by the Monitoring Committee are available from:
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115,
Federal Building, 300 S. New Street, Dover, DE 19901-6790.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regina Spallone, Fishery Policy
Analyst, 508-281-9221.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Fishery Management Plan for the Summer
Flounder Fishery (FMP) was developed jointly by the Atlantic States
Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council) in consultation with the New England and
South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils. The management unit for the
FMP is summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) in U.S. waters of the
Atlantic Ocean from the southern border of North Carolina northward to
the Canadian border. Implementing regulations for the fishery are found
at 50 CFR part 625.
Section 625.20 of Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations
implementing the Fishery Management Plan for the Summer Flounder
Fishery (FMP) specifies the process for setting annual management
measures in order to achieve the fishing mortality (F) rates specified
in the FMP. Under Amendment 7 to the FMP, the schedule of F rates
established sets a target fishing mortality rate of 0.41 in 1996, 0.3
in 1997, and 0.23 (Fmax) in 1998 and thereafter, provided the
allowable levels of fishing in 1996 and 1997 may not exceed a ``cap''
of 18.51 million lb (8.4 million kg), unless such fishing levels had an
associated F of 0.23. This ``cap'' reflected a rounding of the actual
poundage. The Council felt that such a rounding, while convenient for
the reader, did not accurately reflect the true intent, which was
18,518,830 lb (8,400 mt). Therefore, this action modifies the ``cap''
to reflect the Council's intent that the maximum allowable harvest
level associated with this ``cap'' is 18,518,830 lb (8,400 mt). This
clarification is outlined in the section below, which specifies changes
from the proposed specifications.
Pursuant to Sec. 625.20, the Director, Northeast Region, NMFS,
implements certain measures for the fishing year to ensure achievement
of the appropriate fishing mortality rate. The measures include those
that are changed, and those that are not changed, from the proposed
1996 specifications that were published in the Federal Register on
November 28, 1995 (60 FR 58593). The unchanged measures include: (1) A
minimum commercial fish size of 13 inches (33 cm); and (2) a minimum
mesh size restriction of 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) diamond or 6-inch (15.2-cm)
square. The changed measures include: (1) A coastwide harvest limit of
18,518,830 lb (8.40 million kg); (2) a coastwide commercial quota of
11,111,298 lb (5.04 million kg); and (3) a coastwide recreational
harvest limit of 7,407,532 lb (3.36 million kg).
Commercial Quota
The coastwide commercial quota is allocated among the states based
on historic catch shares specified in the regulations. Table 1 presents
the 1996 commercial quota (11,111,298 lb; 5,040,000 kg) apportioned
among the states according to the percentage shares specified in
Sec. 625.20(d)(1). These state allocations do not reflect the
adjustments required under Sec. 625.20, if 1995 landings exceed the
1995 quota for any state. A notification of allocation adjustment will
be published in the Federal Register if such an adjustment is
necessary.
Table 1.--1996 State Commercial Quotas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 quota 1996 quota
State Share (%) (lb) (kg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ME............................... 0.04756 5,284 2,397
NH............................... 0.00046 51 23
MA............................... 6.82046 757,841 343,751
RI............................... 15.68298 1,742,583 790,422
CT............................... 2.25708 250,791 113,757
NY............................... 7.64699 849,680 385,408
NJ............................... 16.72499 1,858,363 842,939
[[Page 292]]
DE............................... 0.01779 1,977 897
MD............................... 2.03910 226,570 102,770
VA............................... 21.31676 2,368,569 1,074,365
NC............................... 27.44584 3,049,589 1,383,270
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreational catch data for 1995 are not yet available. The Council
and ASMFC will consider modifications to the recreational possession
limit and recreational season after a review of that information.
Final Rule, Technical Amendment and Changes From Proposed
Specifications to Final Specifications
This document modifies the language specified in Sec. 625.20(a)
established by the final rule for Amendment 7 to the FMP that set the
harvest limit ``cap'' at 18.51 million lb (8,396 mt). The final rule,
technical amendment contained in this action changes the harvest limit
``cap'' to be 18,518,830 lb (8,400 mt), making the ``cap'' consistent
with Council intent as stated in the comment submitted by the Council
and addressed below. The value of 8,400 mt is contained in Amendment 7
and that value is equivalent to 18,518,830 lb, which is 8,830 lb
greater than the rounded off value of 18.51 million lb. As a result,
the state allocations of commercial quota have been altered slightly
relative to the proposed specifications.
Comments and Responses
One comment was received regarding the 1996 summer flounder
specifications from the Council.
Comment: The Council checked the administrative record and
acknowledged an error in the publication of the harvest limit ``cap'',
as published in Amendment 7 to the FMP. The Council wishes to correct
the specifications to reflect accurately their intent regarding the
total harvest limit and subsequent specifications for the commercial
and recreational fisheries. Specifically, the Council intended the
total harvest limit to equal 18,518,830 lb (8,400 mt), rather than
18.51 million lb which actually equals 8,396 mt. The value of
18,518,830 lb would result in an allocation of 11,111,298 lb (5,040,000
kg) to the commercial sector, and 7,407,532 lb (3,360,000 kg) to the
recreational sector.
Response: NMFS agrees. The administrative record shows that, for
the purpose of reading ease, the numbers for pounds were rounded during
publication. However, this rounding resulted in a loss of the original
intent of the Council. To modify the regulations to reflect more
accurately the record, a technical amendment to the final rule for
Amendment 7 is necessary. That action accompanies the publication of
these final specifications.
Classification
This action is authorized by 50 CFR part 625 and complies with the
National Environmental Policy Act.
These final specifications are exempt from review under E.O. 12866.
For the technical regulatory change, NMFS finds good cause to waive
prior notice and opportunity for public comment under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B). The technical change corrects the regulation's codification
of the quota cap in Amendment 7 to reflect accurately the language
adopted by the Council. As such, NMFS finds that prior notice and
comment are unnecessary. Further, there is no requirement to delay the
effective date of this technical change as it is not a substantive
rule.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 625
Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 28, 1995.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 625 is amended
as follows:
PART 625--SUMMER FLOUNDER FISHERY
1. The authority citation for part 625 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 625.20, paragraph (a) introductory text is revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 625.20 Catch quotas and other restrictions.
(a) Annual review. The Summer Flounder Monitoring Committee will
review the following data on or before August 15 of each year to
determine the allowable levels of fishing and other restrictions
necessary to achieve a fishing mortality rate (F) of 0.53 in 1993
through 1995, 0.41 in 1996, 0.30 in 1997, and 0.23 in 1998 and
thereafter, provided the allowable levels of fishing in 1996 and 1997
may not exceed 18,518,830 lb (8,400 mt), unless such fishing levels
have an associated F of 0.23:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 95-31584 Filed 12-29-95; 12:22 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 95-31583 Defect and Noncompliance Reports; Record Retention; and Defect and Noncompliance Notification
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 274-279]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31583]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 573, 576, and 577
[Docket No. 93-68; Notice 8]
RIN 2127-AG15
Defect and Noncompliance Reports; Record Retention; and Defect
and Noncompliance Notification
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Grant in part and denial in part of petitions for
reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) is granting in part petitions for
reconsideration of an April 5, 1995 final rule that, among other
things, amended 49 CFR Parts 573, 576, and 577 (60 FR 17254). On
reconsideration, the agency is amending provisions of that final rule
concerning submission by manufacturers of schedules for recall
campaigns, recordkeeping regarding recalls of leased vehicles, record
retention period, and notification to lessees of recall campaigns.
NHTSA has concluded that these changes will reduce manufacturer burdens
without adversely affecting the agency's recall program.
DATES: Effective date: The amendments made by this final rule are
effective on January 4, 1996.
Any petitions for reconsideration must be received by NHTSA no
later than February 5, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Any petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
and notice number of this notice and be submitted to: Docket Section,
Room 5109, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street SW., Washington, DC 20590. (Docket Room hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jonathan D. White, Office of Defects Investigation, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., Room 5319,
Washington, DC 20590; (202) 366-5227.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This final rule amends several sections of 49 CFR Parts 573, 576,
and 577, as those parts were recently amended on April 5, 1995. These
changes are being adopted by NHTSA in response to four petitions for
reconsideration of the April 5 final rule that were submitted by the
Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM), Chrysler
Corporation (Chrysler), Ford Motor Company (Ford), and General Motors
Corporation (GM).
In addition to seeking substantive changes, the petitions asked for
an extension of the original May 5, 1995 effective date of the April 5
amendments on the ground that it would be difficult to achieve
compliance by that date. On May 16, 1995, the agency published a notice
in the Federal Register setting a new effective date of July 7, 1995
for the April 5 amendments. 60 FR 26002. Subsequently, on July 7, 1995,
NHTSA suspended until further notice the effective date of four of the
provisions for which the petitioners had sought reconsideration. 60 FR
35458. That notice also confirmed that all other provisions of the
April 5 final rule would go into effect on July 7, 1995.
In September 1995, the Office of the Federal Register informed
NHTSA that it could not leave the effective date of a regulation
indefinite, as it had done in the July 7 Federal Register notice.
Accordingly, NHTSA published another notice setting January 2, 1996, as
the effective date of those four provisions, pending the decision on
reconsideration. 60 FR 50476 (Sept. 29, 1995).
Based on its review of the petitions for reconsideration, NHTSA
also decided that it would be advisable to obtain further information
from the public on four of the issues raised in the petitions.
Accordingly, the agency announced that it would hold a public meeting
in Detroit, Michigan to receive oral presentations on those issues and
to ask questions of those present, and that it would also receive
written comments on those issues. 60 FR 35459 (July 7, 1995).
The following five entities made presentations at the Detroit
meeting, which took place on July 24, 1995: AIAM, Chrysler, Ford, GM,
and the R. L. Polk Company (Polk). The following ten entities submitted
written comments to the public docket: Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety (Advocates), American Automotive Leasing Association (AALA),
American Honda Motor Company, Inc. (Honda), Association of Consumer
Vehicle Lessors (ACVL), Ford, GM, Institute of International Container
Lessors (IICL), National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA),
National Vehicle Leasing Association (NVLA), and Truck Renting and
Leasing Association (TRALA). In addition, NHTSA placed a written
transcript of the Detroit meeting in the public docket for this
rulemaking.
[[Page 275]]
The notice published today grants the petitions for reconsideration
with respect to the four provisions specified above and denies the
petitions insofar as they sought amendments to other provisions of the
April 5 final rule. The four provisions pertain to the enforcement of
the provisions of Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code (49
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 30101-30169) that set forth the obligations of
manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to provide
notification that motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment
contain a safety-related defect or do not comply with a Federal motor
vehicle safety standard and to remedy the defect or noncompliance
without charge. 49 U.S.C. 30116-30121. The provisions of the final rule
regarding notification of defects and noncompliances in leased vehicles
implement a provision of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) that requires vehicle lessors to send
their lessees a copy of notifications received from manufacturers
regarding a safety-related defect or noncompliance in the lessees'
vehicles. 49 U.S.C. 30119(f).
Amendments to Part 573--Defect and Noncompliance Reports
NHTSA is amending two sections of 49 CFR Part 573, one that sets
forth requirements regarding the submittal by manufacturers of
schedules for owner notification and remedy campaigns (recalls) under
certain circumstances (section 573.5(c)(8)), and one that specifies
recordkeeping requirements for manufacturers in connection with recalls
of leased vehicles (section 573.7(d) and (e)).
Schedule for Recall Campaigns
In order to address an increase in the number of recalls in which
there has been a significant delay between the manufacturer's decision
that a defect or noncompliance exists and the commencement and
conclusion of the manufacturer's recall campaign, NHTSA included in the
April 5 final rule a requirement that manufacturers include in their
defect/noncompliance reports submitted to NHTSA pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30119 and 49 CFR Part 573 (Part 573 Report) a detailed schedule for
those notification campaigns that would not begin within thirty days of
the Part 573 Report or end within 75 days of that Report. Several
petitioners objected to this requirement as unnecessary and unduly
burdensome. In oral statements at the public meeting and in their
written comments, manufacturers indicated that the time periods
specified in the final rule would mean that detailed schedules would be
required in most recalls, because most notification campaigns are
either begun more than 30 days after the Part 573 Report or not
completed within 75 days of that Report. In addition, they asserted
that the need to file detailed scheduling information with NHTSA at the
outset of most recalls would have the effect of delaying implementation
of recalls, because personnel and resources would have to be taken away
from other aspects of recall implementation to ensure compliance with
the added reporting requirements.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30119(c), manufacturers must notify owners,
purchasers, and dealers of safety defects and noncompliances ``within a
reasonable time'' after the decision that the defect or noncompliance
exists. NHTSA continues to believe strongly that safety recalls should
be implemented as soon as reasonably possible. However, it also
recognizes that the concerns raised by the manufacturers are serious
and need to be considered.
In order to make the rule more responsive both to the
manufacturers' concerns and to the public safety interest in prompt
notification of safety-related defects and noncompliances, NHTSA has
decided to modify the burdensome aspects of the recall schedule
provisions of the April 5 final rule. Thus, the agency is deleting the
requirement that extensive scheduling information and explanatory
material be provided in the manufacturer's Part 573 Report in instances
where notification would begin more than 30 days after the Part 573
Report is submitted or end more than 75 days after the Report. Instead,
under the rule adopted today, manufacturers will only be required to
include in their Part 573 Reports the estimated date when owners will
first be notified that a remedy for the defect or noncompliance is
available and the estimated date when all owners will have been so
notified.
No additional scheduling information will be required under the
regulation. In those relatively rare instances where the agency wishes
to further examine whether the manufacturer's time frame for the recall
is reasonable under the circumstances, it may request more detailed
information from the manufacturer on a case-by-case basis.
As NHTSA noted in the preamble to the April 5 final rule, in most
cases, manufacturers develop a recall implementation schedule for their
own internal use at the time they decide that a defect or noncompliance
exists, or promptly thereafter. The final rule adopted today simply
requires manufacturers to provide the agency with the two most basic
elements of this scheduling information when they file their Part 573
Reports. Under this revision, manufacturers will have flexibility to
tailor the recall notification schedule to the circumstances of the
particular recall, with far less of a reporting burden, while NHTSA
will retain the ability, on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that the
timing of recall notification is reasonable. The agency is retaining
its authority, as set forth in new section 577.7(a)(1), to order a
manufacturer to notify owners on a specific date when it finds, after
consideration of available information and the views of the
manufacturer, that such notification is in the public interest.
NHTSA recognizes that in some cases a manufacturer may not have any
scheduling information at the time it submits its Part 573 Report
(e.g., where the remedy has not been developed or tested, or where the
scope of the recall is uncertain). In such instances, the manufacturer
should indicate in the Report that the information is not available.
Thereafter, in accordance with section 573.5(b), the required
information ``shall be submitted as it becomes available.''
On reconsideration, NHTSA has also decided to rescind new section
573.5(c)(8)(iii), which would have required a manufacturer to describe
all factors that it anticipated could interfere with its ability to
adhere to the proposed recall schedule and to describe with specificity
the likely effect of each of those factors. The agency believes that
the burden of requiring advance information about events which might
never actually have any effect on the recall significantly outweighs
whatever safety benefit might be derived from it. In addition, the
agency believes that the purpose of that requirement can as readily be
served by the requirement, retained in today's final rule, that a
manufacturer must promptly advise NHTSA if circumstances arise that can
result in unanticipated delays of two weeks or more in recall campaign
implementation. This requirement, formerly included in section
573.5(c)(8)(iv), is now renumbered as Sec. 573.5(c)(8)(ii).
This final rule renumbers sections 573.5(c)(8) (v) and (vi) as
sections 573.5(c)(8) (iii) and (iv), respectively, and makes minor
changes in those paragraphs to reflect the changes to this section
described above, but makes no substantive changes. These provisions are
concerned with the effect on the requirement to file a notification
[[Page 276]]
schedule of a manufacturer's intent to submit a petition for an
exemption from the recall requirements of the statute on the ground
that the defect or noncompliance is inconsequential.
Recordkeeping Regarding Recalls of Leased Vehicles
After reviewing the petitions for reconsideration and the oral and
written comments, NHTSA has decided to revise 49 CFR Sec. 573.7 (d) and
(e), which imposed requirements on manufacturers and lessors to
maintain lists of the names and addresses of ``known'' lessees of
vehicles covered by recall campaigns.
All of the manufactures that participated in the reconsideration
process stated that the divisions of the company that deal with recalls
and maintain owner lists do not know whether a particular vehicle is
leased. However, the manufacturers were concerned that they could be
held responsible under the rule for ``knowing'' that a vehicle was
leased because that information is contained in records maintained
elsewhere in the organization, such as corporate offices or
subsidiaries involved with fleet operations or consumer credit matters.
These manufacturers stated that it would be extremely costly and
time-consuming to integrate their leased vehicle records with the
vehicle owner lists prepared in connection with recall campaigns. Such
records are generally maintained in separate databases in separate
parts of the company and integrating the databases and reprogramming
the systems to generate the information in the manner required by
section 573.7(d) would require many months of work and substantial
additional financial cost. Similarly, Polk, which is the principal
source of vehicle registration information used by manufacturers in
recall mailings, stated at the public meeting that it could not
specifically identify for their manufacturer clients which vehicles on
a given list of registered vehicles were leased. Finally, even apart
from cost considerations, the manufacturers contended that they should
not have to bear the burden of maintaining records reflecting lessee
notification, since that should be the responsibility of the vehicle
lessors.
On the basis of the foregoing information, NHTSA has concluded that
any benefit to be gained by requiring manufacturers to identify those
vehicles on its recall notification lists that are leased and the
person or entity to whom notification was sent as the lessor or lessee
is far outweighed by the cost and time burdens that manufacturers would
incur to implement such a system. Moreover, the agency agrees that it
is not appropriate to require manufacturers to bear the burdens
associated with keeping records regarding the notification of lessees,
when Congress imposed the responsibility for such notification on the
lessors.
Accordingly, NHTSA has decided to rescind in its entirety section
573.7(d) of the April 5 final rule. The agency will monitor lessor
compliance with notification requirements of section 30119(f) through
direct contact with lessors rather than by reviewing manufacturer
records. To identify such lessors, NHTSA plans to obtain information
from manufacturers and lessor organizations.
For similar reasons, the agency is also amending section 573.7(e),
which primarily sets forth recordkeeping requirements applicable to
lessors, by deleting language in the last two sentences that are
applicable to record retention by manufacturers who send out recall
notifications directly to lessees pursuant to agreements with lessors.
Such lessees are, in effect, being notified as if they were owners,
without any lessor involvement, so there is no need to apply additional
recordkeeping burdens on the manufacturers to assure compliance
requirements of section 30119(f).
Two commenters, AALA and TRALA, representing lessors, contended
that the recordkeeping requirements for lessors set forth in section
573.7(e) are overly burdensome and time consuming because they require
them to establish new systems for keeping these records. In addition,
AALA questioned the utility of requiring lessors to maintain these
records in light of the fact that, once the lease has expired, the
vehicle generally undergoes one or more rapid changes of ownership.
AALA questioned the purpose behind the requirement to maintain records
on ``vehicles whose future ownership the lessor would be unable to
verify.''
The purpose of this recordkeeping requirement is not to verify
``future ownership'' of vehicles; it is to give NHTSA a means of
verifying that lessors are complying with their duty to provide their
lessees with copies of safety recall notifications. This is analogous
to the requirement that manufacturers must keep a record of recall
notifications sent to registered owners.
The agency has made every effort to ensure that the recordkeeping
requirements impose as little burden as possible on lessors. The
information required is minimal (less than what is required of
manufacturers), and it should not entail great expenditure of resources
to develop and maintain a record retention system. For these reasons,
NHTSA is retaining the substantive requirements of section 573.7(e) as
they apply to the lists that must be maintained by lessors.
Amendments to Part 576--Record Retention
Prior to the April 5 final rule, 49 CFR Sec. 576.5 required vehicle
manufacturers to retain relevant records for five years from the date
they are generated or acquired. The April 5 rule amended section 576.5
to require such records to be maintained for eight years from the last
date of the model year in which the vehicle to which the records relate
was produced. After considering the petitions for reconsiderations and
the oral and written comments submitted on this subject, NHTSA has
decided to rescind the amendment to section 576.5 and reinstate the
preexisting requirement.
The primary reason for this decision is the time and cost burdens
that the amendment would have placed upon vehicle manufacturers.
Several manufacturers stated that it would be highly costly and
extremely time consuming to change their computerized record keeping
systems to comply with the new record retention requirements. The
agency has concluded that the safety benefit that would be derived from
revising the record retention period requirements would be far
outweighed by costs and other burdens on resources that would be
incurred by manufacturers in order to make the change.
The agency is also making a technical amendment to 49 CFR
Sec. 576.6, which defines the records that must be retained by
manufacturers under Part 576. Ford pointed out that in the text of the
April 5 amendment, the word ``such'' does not appear as a modifier to
the term ``malfunctions'' the second time that word appears (in the
second sentence of the section). Ford expressed concern that the
removal of the word ``such'' could be construed to broaden the scope of
the section to cover additional types of records beyond those related
to motor vehicle safety.
The agency does not agree that the slight change in the wording of
this phrase would have had a substantive affect on the record retention
requirements, since the revised language specified that the requirement
only applied to records of ``malfunctions that may be related to motor
vehicle safety.'' Nevertheless, to prevent any possible
misunderstanding, NHTSA is making a
[[Page 277]]
technical amendment to this section to reinstate the preexisting
wording. The agency wishes to emphasize that the April 5 amendment to
section 576.6 that clarified that the record retention requirements
apply to records made on electronic media has not changed, and remains
in effect.
Amendments to Part 577--Defect and Noncompliance Notification
In its September 1993 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to
implement the ISTEA requirement that vehicle lessors furnish their
lessees with copies of notifications of safety-related defects and
noncompliances in leased vehicles, NHTSA proposed to require
manufacturers to include language in all recall notification letters to
lessors that would remind them of their statutory obligations. Several
comments submitted in response to the NPRM pointed out that it would be
very difficult for manufacturers to identify which owners were lessors.
On the basis of those comments, the April 5 final rule added a new
section 577.5(h), which required manufacturers to include language
describing a lessor's obligation to notify lessees of safety recalls in
all owner notification letters.
During the reconsideration process, this requirement was vigorously
challenged. Most commenters stated that the inclusion of lessor/lessee
language in all owner notification letters would add clutter to the
letter and could confuse the recipients of the owner notification
letter who are not lessors/lessees. In addition, commenters
representing various elements of the leased vehicle industry generally
expressed the view that requiring manufacturers to notify lessors of
their obligations is unnecessary for several alternative reasons: (1)
Many lessors have an arrangement with manufacturers in which the latter
mails recall letters directly to individuals on a list furnished by the
lessor; (2) many individual lessees receive notification letters
directly from manufacturers because the name of the lessee appears on
the title as the owner; and (3) many lessors are already aware of their
obligations and are complying with them.
These commenters also argued that the rule as written failed to
take into account several features of the leased vehicle market: e.g.,
the fact that in consumer leasing, the lessee is likely to be the
driver, whereas in commercial leasing, the vehicles will be driven by
individuals who are not the lessee of record; and the fact that some
lessors regard their lists of lessees as trade secrets and do not
disclose them to manufacturers (which are often perceived as
competitors).
On reconsideration, the agency has concluded that section 577.5(h)
should be rescinded. The likely confusion resulting from the inclusion
of this information in all owner notification letters will outweigh any
potential safety benefit associated with reminding lessors of their
obligations, particularly since there is reason to believe that most
lessors are already aware of those obligations. However, since it is
likely that not all lessors are aware of the duty to notify their
lessees of recalls, the agency believes that further steps are
appropriate to maximize the number of lessors that are informed of
their obligations under the statute and regulations. To that end, NHTSA
plans to send a notice to vehicle lessors informing them of their
statutory and regulatory obligations with respect to recall
notification of their lessees. The agency will also monitor the
performance of such lessors through periodic compliance reviews. The
agency plans to identify vehicle lessors from several sources,
including manufacturers, lessor associations, and commercial
publications.
Other Issues
The agency has also considered issues raised by petitioners and
commenters concerning other aspects of the April 5 final rule. Several
entities asserted that NHTSA should have allowed more time to comply
with the April 5 amendments. The agency recognized that the original
30-day period may not have allowed sufficient time for those affected
by the changes to come into compliance. However, NHTSA remains
convinced that the extension of the effective date for the provisions
not affected by the petitions for reconsideration to July 7 (providing
a total of over 90 days) was sufficient.
Most of the concerns about the time centered on the provisions
regarding manufacturer recordkeeping for leased car notifications
(section 573.7) and the changes in the duration of the record retention
requirements of section 576.5. However, those concerns are now moot due
to the substantive changes made to those sections on reconsideration.
The other issues raised by the petitions for reconsideration were
essentially restatements of arguments made during the comment period
prior to issuance of the final rule. The agency has concluded that no
change of those provisions is warranted.
Advocates objected to the fact that NHTSA postponed the effective
date of several provisions of the final rule while it was considering
the merits of the petitions for reconsideration. It noted that the
agency had recently failed to stay a regulatory action when Advocates
filed a petition for reconsideration.
Under 49 CFR Sec. 553.35(d), a petition for reconsideration does
not stay the effectiveness of a rule ``unless the Administrator so
provides.'' Thus, a decision whether or not to stay the effective date
of a rule pending consideration of petitions for reconsideration is
within the discretion of the Administrator.
In the Federal Register notice that first extended the effective
date of all provisions of the April 5 rule from May 5 to July 7, 1995
(60 FR 26002), the agency noted, ``The [petitioners] have presented
NHTSA with information that makes a credible showing that they are not
able to achieve compliance with at least some provisions of the final
rule by May 5, and that it will be some months before they are able to
do so.'' In addition, NHTSA noted that the short time between the
filing of the petitions for reconsideration and original effective date
precluded it from sorting through all of the provisions of this
multifaceted rule and the arguments in the petitions in order to
identify particular provisions whose effective date should have been
extended. Id.
The agency extended the effective date of four specified provisions
of the final rule beyond July 7, because it had decided that it needed
to gather further information on those issues. See 60 FR 35458 (July 7,
1995). The agency believes that this decision was reasonable under the
circumstances, and was adequately explained at the time.
The fact that the agency did not stay a rule for which Advocates
sought reconsideration is not material. Unlike the manufacturers,
Advocates did not risk noncompliance with Federal law if the agency had
not stayed its action.
Advocates also contended that NHTSA should not have considered the
merits of the arguments raised in the petitions for reconsideration
because the manufacturers did not present any new information that
could not have been presented prior to the issuance of the final rule.
While it may be true that the information was previously available,
there were relatively significant changes made to each of the four
provisions between the NPRM and the April 5 final rule. The
manufacturers could not have known exactly what the agency would
require in those provisions. Thus, it was appropriate to consider the
additional information and arguments presented in the reconsideration
petitions and in the subsequent comments.
[[Page 278]]
Rule Making Analyses and Notices
1. Executive Order 12866 (Federal Regulations) and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has analyzed the changes made by this revised final rule and
determined that it is not ``significant'' within the meaning of the
Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. OMB
has also determined that it is not significant within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866. These changes will not impose any costs on the
regulated parties and are likely to reduce such costs.
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency has also considered the effects of this rulemaking
action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I
certify that this proposed rule will not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
3. National Environmental Policy Act
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
the agency has analyzed the environmental impacts of this rulemaking
action and determined that implementation of this action will not have
a significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
4. Paperwork Reduction Act
The amendments made by this final rule on reconsideration will not
impose any new recordkeeping burdens and are likely to reduce such
burdens.
5. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that the rule making does not have sufficient federalism implications
to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
6. Civil Justice Reform Act
This final rule does not have a retroactive or preemptive effect.
Judicial review of this rule may be obtained pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
section 702. That section does not require that a petition for
reconsideration be filed prior to seeking judicial review.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 573
Imports; Motor vehicle safety; Motor vehicles; Reporting and record
keeping requirements; Tires.
49 CFR Part 576
Motor vehicle safety; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 577
Motor vehicle safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, Parts 573, 576, and 577 of Title
49 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 573--DEFECT AND NONCOMPLIANCE REPORTS
1. The authority citation for part 573 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102-30103, 30112, 30117-30121, 30166-
30167; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50
2. Section 573.5 is amended by removing paragraphs (c)(8) (ii),
(iii), and (iv), redesignating paragraphs (c)(8) (v) and (vi) as
paragraphs (c)(8) (iii) and (iv) and revising them, and by adding a new
paragraph (c)(8)(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 573.5 Defect and noncompliance information report.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(8) * * *
(ii) The estimated date on which it will begin sending
notifications to owners that there is a safety-related defect or
noncompliance and that a remedy without charge will be available, and
the estimated date on which it will have completed such notification.
If a manufacturer subsequently becomes aware that either the beginning
or the completion date reported to the agency will be delayed by more
than two weeks, it shall promptly advise the agency of the delay and
the reasons therefor, and furnish a revised estimate.
(iii) If a manufacturer intends to file a petition for an exemption
from the recall requirements of the Act on the basis that a defect or
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
it shall notify NHTSA of that intention in its report to NHTSA of the
defect or noncompliance under this section. If such a petition is filed
and subsequently denied, the manufacturer shall provide the information
required by paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section within five Federal
government business days from the date the petition denial is published
in the Federal Register.
(iv) If a manufacturer advises NHTSA that it intends to file such a
petition for exemption from the notification and remedy requirements on
the grounds that the defect or noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety, and does not do so within the 30-day
period established by 49 CFR 556.4(c), the manufacturer must submit the
information required by paragraph (c)(8)(ii) of this section no later
than the end of that 30-day period.
3. Section 573.7 is amended by removing paragraph (d),
redesignating paragraph (e) as paragraph (d), and revising new
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 573.7 Lists of purchasers, owners, lessors and lessees.
* * * * *
(d) Each lessor of leased motor vehicles that receives a
notification from the manufacturer of such vehicles that the vehicle
contains a safety-related defect or fails to comply with a Federal
motor vehicle safety standard shall maintain, in a form suitable for
inspection, such as computer information storage devices or card files,
a list of the names and addresses of all lessees to which the lessor
has provided notification of a defect or noncompliance pursuant to 49
CFR 577.5(h). The list shall also include the make, model, model year,
and vehicle identification number of each such leased vehicle, and the
date on which the lessor mailed notification of the defect or
noncompliance to the lessee. The information required by this paragraph
must be retained by the lessor for one calendar year from the date the
vehicle lease expires.
PART 576--RECORD RETENTION
4. The authority citation for part 576 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30112, 30115, 30117-30121, 30166-30167;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
5. Section 576.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 576.5 Basic requirements.
Each manufacturer of motor vehicles shall retain as specified in
Sec. 576.7 all records described in Sec. 576.6 for a period of five
years from the date on which they were generated or acquired by the
manufacturer.
6. Section 576.6 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 576.6 Records.
Records to be retained by manufacturers under this part include all
documentary materials, films, tapes, and other information-storing
media that contain information concerning malfunctions that may be
related to motor vehicle safety. Such records include, but are not
limited to, communications from vehicle users and memoranda of user
complaints; reports and other documents, including material generated
or communicated by computer, telefax or other electronic means, that
are related to work
[[Page 279]]
performed under, or claims made under, warranties; service reports or
similar documents, including electronic transmissions, from dealers or
manufacturer's field personnel; and any lists, compilations, analyses,
or discussions of such malfunctions contained in internal or external
correspondence of the manufacturer, including communications
transmitted electronically.
PART 577--DEFECT AND NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION
7. The authority citation for part 577 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102-30103, 30112, 30115, 30117-30121,
30166-30167; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR
501.8.
Sec. 577.5 [Amended]
8. Section 577.5 is amended by removing paragraph (h) and
redesignating paragraph (i) as paragraph (h).
Issued on: December 21, 1995.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-31583 Filed 12-29-95; 10:49 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 95-31580 Foreign Fishing; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Annual Specifications and Management Measures
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 279-291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31580]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 611 and 663
[Docket No. 951227306-5306-01; I.D. 121295C]
Foreign Fishing; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Annual
Specifications and Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: 1996 groundfish fishery specifications and management measures;
1996 preliminary fishery specifications for Pacific whiting; receipt of
applications for experimental fishing permits; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces the 1996 fishery specifications and management
measures for groundfish taken in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
and state waters off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California
as authorized by the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). The specifications include the level of the acceptable
biological catch (ABC) and harvest guidelines including the
distribution between domestic and foreign fishing operations. The
harvest guidelines are allocated between the limited entry and open
access fisheries. The management measures for 1996 are designed to keep
landings within the harvest guidelines, for those species for which
there are harvest guidelines, and to achieve the goals and objectives
of the FMP and its implementing regulations. The intended effect of
these actions is to establish allowable harvest levels of Pacific Coast
groundfish and to implement management measures designed to achieve but
not exceed those harvest levels, while extending fishing and processing
opportunities as long as possible during the year.
DATES: Effective 0001 hours (local time) January 1, 1996, until the
1997 annual specifications and management measures are effective,
unless modified, superseded, or rescinded. The 1997 annual
specifications and management measures will be published in the Federal
Register. Comments will be accepted until February 5, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments on these specifications should be sent to Mr.
William Stelle, Jr., Director, Northwest Region, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., BIN C15700, Bldg. 1,
Seattle, WA 98115-0070; or Ms. Hilda Diaz-Soltero, Director, Southwest
Region, National Marine Fisheries Service, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite
4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213. Information relevant to these
specifications and management measures, including the stock assessment
and fishery evaluation (SAFE) report, has been compiled in aggregate
form and is available for public review during business hours at the
office of the Director, Northwest Region, NMFS (Regional Director), or
may be obtained from the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council),
by writing the Council at 2130 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR
97201.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William L. Robinson (Northwest Region,
NMFS) 206-526-6140; or Rodney R. McInnis (Southwest Region, NMFS) 310-
980-4040.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP requires that fishery specifications
for groundfish be evaluated each calendar year, that harvest guidelines
or quotas be specified for species or species groups in need of
additional protection, and that management measures designed to achieve
the harvest guidelines or quotas be published in the Federal Register
and made effective by January 1, the beginning of the fishing year.
This action announces and makes effective the final 1996 fishery
specifications and the management measures designed to achieve them.
These specifications and measures were considered by the Council at two
meetings and were recommended to NMFS by the Council at its October
1995 meeting.
I. Final Specifications: ABCs and Harvest Guidelines; Apportionments to
Foreign and Joint Venture Fisheries; Open Access and Limited Entry
Allocations
The fishery specifications include ABCs, the designation of harvest
guidelines or quotas for species that need individual management, the
apportionment of the harvest guidelines or quotas between domestic and
foreign fisheries, and allocation between the open access and limited
entry segments of the domestic fishery.
The final 1996 specifications for ABCs, harvest guidelines, and
limited entry and open access allocations are listed in Table 1,
followed by a discussion of each 1996 specification that differs from
1995. The apportionment between foreign and domestic fisheries is
explained separately at the end of this section. As in the past, the
specifications include fish caught in state ocean waters (0-3 nautical
miles (nm) offshore) as well as fish caught in the EEZ (3-200 nm
offshore).
[[Page 280]]
Table 1.--1996 Specifications of Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC), Harvest Guidelines, and Limited Entry and Open Access Allocations, by International North Pacific Fisheries Commission
(INPFC) Subareas
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable biological catch (ABC) (x 1,000 mt) Allocations (x 1,000 mt)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
Species Harvest guideline (x Limited entry Open access
Vancouver Columbia Eureka Monterey Conception Total ABC 1,000 mt) -------------------------------------------
a 1000 mt Percent 1000 mt Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roundfish:
Lingcod b............................
(1)1.3 0.3 0.7 0.1 2.4 2.4 1.21 80.9 0.29 19.1
Pacific cod..........................
(1)3.2 (c) (c) (c) 3.2 .......... ....................... ....................... ......... .........
Pacific whiting d....................
(4)Preliminary 123.0 123.0 98.4 ......... ......... .......... .......................
Sablefish e f........................
(3)8.7 0.425 9.1 7.8 6.557 93.4 0.463 6.6
Jack mackerel g......................
(3)52.6 .......... 52.6 52.6 ......... .......... ....................... .......................
Rockfish:
POP h................................ 0.0 0.0 (c) (c) (c) 0.0 0.75 ......... ......... ......... .........
Shortbelly...........................
(4)23.5 23.5 23.5 ......... ......... .......... .......................
Widow i..............................
(4)7.7 7.7 6.5 6.26 96.3 0.24 3.7
Thornyheads:.........................
(3)8.0 .......... 8.0 ......... ......... .......... 0.00 .......................
Shortspine e j...................
(3)1.0 .......... 1.0 1.5 1.496 99.75 0.004 0.25
Longspine e j....................
(3)7.0 .......... 7.0 6.0 ......... .......... ....................... .......................
Sebastes complex: k..................
(1)11.9
(2)13.2 11.9 N 11.2 N 10.12 90.4 1.08 9.6
(1)
(2) 13.2 S 13.2 S 8.76 67.4 4.24 32.6
Bocaccio l....................... (G5c) (c)
(2)1.7 1.7 1.7 1.01 67.4 0.49 32.6
Canary m.........................
(1)1.0 0.25 (c) (c) 1.25 0.85 0.78 91.2 0.07 8.8
Chilipepper...................... (c) (c)
(2)4.0 4.0 ......... ......... ......... .......... .......................
Yellowtail n..................... 1.19 2.9 2.58 (c) (c) 6.74 3.59 N 3.25 90.4 0.35 9.6
7 ......... ......... .......... ....................... 2.58 S 2.33 90.4 0.25 9.6
Remaining rockfish................... 0.8 3.7
(2)7.0 11.5 ......... ......... ......... .......... .......................
Flatfish:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dover sole e o....................... 0.82-1.57 3.0 2.9 3.16-4.36 1.0 10.88-12.83 11.05 WOC ......... ......... ......... .........
2.85 Col
English sole.........................
(1)2.0
(2)1.1 3.1 ......... ......... ......... .......... .......................
Petrale sole.........................
(1)1.2 0.5 0.8 0.2 2.7 .......... ....................... ....................... ......... .........
Arrowtooth flounder..................
(4)5.8 5.8 ......... ......... ......... .......... .......................
Other flatfish....................... 0.7 3.0 1.7 1.8 0.5 7.7 ....................... ......... ......... ......... .........
Other fish p............................. 2.5 7.0 1.2 2.0 2.0 14.7 ....................... ......... ......... ......... .........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a U.S. Vancouver only, except for Pacific whiting.
b The lingcod stock assessment covers the entire Vancouver INPFC area, including Canada, and the Columbia subarea north of Cape Falcon. The U.S. ABC is based on 50 percent of the ABC for this
assessment area plus 400 mt for the Columbia subarea south of Cape Falcon. The coastwide harvest guideline equals the sum of the ABCs and includes a recreational harvest of 900 mt. The
limited entry and open-access percents are applied only to the commercial portion of the harvest guideline, which is 1,500 mt (the 2,400 mt harvest guideline minus 900 mt for estimated
recreational harvest).
c These species are not common nor important in the areas footnoted. Accordingly, for convenience, Pacific cod is included in the ``other fish'' category for the areas footnoted, and rockfish
species are included in the ``remaining rockfish'' category for the areas footnoted only.
d Whiting specifications are preliminary. The ABC is coastwide, including Canadian waters. The U.S. harvest guideline is preliminarily set at 80 percent of the U.S./Canada ABC. The allocation
to Washington coastal treaty tribes will be determined in a separate rulemaking. The 40 percent reserve for shore-based processing will be based on the commercial portion of the harvest
guideline (the U.S. harvest guideline minus the tribal allocation).
e Dover sole, thornyheads, and trawl-caught sablefish are managed together as the ``DTS complex'' (formerly called the deepwater complex). There is no harvest guideline for the DTS complex.
f The 7,800 mt sablefish harvest guideline is the 8,700 mt ABC north of the Conception subarea (north of 36 deg. N. latitude) reduced by 900 mt for estimated discards. The 7,800-mt harvest
guideline is reduced by 780 mt for the treaty tribes before dividing the remaining 7,020 mt between the limited entry (6,557 mt) and open-access (463 mt) fisheries. The limited entry
allocation is further allocated 58 percent (3,803 mt) to the trawl fishery, and 42 percent (2,754 mt) to the nontrawl fishery, both of which are harvest guidelines.
g Only jack mackerel north of 39 deg.00' N. latitude are managed by the FMP. The ABC and harvest guideline include area beyond 200 nm.
h The POP harvest guideline for landed catch applies to the Vancouver/Columbia subareas combined.
i The 6,500 mt harvest guideline for widow rockfish is derived by subtracting 16 percent for estimated discards (1,200 mt) from the ABC (7,700 mt).
j The thornyhead ABCs and harvest guidelines apply north of Point Conception, CA. The harvest guideline represents landed catch. Limited entry and open-access allocations are set for the first
time for shortspine thornyheads because open-access harvest has exceeded traditional levels during the 1984-1988 window period.
k The Sebastes-North harvest guideline (11,200 mt) applies to the Vancouver and Columbia subareas and equals the sum of the ABCs as follows: canary (1,000 mt), yellowtail rockfish (6,740 mt
coastwide minus 300 mt for the Eureka subarea), and remaining rockfish (4,500 mt), minus 720 mt for estimated discards (150 mt for canary rockfish and 570 mt for yellowtail rockfish north of
Cape Lookout). Within the Sebastes-North harvest guideline are two small harvest guidelines for commercial harvest of black rockfish by the Makah, Quileute, Hoh, and Quinault Indian tribes:
20,000 pounds (9,072 kg) for the EEZ north of Cape Alava (48 deg.09'30'' N. latitude) and 10,000 pounds (4,536 kg) between Destruction Island (47 deg.40'00'' N. latitude) and Leadbetter
Point 46 deg.38'10'' N. latitude). The Sebastes-South harvest guideline is the sum of the ABCs for the species in the Eureka/Monterey/Conception subareas: bocaccio (1,700 mt), canary (250
mt), chilipepper (4,000 mt), yellowtail rockfish (300 mt), and remaining rockfish (7,000 mt).
l The bocaccio harvest guideline applies to the Eureka, Monterey, and Conception subareas; as trip-limit induced discards are believed to be minimal, there is no deduction for discards. The
open-access and limited entry allocation percentages for bocaccio are applied only to the commercial portion of the harvest guideline, which is 1,500 mt in 1995 (1,700 mt harvest guideline
minus 200 mt estimated recreational harvest).
m The canary rockfish harvest guideline for the Vancouver/Columbia area is the sum of the ABCs minus 150 mt for estimated discards.
n The 1993 yellowtail rockfish assessment addressed three separate areas: U.S. Vancouver; Columbia north of Cape Falcon; and Columbia south of Cape Falcon plus Eureka. For this table, the
2,970 mt Columbia ABC is for north Columbia only, and the Eureka ABC is for the Eureka subarea plus south Columbia. The total ABC for yellowtail rockfish is divided into two harvest
guidelines: 3,600 mt for the northern area (4,160 mt for Vancouver plus Columbia north of Cape Lookout, close to Cape Falcon minus 570 mt for discards) and 2,580 mt for the southern area
(Eureka plus Columbia area south of Cape Lookout). The harvest guidelines for the Sebastes complex apply to different areas, north and south of the Columbia/Eureka border at 43 deg.00'00''
N. latitude. For calculating the Sebastes complex harvest guidelines, 300 mt of yellowtail rockfish is estimated for the Eureka subarea. Therefore, 300 mt of the yellowtail rockfish southern
harvest guideline is included in the southern Sebastes complex harvest guideline, and the remainder of the yellowtail rockfish southern harvest guideline is included in the northern Sebastes
complex harvest guideline.)
o The 11,050 mt coastwide harvest guideline for Dover sole (the upper end of the ABC range for the Vancouver subarea and the lower end of the ABC for the Monterey subarea (which are the recent
average catches in those two subareas), plus the ABCs for the Columbia, Eureka and Conception subareas, minus 580 mt for estimated discards. The coastwide harvest guideline includes a 2,850
mt harvest guideline for the Columbia subarea (3,000 mt ABC minus 150 mt estimated discards).
p Includes sharks, skates, rays, ratfish, morids, grenadiers, and other groundfish species noted above in footnote c.
[[Page 281]]
Changes to the ABCs and Harvest Guidelines
The ABCs represent the total catch--amounts that are discarded as
well as retained. Information considered in determining the ABCs is
available from the Council and was made available to the public, before
the Council's October 1995 meeting, in the Council's SAFE document (see
ADDRESSES). The 1996 final ABCs are changed from the 1995 ABCs only for
Dover sole, as explained below. The preliminary whiting ABC for 1996
also differs from the 1995 ABC. These changes are based on the best
available scientific information. Changes that result only from
rounding are not explained.
Those species or species groups managed with harvest guidelines in
1995 will continue to be managed with harvest guidelines in 1996. As in
1995, no quotas are established. The 1996 harvest guidelines differ
from those in 1995 for: Pacific ocean perch (POP), the Sebastes complex
in the Vancouver/Columbia subareas (north of 43 deg.00' N. lat.),
yellowtail rockfish north of Cape Lookout (45 deg.20'15'' N. lat.), and
Dover sole coastwide. The preliminary harvest guideline for Pacific
whiting (whiting) in 1996 also differs from the 1995 harvest guideline.
Where information is available, a discard factor is subtracted from the
ABC to determine the harvest guideline. Therefore, except for whiting,
the 1996 harvest guidelines represent only that portion of the catch
that is landed.
The changes to the ABCs and harvest guidelines are described
briefly below. All other ABC and annual harvest guideline
specifications announced for 1995 (Table 1 at 60 FR 2331, January 9,
1995) will apply again in 1996 and are included in Table 1. More
detailed information appears in the Council's SAFE document (September
1995), the ``Final Groundfish Management Team Acceptable Biological
Catch and Harvest Guideline Recommendations for 1996'' (GMT Report
C.1.) from the October 1995 Council meeting, and the Council's
newsletters for its August and October 1995 meetings (see ADDRESSES).
POP
Since 1981, POP has been managed under a schedule intended to
rebuild POP to a level that would annually support removals of 1,000
metric tons (mt). Landings were higher than this as recently as 1993.
To achieve an annual harvest of about 1,000 mt while maintaining a
biologically sound harvest rate, the current biomass would have to
double. This would be a slow process unless there is a fortuitous
sequence of large recruitments. The harvest guideline for POP is meant
to accommodate only small, incidental catches and, therefore, is not a
target to be achieved deliberately. Trip limits for POP will not be
increased to achieve the harvest guideline, and may be reduced if
landings are too high. The harvest guideline for POP is reduced from
1,300 mt in 1995 to 750 mt in 1996, close to the projected landings in
1995.
Yellowtail Rockfish--North
The 1996 harvest guideline for yellowtail rockfish north of Cape
Lookout is reduced by 570 mt, from 4,160 mt in 1995 to 3,590 mt in
1996, to account for trip-limit induced discards in that area. The
harvest guideline in 1996 represents landings rather than total catch.
Before 1996, the harvest guideline represented total catch, and
estimates of discards were added to landings during the season.
Sebastes Complex--North
The harvest guideline for the Sebastes complex in the Vancouver and
Columbia subareas, which consists of the sum of the ABCs of the
different species that make up the complex minus estimated discards, is
reduced by 570 mt, from 11,800 mt in 1995 to 11,200 mt in 1996 (rounded
to the nearest hundred mt). This amount represents the difference after
subtracting the estimate of discards for yellowtail rockfish.
As in 1995, the 1996 ABCs and harvest guidelines for the Sebastes
complex and yellowtail rockfish apply to different areas due to
differences in stock assessment areas. The ABCs and harvest guidelines
for the Sebastes complex apply north and south of 43 deg.00'00'' N.
lat. (the Columbia/Eureka subarea boundary). The yellowtail rockfish
ABCs in the Columbia area are divided at Cape Falcon (45 deg.46'00'' N.
lat.), which is the boundary used in the stock assessment, and the
harvest guidelines are divided at Cape Lookout (45 deg.20'15'' N.
lat.), about 26 nm to the south, for management purposes.
Dover Sole
New stock assessments were conducted for Dover sole in the
Vancouver and Monterey subareas. However, uncertainty in the stock
assessments and the surveys on which they are based prompted the
Council to recommend ranges of ABCs for these two subareas in 1996. In
the Vancouver subarea, the lower end of the ABC range (820 mt) is the
ABC recommended in the recent stock assessment, and the upper end
(1,570 mt) is based on the 1990-94 average landings. In the Monterey
subarea, the lower end of the ABC range (3,160 mt) is based on the
1990-94 average landings and the upper end (4,360 mt) is the level
proposed in the recent stock assessment. The 1996 coastwide ABC is the
sum of the area ABCs, which ranges from 10,880 mt to 12,830 mt.
The 1996 coastwide harvest guideline for Dover sole is based on the
recent average catch in the Vancouver and Monterey subareas (the upper
end of the Vancouver ABC range and the lower end of the Monterey ABC
range), plus the ABCs for the Columbia, Eureka, and Conception
subareas, which are the same as in 1995. The total is then reduced by 5
percent (580 mt) for expected discards. The 1996 coastwide harvest
guideline is 11,050 mt, which is reduced from 13,600 mt in 1995. The
harvest guideline for Dover sole in the Columbia subarea is the same as
in 1995.
Whiting--Preliminary
In order to consider the results of a new stock assessment, the
Council has recommended only the preliminary whiting ABC and harvest
guideline at this time, and will recommend the final ABC and harvest
guideline in March 1996.
In 1994, the ABC for whiting was substantially higher than in
previous years, primarily because it was based on data from the 1992
hydroacoustic survey that utilized new, more sensitive equipment, and
extended farther offshore and farther north to encompass the species'
range. To provide for cautious exploitation until the 1992 survey
results could be confirmed, a conservative harvest rate policy was
adopted in 1994 and 1995 to minimize the risk to the resource if the
ABC were later found to be too high. The most recent stock assessment,
prepared in 1995, supported resumption of the moderate exploitation
rate, and the Council recommended a preliminary 1996 whiting ABC (for
the U.S. and Canada combined) of 123,000 mt, assuming large recruitment
from the 1994 year class. This continues the decline in ABC from
325,000 mt in 1994 and 223,000 mt in 1995, as the strong 1980 and 1984
year classes become less abundant. As in recent years, the preliminary
U.S. harvest guideline is 80 percent of the U.S.-Canada ABC (98,400
mt). An update to the 1995 stock assessment based on the results of the
summer/fall 1995 hydroacoustic survey is expected to be completed early
in 1996. The Council will review the results of the new stock
assessment at its March 1996 meeting and will recommend the final ABC
and harvest
[[Page 282]]
guideline at that time. The final ABC may be higher or lower than the
preliminary ABC.
The recent overages have not caused a biological problem,
particularly given the large increase in the ABC in 1994 and use of a
conservative exploitation rate in 1994 and 1995. Even though the
preliminary ABC and harvest guideline return to a higher, moderate
exploitation rate, the total harvest in 1996 is expected to be lower
than the overfishing level. Bilateral discussions with Canada are
expected to continue.
The regulations at 50 CFR 663.23(b)(4) set aside 40 percent of the
U.S. harvest guideline in 1994-96 for priority use by vessels
delivering whiting to shoreside processors. The amount available for
this shoreside reserve in 1996 depends on the level of the final U.S.
harvest guideline and the amount set aside for tribal fisheries, which
are not yet determined.
Setting Harvest Guidelines Greater Than ABC
In most cases, harvest guidelines are less than or equal to the
ABCs, or prorated ABCs, for specific areas. However, for 1996 as in
1995, the Council recommended harvest guidelines that exceed the ABCs
for two species, POP and shortspine thornyheads. The FMP requires that
the Council consider certain factors when setting a harvest guideline
above an ABC. These factors were analyzed by the Council's groundfish
management team (GMT) and considered at the Council's October 1995
meeting before the Council recommended the 1996 harvest guidelines.
These factors also were considered when establishing the 20-year
rebuilding schedule for POP in the 1981 FMP, in the most recent stock
assessments for POP (in the September 1995 SAFE document) and
shortspine thornyheads (in the October 1994 SAFE document), and in the
GMT's recommendations for 1996 (GMT Report C.1., October 1995).
Overfishing
The FMP defines ``overfishing'' as a fishing mortality rate that
would, in the long term, reduce the spawning biomass per recruit below
20 percent of what it would have been if the stock had never been
exploited (unless the species is above the level that would produce
maximum sustainable yield (MSY)). The rate is defined in terms of the
percentage of the stock removed per year.
Therefore, high catch rates can cause overfishing at any stock
abundance level. Conversely, overfishing does not necessarily occur for
stocks at low abundance levels if the catch can be kept to a
sufficiently small fraction of that stock level. The target rate of
exploitation for Pacific Coast groundfish typically is the rate that
would reduce spawning biomass per recruit to 35 percent of its unfished
level. This desired rate of fishing will always be less than the
overfishing rate, so there is a buffer between the management target
and the level that could harm the stock's long-term potential
productivity. If the overfishing level is reached, the Guidelines for
Fishery Management Plans at 50 CFR part 602 require the Council to
identify actions to be undertaken to alleviate overfishing.
None of the ABCs for 1996 reaches or exceeds the level of
overfishing. However, for those species whose harvest guidelines exceed
ABC (POP and shortspine thornyheads), the harvest guideline approaches
the overfishing level. In addition, the overfishing level for POP and
shortspine thornyheads was projected to be reached in 1995. Landings of
POP were projected at 857 mt in 1995, very close to the 852 mt
overfishing level for landed catch. Landings of shortspine thornyheads
were projected at about 1,800 mt through November 1995, but total catch
may have exceeded the 1,757 mt overfishing level (for total catch) by
as much as 170 mt (10 percent), depending on assumptions made about the
level of trip-limit induced discards. Further discussion appears in the
GMT Supplemental Report C.1. (October 1995). Overfishing in 1996 will
be avoided by establishment or reduction of harvest guidelines and by
more restrictive management of the fisheries for these species.
Discards
In 1996, the ABCs represent total catch, and the harvest
guidelines, except for whiting, represent only that portion of the
catch that is landed. Stock assessments and inseason catch monitoring
are designed to account for all fishing mortality, including that
resulting from fish discarded at sea. Discards of rockfish and
sablefish in the fishery for whiting are well monitored and are
accounted for inseason as they occur. In the other fisheries, discards
caused by trip limits have not been monitored, so discard factors have
been developed to account for this extra catch. A level previously
measured for widow rockfish (about 16 percent of the total catch) in a
scientific study is assumed to be appropriate for the commercial
fisheries for widow rockfish, yellowtail rockfish (in the northern
area), canary rockfish, and POP. A discard level of 8 percent is used
for the deepwater thornyhead fishery, 5 percent for Dover sole, and 20
percent for sablefish. The discard factors are typically applied by
setting the harvest guideline for landed catch at a level that is equal
to the ABC minus expected discard. More detailed information is found
in the Council's SAFE document.
Foreign and Joint Venture Fisheries
For those species needing individual management that will not be
fully utilized by domestic processors or harvesters, and that can be
caught without severely affecting species that are fully utilized by
domestic processors or harvesters, foreign or joint venture operations
may occur. A joint venture occurs when U.S. vessels deliver their catch
to foreign processing vessels in the EEZ. The harvest guidelines or
quotas for these species may be apportioned to domestic annual harvest
(DAH, which includes domestic annual processing (DAP) and joint venture
processing (JVP)) and to the total allowable level of foreign fishing
(TALFF). In January 1996, no surplus groundfish are available for joint
venture or foreign fishing operations. Consequently, all the harvest
guidelines in 1996 are designated entirely for DAP (which also equals
DAH), and JVP and TALFF are set at zero.
In the unlikely event that fish are reallocated inseason and a
foreign or joint venture fishery should occur, the incidental catch
levels would be as follows: For a whiting fishery, the same as
announced at Table 2, footnote 1 of 58 FR 2990 (January 7, 1993); for a
jack mackerel joint venture, initially the same as those suggested in
section 12.5.2 of the FMP but subject to change during the year.
II. The Limited Entry Program
Amendment 6 to the FMP established a limited entry program that, on
January 1, 1994, divided the commercial groundfish fishery into two
components, the limited entry fishery and the open access fishery, each
of which has its own allocations and management measures. The limited
entry and open access allocations are calculated according to a formula
specified at section II.E. of the appendix to 50 CFR part 663, which
takes into account the relative amounts of a species taken by each
component of the fishery during the 1984-88 limited entry window
period. At its October 1995 meeting, the Council recommended the
species and areas subject to open access and limited entry allocations
in 1996, and the Regional Director calculated the amounts of the
allocations that are
[[Page 283]]
presented in Table 1. Unless otherwise specified, the limited entry and
open access allocations are treated as harvest guidelines in 1996.
Open Access Allocations
The open access fishery is composed of vessels using (1) exempt
gear, or (2) longline or pot (trap) gear used pursuant to the harvest
guidelines, quotas, and other management measures governing the open
access fishery. Exempt gear means all types of legal groundfish fishing
gear except groundfish trawl, longline, and pots. (Exempt gear includes
trawls used to harvest pink shrimp or spot or ridgeback prawns (shrimp
trawls), and, south of Point Arena, CA (38 deg.57'30'' N. lat.),
California halibut or sea cucumbers.)
The open access allocation is derived by applying the open access
allocation percentage to the annual harvest guideline or quota after
subtracting any set-asides for recreational fishing or treaty Indians
(see sections II.E.(b) and (c) of the Appendix to 50 CFR part 663). For
those species in which the open access share would have been less than
1 percent, no open access allocation is specified unless significant
open access effort is anticipated. At the time the calculations were
made, the status of some vessels (whether they would receive a limited
entry permit) was not certain. These amounts are minor and would not
affect the level of trip limits for the limited entry or open access
fisheries.
At its October 1995 meeting, the Council learned that the harvest
of shortspine thornyheads in 1995 had increased from the level of
harvest during the 1984-88 limited entry window period. More than 150
mt of shortspine thornyheads were landed in California alone in 1995,
whereas the coastwide harvest by open access gear during the 1984-88
window period was less than one percent (15 mt) of the harvest
guideline. Consequently, the Council recommended that an open access
allocation for shortspine thornyheads be set in 1996 and that
management measures be implemented to keep landings within that harvest
guideline. The open access allocation percentage for shortspine
thornyheads subsequently was determined to be 0.25 percent of the
harvest guideline, which is 4 mt in 1996.
Limited Entry Allocations
The limited entry fishery means the fishery composed of vessels
using limited entry gear fished pursuant to the harvest guidelines,
quotas, and other management measures governing the limited entry
fishery. Limited entry gear means longline, pot, or groundfish trawl
gear used under the authority of a valid limited entry permit, issued
under 50 CFR part 663, affixed with an endorsement for that gear.
(Groundfish trawl gear excludes shrimp trawls used to harvest pink
shrimp, spot prawns, or ridgeback prawns, and other trawls used to fish
for California halibut or sea cucumbers south of Point Arena, CA.)
The limited entry allocation is the allowable catch (harvest
guideline or quota) reduced by: (1) Set-asides, if any, for treaty
Indian fisheries or recreational fisheries; and (2) the open access
allocation.
Recreational Harvest
Before calculating limited entry and open access allocations,
estimates of recreational fishing currently are subtracted for two
species, 200 mt for bocaccio (which also is reflected in the
allocations for the Sebastes complex in the Eureka, Monterey, and
Conception subareas), and 900 mt for lingcod.
Washington Coastal Tribal Fisheries
The treaty Indian fisheries will be managed by the tribes. The
treaty Indian fisheries for sablefish and whiting are not governed by
the limited entry or open access regulations or allocations.
Sablefish
From 1991 through 1994, the Washington Coastal Treaty Tribes
conducted a tribal sablefish fishery of 300 mt that was recognized in
these annual management measures. In 1994, the U.S. Government formally
recognized the treaty right to fish for groundfish of the four
Washington Coastal Treaty Tribes (the Makah, Hoh, Quileute, and
Quinault) and concluded that, in general terms, the quantification of
the right is 50 percent of the harvestable surplus of groundfish
available in the tribes' usual and accustomed fishing areas (marine
waters under U.S. jurisdiction north of 46 deg.53'18'' N. lat. and east
of 125 deg.44'00'' W. long.). For 1996 as in 1995, the tribes' treaty
right to sablefish is 10 percent of the sablefish harvest guideline, or
780 mt in 1996.
Whiting
The Washington Coastal Treaty Tribes have requested that whiting be
set aside for tribal fishing in 1996. The amount of the tribal
allocation for 1996 has not yet been determined, and will be announced
in a separate rulemaking that will provide a procedure for implementing
tribal treaty rights for groundfish.
Rockfish
The tribes continue to have a small harvest guideline, the same as
in 1995, for black rockfish off Washington State, to which the non-
tribal trip limits do not apply (50 CFR 663.23(b)). For other rockfish,
the open access trip limits will apply for fixed gear. The limited
entry trip limits will apply for trawl-caught rockfish, and this will
be implemented with a separate rule governing tribal groundfish.
III. 1996 Management Measures
Projections of landings in 1995 are based on the information
available to the Council at its October 1995 meeting (GMT Supplemental
Report C.3.a., October 1995).
A. Limited Entry Fishery
The following management measures apply to vessels operating in the
limited entry fishery after January 1, 1996, and are designed to keep
landings within the harvest guidelines or limited entry allocations.
Cumulative trip limits continue to be used for most of the limited
entry fishery, which allows fishers to accumulate fish over a period of
time without limit on the number of landings. However, in response to
the industry's concerns about discards and the difficulty of accurately
weighing small amounts of fish at sea to assure compliance with trip
limits, 2-month rather than 1-month cumulative limits will be used for
the limited entry fishery in 1996. However, no more than 60 percent of
the 2-month limit may be taken in either calendar month, resulting in a
variable monthly trip limit within the 2-month limit. This enables the
limited entry fleet to maintain its current monthly fishing pattern,
target on 50 percent of the 2-month cumulative limit in a month, and
have the protection of a buffer equivalent to 10 percent of the 2-month
cumulative limit to account for inaccuracies in weighing fish at sea or
for small amounts caught above the target level. The 2-month periods
are: January-February, March-April, May-June, July-August, September-
October, November-December.
Widow rockfish
In 1995, the cumulative trip limit for widow rockfish continued at
30,000 lb (13,608 kg) per month until July 14, when it was increased to
45,000 lb (20,412 kg) per month. Landings are projected to exceed the
6,500-mt harvest guideline by about 1 percent in 1995. In 1996, a 2-
month cumulative limit of 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) will be implemented,
which is intended to
[[Page 284]]
reduce the need for abrupt adjustment during the year.
The Sebastes complex (including yellowtail rockfish, canary
rockfish, and bocaccio). In 1995, three different cumulative monthly
trip limits were set for the Sebastes complex, which continued
throughout the year: 35,000 lb (15,876 kg) north of Cape Lookout,
50,000 lb (22,680 kg) between Cape Lookout and Cape Mendocino, and
100,000 lb (45,359 kg) south of Cape Mendocino. The monthly cumulative
trip limit for yellowtail rockfish was 18,000 lb (8,165 kg) north of
Cape Lookout and 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) between Cape Lookout and Cape
Mendocino until May 1, when it was increased to 18,000 lb (8,165 kg)
north of Cape Lookout and 40,000 lb (18,144 kg) between Cape Lookout
and Cape Mendocino. The cumulative monthly trip limit for canary
rockfish was 6,000 lb (2,722 kg) coastwide until August 1, when it was
increased to 9,000 lb (4,082 kg). By the end of 1995, landings are
projected as follows: Sebastes complex in the Vancouver/Columbia
subarea--6,825 mt (30 percent below the harvest guideline); yellowtail
rockfish north of Cape Lookout--3,416 mt (5 percent over the harvest
guideline); yellowtail rockfish south of Cape Lookout--1,489 mt (27
percent below the harvest guideline); canary rockfish--627 mt (26
percent below the harvest guideline); and bocaccio--741 mt (39 percent
below the harvest guideline).
In January 1996, the 2-month cumulative trip limits for the
Sebastes complex will be: 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) north of Cape Lookout,
100,000 lb (45,359 kg) between Cape Lookout and Cape Mendocino, and
200,000 lb (90,719 kg) south of Cape Mendocino. Two-month cumulative
limits also apply to yellowtail rockfish, canary rockfish and bocaccio,
which also count toward the limits for the Sebastes complex. These 2-
month cumulative limits are: Yellowtail rockfish--32,000 lb (14,515 kg)
north of Cape Lookout or 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) between Cape Lookout and
Cape Mendocino; canary rockfish--18,000 lb (8,165 kg); bocaccio south
of Cape Mendocino--60,000 lb (27,216 kg).
The declaration procedures implemented by the States of Washington
and Oregon for vessels operating north and south of Cape Lookout remain
in effect for the Sebastes complex and yellowtail rockfish. The
declarations enable a vessel to operate both north and south of Cape
Lookout during the trip limit period, and to take and retain the more
liberal, southern limits of the Sebastes complex and yellowtail
rockfish, but only if the appropriate state is notified, as required by
state law. In 1996, the trip limit period is changed to 2 months for
most limited entry fisheries, and remains at 1 month for most open
access fisheries.
POP
In 1995, the cumulative trip limit for POP of 6,000 lb (2,722 kg)
per month continued throughout the year. Landings were projected to be
785 mt at the end of 1995, 36 percent below the harvest guideline. The
1996 harvest guideline was reduced close to the level of 1995 landings,
and the cumulative trip limit is changed to 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) per 2-
month period. POP is managed to achieve a rebuilding schedule, so trip
limits will not be increased to achieve the harvest guideline.
Sablefish
The sablefish harvest guideline is subdivided among several
fisheries. The tribal fishery allocation is set aside prior to dividing
the balance of the harvest guideline between the commercial limited
entry and open access fisheries. These three fisheries are managed
differently. The limited entry allocation is further subdivided into
trawl (58 percent) and nontrawl (42 percent) allocations. Trawl-caught
sablefish are managed together with Dover sole and thornyheads as the
DTS complex because they often are caught together. Landings of
sablefish are expected to be close to the 7,800 mt harvest guideline in
1995.
DTS complex (Dover sole, thornyheads, and trawl-caught sablefish).
In 1995, the two cumulative monthly trip limits for the DTS complex
remained in effect until December 1: 35,000 lb (15,876 kg) north of
Cape Mendocino and 50,000 lb (22,680 kg) south of Cape Mendocino. This
differential trip limit was intended to provide additional protection
for shortspine thornyheads, the most valuable and least abundant
species in the DTS complex, while encouraging the harvest of Dover sole
in more southern areas. In 1996, the trip limit will be doubled to
accommodate the 2-month periods: 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) north of Cape
Mendocino, and 100,000 lb (45,359 kg) south of Cape Mendocino.
Further protection for shortspine thornyheads was provided by
managing the two thornyhead species separately in 1995. On January 1, a
cumulative trip limit was set for shortspine and longspine thornyheads
combined of 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) per month, containing no more than
4,000 lb (1,814 kg) of shortspine thornyheads. On April 1, the monthly
cumulative limit was reduced to 15,000 lb (6,804 kg) of thornyheads,
containing no more than 3,000 lb (1,361 kg) of shortspine thornyheads.
On September 1, the cumulative monthly limit was reduced further to
8,000 lb (3,629 kg) of thornyheads, of which no more than 1,500 lb (680
kg) could be shortspines. Even so, landings of shortspine thornyheads
reached the harvest guideline on September 20, and are projected to
exceed the overfishing level by as much as 170 mt, even with the
fishery closure in December. Landings of longspine thornyheads are
projected to be about 5,800 mt in 1995, 200 mt below its harvest
guideline. Landings of both thornyhead species were prohibited on
December 1, since the two species often are caught together. In January
1996, the trip limits for thornyheads are half the amount of limits in
effect at the beginning of 1995: 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) of thornyheads in
a 2-month period, of which no more than 4,000 lb (1,814 kg) may be
shortspine thornyheads.
The monthly cumulative trip limit for trawl-caught sablefish
remained at 6,000 lb (2,722 kg) cumulative per month from July 1994
until it was raised to 7,000 lb (3,175 kg) on May 1, 1995. The ``per
trip'' limit for sablefish smaller than 22 inches (56 cm) remained at
500 lb (227 kg). Landings of trawl-caught sablefish were projected to
exceed the limited entry trawl allocation by the end of 1995.
Therefore, to keep landings within the trawl allocation, and because
shortspine thornyheads often are caught with sablefish, the trawl
fishery for sablefish also was closed on December 1. In 1995, landings
are projected to be very close to the limited entry trawl allocation of
3,803 mt. In 1996, the cumulative trip limit is doubled to 12,000 lb
(5,443 kg) to accommodate the new, 2-month cumulative trip limit
period. The 500-lb (227-kg) per-trip limit for sablefish smaller than
22 inches (56 cm) remains in effect.
Dover sole were managed somewhat indirectly in 1995, as in previous
years. Until December 1, the amount of the DTS limit that was not
comprised of thornyheads or trawl-caught sablefish could be Dover sole.
A ``per trip'' limit of 3,000 lb (1,361 kg) was implemented on December
1, concurrent with the closure of the limited entry and open access
fisheries for thornyheads and trawl-caught sablefish, to accommodate
bycatch in the petrale sole fishery. Landings of Dover sole are
expected to be far below its harvest guidelines in 1995 (projected at
42 percent below the coastwide harvest guideline and 30 percent below
the Columbia subarea harvest guideline, even before the
[[Page 285]]
reduction to 3,000 lb (1,361 kg) cumulative in December 1995). These
``underages'' were not addressed by increasing the trip limits in 1995
because of the close association of Dover sole, sablefish, and
thornyheads, and new information supporting more cautious management of
Dover sole. In 1996, Dover sole will be managed the same as in 1995;
the trip limit will be the amount of the DTS limit remaining after
subtracting landings of sablefish and thornyheads.
Nontrawl sablefish
Small daily trip limits were applied to the nontrawl fishery again
in 1995 before and after the August 6-13, 1995, ``regular'' and
September 1-31, 1995, ``mop-up'' seasons. A 300-lb (136-kg) daily trip
limit was applied only north of the Conception subarea (36 deg.00'00''
N. lat.), the same area covered by the harvest guideline. In the
Conception area, where there is no harvest guideline and landings had
been below the 425-mt ABC, the daily trip limit was 350 lb (159 kg) to
accommodate most landings without encouraging excessive effort shifts
into that area. The trip limit for sablefish smaller than 22 inches (56
cm) of 1,500 lb (680 kg) or 3 percent of all legal sablefish on board,
whichever is greater, remained in effect during the regular and mop-up
seasons. In 1995, the regular (derby) season was preceded by a 72-hour
closure for all limited entry and open access fixed gear used to take
and retain groundfish, with one exception. Pot gear could be set 24
hours before the regular season because this gear takes longer to
deploy. Landings in 1995 are expected to be just below the limited
entry nontrawl allocation for sablefish of 2,754 mt.
In 1996, the same daily trip limits for the limited entry fishery
will apply outside the regular and mop-up seasons and any closure. The
``per trip'' limit for nontrawl sablefish smaller than 22 inches (56
cm) will remain in effect during the regular and mop-up fisheries, but,
for ease of calculation, the percentage is modified to apply only to
legal sablefish 22 inches (56 cm) or larger (total length). The Council
recommended that the date of the regular season be changed to September
1 in 1996. This change has not yet been approved by NMFS. The Council
also is considering different management strategies for 1997 and
beyond, but has not yet submitted a recommendation to NMFS.
Whiting
Approximately 176,600 mt of whiting was harvested in 1995, 74,000
mt by the shore-based fleet and 102,600 mt by the at-sea processing
sector (which includes deliveries to motherships). The 10,000-lb
(4,536-kg) trip limit for whiting taken before and after the regular
whiting season and inside the 100-fathom (183-m) contour in the Eureka
subarea (40 deg.30'00''-43 deg.00'00'' N. lat.) continues in effect in
1996. Additional regulations, including the allocation of whiting to
vessels that deliver shoreside and those that deliver at-sea, are found
at 50 CFR 663.23(b) (3) and (4). The Council has recommended that the
start of the regular season north of 42 deg. N. lat. be changed from
April 15 to May 15, but this recommendation has not yet been approved
by NMFS.
Lingcod
Throughout 1995, lingcod was managed under a monthly cumulative
trip limit of 20,000 lb (9,072 kg). Lingcod smaller than 22 inches (56
cm) could not be landed in the commercial or recreational fisheries
until August 1, 1995, when a 100-lb (45-kg) per trip exception was made
for trawl-caught lingcod. Landings of lingcod are projected at 1,431 mt
in 1995, 3 percent below the harvest guideline. To maintain similar
landing rates in 1996, the cumulative limit is doubled to 40,000 lb
(18,144 kg) per 2-month period.
Black Rockfish
Black rockfish off the State of Washington continue to be managed
under the regulations at 50 CFR 663.23(b). The State of Oregon
implements trip limits for black rockfish off the Oregon coast. The
Council has considered trip limits off Oregon but has not yet submitted
its recommendation to NMFS for review.
B. Open Access Fishery
The trip limits for the open access fishery are designed to keep
landings within the open access allocation, while allowing the
fisheries to operate for as long as possible during the year. The
overall open access limits for rockfish, sablefish and ``all
groundfish'' in 1996 are the same as in 1995 with several exceptions,
explained below.
(1) As in 1995, any more restrictive limits imposed on limited
entry vessels also apply to open access vessels. However, in 1996, a
vessel operating in the open access fishery may not, in any calendar
month, exceed 50 percent of any 2-month cumulative trip limit in the
limited entry fishery. This is intended to maintain a relatively
consistent pattern of landings and to discourage new entry into the
open access fishery.
(2) A daily trip limit is added for thornyheads to keep landings
within the new open access allocation (4 mt in 1996). Landings of
shortspine thornyheads by open access vessels are estimated at over 150
mt in 1995, much higher than landings during the 1984-88 window period.
The best available information at the October 1995 Council meeting
indicated that a trip limit of 50 lb (23 kg) per day would accommodate
most open access trips, but still may be too liberal to keep landings
within the open access allocation in 1996. After the Council made its
recommendation, some members of the industry stated that 50 lb (23 kg)
per day was too low to sustain current fisheries south of Point
Conception CA (34 deg.27' N. lat.). Historical landings by open access
vessels were less than 1 percent coastwide during the window period, so
they were even smaller south of Pt. Conception, suggesting this is new
effort in the area which the FMP seeks to discourage. Nonetheless, the
Council may reconsider this issue in the future.
(3) The open access trip limits in 1995 applied to all shrimp and
prawn gear. In 1996, they will apply only to shrimp/prawn trawl gear
because the open access trip limits for pots already accommodate shrimp
gear that conforms with the Federal requirements for groundfish pots:
To have biodegradable escape panels constructed with #21 or smaller
untreated cotton twine in such a manner that an opening at least 8
inches (20.5 cm) in diameter results when the twine deteriorates (50
CFR 663.22(e)).
C. Operating in Both Limited Entry and Open Access Fisheries
Vessels using open access gear are subject to the management
measures for the open access fishery, whether or not the vessel has a
valid limited entry permit endorsed for any other gear. In addition, a
vessel operating in the open access fishery must not exceed any trip
limit, frequency limit, and/or size limit for the same gear and/or
subarea in the limited entry fishery (as announced in this Federal
Register document in paragraphs titled ``limited entry''). A vessel
that operates in both the open access and limited entry fisheries is
not entitled to two separate trip limits for the same species. Fish
caught with open access gear will also be counted toward the limited
entry trip limit. For example: In one month, a trawl vessel catches
6,000 lb (2,722 kg) of sablefish in the limited entry fishery, and in
the same month catches 1,500 lb (680 kg) of sablefish with shrimp trawl
(open access) gear, for a total of 7,500 lb (3,402 kg) of sablefish.
Because the open access landings are counted toward the limited entry
limit, the vessel would have
[[Page 286]]
exceeded its limited entry, cumulative limit of 7,200 lb (3,266 kg) (60
percent of the 12,000-lb (5,443-kg) 2-month cumulative limit for the
limited entry fishery).
D. Operating in Areas with Different Trip Limits
Trip limits may differ for a species or species complex at
different locations on the coast. Unless otherwise stated (as for
yellowtail rockfish, black rockfish, and the Sebastes complex), the
same cross-over provisions utilized in 1995 will apply.
E. Changes to Trip Limits; Closures
Unless otherwise stated, a vessel must have initiated offloading
its catch before the fishery is closed or before a more restrictive
trip limit becomes effective. As in the past, all fish on board the
vessel when offloading begins are counted toward the landing limits
(See 50 CFR 663.2, the definition of ``landing'').
F. Designated Species B Permits
Designated species B permits may be issued if the limited entry
fleet will not fully utilize the harvest guideline for Pacific whiting,
shortbelly rockfish, or jack mackerel. However, the limited entry fleet
has requested the full use of these species in 1996, so issuance of
designated species B permits is not expected. If designated species B
permits for jack mackerel are issued, the bycatch limits announced in
the 1995 annual management measures (60 FR 2331, January 9, 1995) may
be used or modified.
G. Recreational Fishing
Bag limits in the 1996 recreational fishery remain the same as in
1995.
IV. NMFS Actions
For the reasons stated above, the Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, NOAA (Assistant Administrator), concurs with the Council's
recommendations and announces the following management actions for
1996, including those that are the same as in 1995.
A. General Definitions and Provisions
The following definitions and provisions apply to the 1996
management measures, unless otherwise specified in a subsequent notice:
(1) Trip limits. Trip limits are used in the commercial fishery to
specify the amount of fish that may legally be taken and retained,
possessed, or landed, per vessel, per fishing trip, or cumulatively per
unit of time, or the number of landings that may be made from a vessel
in a given period of time, as explained below.
(a) A trip limit is the total allowable amount of a groundfish
species or species complex, by weight, or by percentage of fish on
board, that may be taken and retained, possessed, or landed per vessel
from a single fishing trip.
(b) A daily trip limit is the maximum amount that may be taken and
retained, possessed, or landed per vessel in 24 consecutive hours,
starting at 0001 hours local time. Only one landing of groundfish may
be made in that 24-hour period. Daily trip limits may not be
accumulated during multiple day trips.
(c) A cumulative trip limit is the maximum amount that may be taken
and retained, possessed, or landed per vessel in a specified period of
time, without a limit on the number of landings or trips.
(i) Limited entry fishery. Unless otherwise specified, cumulative
trip limits in the limited entry fishery apply to 2-month periods. No
more than 60 percent of the applicable 2-month cumulative limit may be
taken and retained, possessed or landed in either month of a 2-month
period; this is called the ``60-percent monthly limit.'' The 2-month
periods are: January-February, March-April, May-June, July-August,
September-October, November-December.
(ii) Open access fishery. Unless otherwise specified, cumulative
trip limits apply to 1-month periods in the open access fishery. Within
these limits, in any calendar month, no more than 50 percent of the
applicable 2-month cumulative limit for the limited entry fishery may
be taken and retained, possessed, or landed from a vessel in the open
access fishery; this is called the ``50-percent monthly limit.''
(2) Unless the fishery is closed, a vessel that has landed its
cumulative or daily limit may continue to fish on the limit for the
next legal period, so long as no fish (including but not limited to
groundfish with no trip limits, shrimp, prawns, or other nongroundfish
species or shellfish) are landed (offloaded) until the next legal
period. As stated in the regulations at 50 CFR 663.2, once offloading
of any species begins, all fish aboard the vessel are counted as part
of the landing.
(3) All weights are round weights or round-weight equivalents.
(4) Percentages are based on round weights, and, unless otherwise
specified, apply only to legal fish on board.
(5) ``Legal fish'' means fish legally taken and retained,
possessed, or landed in accordance with the provisions of 50 CFR part
663, the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson
Act), any notice issued under subpart B of part 663, and any other
regulation promulgated or permit issued under the Magnuson Act.
(6) Size limits and length measurement. Unless otherwise specified,
size limits in the commercial and recreational groundfish fisheries
apply to the longest measurement of the fish without mutilation of the
fish or the use of force to extend the length of the fish. No fish with
a size limit may be retained if it is in such condition that its length
has been extended or cannot be determined by these methods.
(a) For a whole fish, total length will be measured from the tip of
the snout (mouth closed) to the tip of the tail in a natural, relaxed
position.
(b) For a fish with the head removed (``headed''), the length will
be measured from the origin of the first dorsal fin (where the front
dorsal fin meets the dorsal surface of the body closest to the head) to
the tip of the upper lobe of the tail; the dorsal fin and tail must be
left intact.
(7) ``Closure,'' when referring to closure of a fishery, means that
taking and retaining, possessing, or landing the particular species or
species group is prohibited. (See the regulations at 50 CFR 663.2.)
Unless otherwise announced in the Federal Register, offloading must
begin before the time the fishery closes.
(8) The fishery management area for these species is the EEZ off
the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California between 3 and 200 nm
offshore, bounded on the north by the Provisional International
Boundary between the United States and Canada, and bounded on the south
by the International Boundary between the United States and Mexico. All
groundfish possessed between 0-200 nm offshore, or landed in,
Washington, Oregon, or California are presumed to have been taken and
retained from the fishery management area, unless otherwise
demonstrated by the person in possession of those fish.
(9) Inseason changes to trip limits are announced in the Federal
Register. Most trip and bag limits in the groundfish fishery have been
designated ``routine,'' which means they may be changed rapidly after a
single Council meeting. Information concerning changes to trip limits
is available from the NMFS Northwest and Southwest Regional Offices
(see ADDRESSES). Changes to trip limits are effective at the times
stated in the Federal Register. Once a change is effective, it is
illegal to take and retain, possess, or land more fish than allowed
under the new trip limit. This means, unless otherwise
[[Page 287]]
announced in the Federal Register, offloading must begin before the
time a fishery closes or a more restrictive trip limit takes effect.
(10) It is unlawful for any person to take and retain, possess, or
land groundfish in excess of the landing limit for the open access
fishery without having a valid limited entry permit for the vessel
affixed with a gear endorsement for the gear used to catch the fish (50
CFR 663.7(t)).
(11) Operating in both limited entry and open access fisheries. The
open access trip limit applies to any fishing conducted with open
access gear, even if the vessel has a valid limited entry permit with
an endorsement for another type of gear. A vessel that operates in both
the open access and limited entry fisheries is not entitled to two
separate trip limits for the same species. Fish caught with open access
gear will also be counted toward the limited entry trip limit.
(12) Operating in areas with different trip limits. Trip limits for
a species or species complex may differ in different geographic areas
along the coast. The following ``crossover'' provisions apply to
vessels operating in different geographical areas that have different
cumulative or ``per trip'' trip limits for the same species or species
complex. They do not apply to species that are only subject to daily
trip limits, or to the trip limits for black rockfish off the State of
Washington (see 50 CFR 663.23(b)). They also do not apply to the trip
limits for yellowtail rockfish and the Sebastes complex when the vessel
is in compliance with paragraph IV.C.(2)(c) below.
If a vessel fishes, for any species, in an area where a more
restrictive trip limit applies, then that vessel is subject to the more
restrictive trip limit for the entire period to which that trip limit
applies, no matter where the fish are taken and retained, possessed, or
landed. Similarly, if a vessel takes and retains a species (or species
complex) in an area where a higher trip limit (or no trip limit)
applies, and possesses or lands that species (or species complex) in an
area where a more restrictive trip limit applies, then that vessel is
subject to the more restrictive trip limit for that trip limit period.
In 1996, the trip limit period for cumulative trip limits is 2
months for the limited entry fishery and 1 month for the open access
fishery, unless otherwise specified.
(13) Sorting. Regulations at 50 CFR 663.7(l) make it unlawful for
any person to ``fail to sort, prior to the first weighing after
offloading, those groundfish species or species groups for which there
is a trip limit, if the weight of the total delivery exceeds 3,000 lb
(1,361 kg) (round weight or round weight equivalent).'' This provision
applies to both the limited entry and open access fisheries.
[Note: The Council has recommended that this regulation be
changed to require all species or species groups with a trip limit,
harvest guideline, or quota to be sorted. There would be no
exception for landings under 3,000 lb (1,361 kg). The States of
Washington and Oregon already have the same or similar requirements.
If approved, the regulation is expected to be implemented in 1996,
after publication in the Federal Register.]
(14) Experimental fisheries. U.S. vessels operating under an
experimental fishing permit issued under 50 CFR 663.10 also are subject
to these restrictions, unless otherwise provided in the permit.
(15) Paragraphs IV.B. through IV.I. below pertain to the commercial
groundfish fishery. The provisions in paragraphs IV.B. through IV.I.
that are not covered under the headings ``limited entry'' or ``open
access'' apply to all vessels in the commercial fishery that take and
retain groundfish, unless otherwise stated. Paragraph IV.J. pertains to
the recreational fishery.
(16) Commonly used geographical coordinates.
(a) Cape Falcon, OR--45 deg.46' N. lat.
(b) Cape Lookout, OR--45 deg.20'15'' N. lat.
(c) Cape Mendocino, CA--40 deg.30' N. lat.
(d) Point Conception, CA--34 deg.27' N. lat.
(e) International North Pacific Fisheries Commission (INPFC)
subareas (for more precise coordinates for the Canadian and Mexican
boundaries, see 50 CFR 663.5):
(i) Vancouver--U.S.- Canada border to 47 deg.30' N. lat.
(ii) Columbia--47 deg.30' to 43 deg.00' N. lat.
(iii) Eureka--43 deg.00' to 40 deg.30' N. lat.
(iv) Monterey--40 deg.30' to 36 deg.00' N. lat.
(v) Conception--36 deg.00' N. lat. to the U.S.-Mexico border.
B. Widow Rockfish (Widow rockfish are commonly called brownies)
(1) Limited entry fishery. The cumulative trip limit for widow
rockfish is 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) per vessel per 2-month period. The
60-percent monthly limit is 42,000 lb (19,051 kg).
(2) Open access fishery. Within the limits at paragraph IV.I.
below, the 50-percent monthly limit for widow rockfish is 35,000 lb
(15,876 kg).
C. Sebastes Complex (including Bocaccio, Yellowtail, and Canary
Rockfish)
(1) General. Sebastes complex means all rockfish managed by the FMP
except Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus), widow rockfish (S.
entomelas), shortbelly rockfish (S. jordani), and Sebastolobus spp.
(also called thornyheads, idiots, or channel rockfish). Yellowtail
rockfish (S. flavidus) are commonly called greenies. Bocaccio (S.
paucispinis) are commonly called rock salmon. Canary rockfish (S.
pinniger) are commonly called orange rockfish.
(2) Limited entry fishery
(a) Cumulative trip limits
(i) North of Cape Lookout. The cumulative trip limit for the
Sebastes complex taken and retained north of Cape Lookout is 70,000 lb
(31,752 k
FR Doc. 95-31580 Foreign Fishing; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Annual Specifications and Management Measures
g) per vessel per 2-month period. Within this cumulative trip
limit for the Sebastes complex, no more than 32,000 lb (14,515 kg) may
be yellowtail rockfish taken and retained north of Cape Lookout, and no
more than 18,000 lb (8,165 kg) may be canary rockfish.
(ii) Cape Lookout to Cape Mendocino. The cumulative trip limit for
the Sebastes complex taken and retained between Cape Lookout and Cape
Mendocino is 100,000 lb (45,359 kg) per vessel per 2-month period.
Within this cumulative trip limit for the Sebastes complex, no more
than 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) may be yellowtail rockfish taken and
retained between Cape Lookout and Cape Mendocino, and no more than
18,000 lb (8,165 kg) may be canary rockfish.
(iii) South of Cape Mendocino. The cumulative trip limit for the
Sebastes complex taken and retained south of Cape Mendocino is 200,000
lb (90,719 kg) per vessel per 2-month period. Within this cumulative
trip limit for the Sebastes complex, no more than 60,000 lb (27,216 kg)
may be bocaccio taken and retained south of Cape Mendocino, and no more
than 18,000 lb (8,165 kg) may be canary rockfish.
(iv) The 60-percent monthly limits are: For the Sebastes complex,
42,000 lb (19,051 kg) north of Cape Lookout, 60,000 lb (27,216 kg)
between Cape Lookout and Cape Mendocino, and 120,000 lb (54,431 kg)
south of Cape Mendocino; for yellowtail rockfish, 19,200 lb (8,709 kg)
north of Cape Lookout, and 42,000 lb (19,051 kg) between Cape Lookout
and Cape Mendocino; for bocaccio, 36,000 lb (16,329 kg) south of Cape
Mendocino; and, for canary rockfish, 10,800 lb (4,899 kg) coastwide.
[[Page 288]]
(b) For operating in areas with different trip limits for the same
species, see paragraph IV.A.(12) above.
(c) State declarations. The provisions of paragraph IV.A.(12) do
not apply to vessels fishing in conformance with this paragraph. The
States of Oregon and Washington are implementing declaration procedures
that enable a vessel that fishes or transits both north and south of
Cape Lookout during a trip limit period (2 months for the limited entry
fishery, 1 month for the open access fishery) to retain the larger
cumulative limit for the Sebastes complex and yellowtail rockfish taken
and retained south of Cape Lookout. Declarations must be made,
according to state law, to the state where the fish will be landed. To
make a declaration or for further information, contact: Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Montesano, WA, at 206-249-4628; or
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Newport, OR, at 503-867-4741 or
503-867-0300.
(3) Open access fishery.
(a) The state declaration procedures are available to all vessels,
whether in the limited entry or open access fishery.
(b) Within the limits at paragraph IV.I. below, the 50-percent
monthly limits are: For the Sebastes complex, 35,000 lb (15,876 kg)
north of Cape Lookout, 50,000 lb (22,680 kg) between Cape Lookout and
Cape Mendocino, and 100,000 lb (45,359 kg) south of Cape Mendocino; for
yellowtail rockfish, 16,000 lb (7,258 kg) north of Cape Lookout, and
35,000 lb (15,876 kg) between Cape Lookout and Cape Mendocino; for
bocaccio, 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) south of Cape Mendocino; and, for
canary rockfish, 9,000 lb (4,082 kg) coastwide.
D. POP
(1) Limited entry fishery. The cumulative trip limit for POP is
10,000 lb (4,536 kg) per vessel per 2-month period. The 60-percent
monthly limit is 6,000 lb (2,722 kg).
(2) Open access fishery. Within the limits at paragraph IV.I.
below, the 50-percent monthly limit for POP is 5,000 lb (2,268 kg).
E. Sablefish and the DTS Complex (Dover Sole, Thornyheads, and Trawl-
Caught Sablefish)
(1) 1996 Management goal. The sablefish fishery will be managed to
achieve the 7,800-mt harvest guideline in 1996.
(2) Washington coastal tribal fisheries. The U.S. Government
recognizes that the Makah, Hoh, Quileute, and Quinault tribes have
treaty rights to fish for groundfish. Each tribe has such right in its
usual and accustomed fishing grounds. The tribal treaty allocation for
sablefish for 1996 is 780 mt. The tribes will regulate their fisheries
so as not to exceed this allocation.
(3) Limited entry fishery
(a) Gear allocations. After subtracting the tribal-imposed catch
limit and the open access allocation from the harvest guideline for
sablefish, the remainder is allocated 58 percent to the trawl fishery
and 42 percent to the nontrawl fishery.
[Note: The 1996 harvest guideline for sablefish north of 36 deg.
N. lat. is 7,800 mt. The 780-mt tribal allocation is subtracted, and
the limited entry and open access allocations are based on the
remaining 7,020 mt. The limited entry allocation of 6,557 mt for
1996 is allocated 3,803 mt (58 percent) to the trawl fishery and
2,754 mt (42 percent) to the nontrawl fishery. The trawl and
nontrawl gear allocations are harvest guidelines in 1996, which
means the fishery will be managed not to exceed the harvest
guidelines, but will not necessarily be closed if they are reached.]
(b) Limited entry trip and size limits for the DTS complex. These
provisions apply to Dover sole and thornyheads caught with any limited
entry gear and to sablefish caught with limited entry trawl gear. ``DTS
complex'' means Dover sole (Microstomus pacificus), thornyheads
(Sebastolobus spp.), and trawl-caught sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria).
Sablefish are also called blackcod. Thornyheads, also called idiots,
channel rockfish, or hardheads, include two species, shortspine
thornyheads (S. alascanus) and longspine thornyheads (S. altivelis).
(i) North of Cape Mendocino. The cumulative trip limit for the DTS
complex taken and retained north of Cape Mendocino is 70,000 lb (31,752
kg) per vessel per 2-month period. Within this cumulative trip limit,
no more than 12,000 lb (5,443 kg) may be sablefish, and no more than
20,000 lb (9,072 kg) may be thornyheads. No more than 4,000 lb (1,814
kg) of the thornyheads may be shortspine thornyheads.
(ii) South of Cape Mendocino. The cumulative trip limit for the DTS
complex taken and retained south of Cape Mendocino is 100,000 lb
(45,359 kg) per vessel per 2-month period. Within this cumulative trip
limit, no more than 12,000 lb (5,443 kg) may be sablefish, and no more
than 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) may be thornyheads. No more than 4,000 lb
(1,814 kg) of the thornyheads may be shortspine thornyheads.
(iii) The 60-percent monthly limits are: For the DTS complex,
42,000 lb (19,051 kg) north of Cape Mendocino, and 60,000 lb (27,216
kg) south of Cape Mendocino; for trawl-caught sablefish, 7,200 lb
(3,266 kg); for both species of thornyheads combined, 12,000 lb (5,443
kg); and for shortspine thornyheads, 2,400 lb (1,089 kg).
(iv) In any trip, no more than 500 lb (227 kg) may be trawl-caught
sablefish smaller than 22 inches (56 cm) total length. (See paragraph
IV.A.(6) regarding length measurement.)
(v) For operating in areas with different trip limits for the same
species, see paragraph IV. A.(12) above.
(c) Limited entry trip and size limits for nontrawl sablefish.
These daily trip limits, which apply to sablefish of any size, apply
until the closed period before the start of the regular season (as
specified at 50 CFR 663.23(b)(2)), between the end of the regular
season and the beginning of the mop-up season, and after the mop-up
season.
[Note: The Council recommended that the regular season be
delayed until September 1, 1996. Before this change can be made
effective, it must be approved by NMFS and then implemented by a
regulation published in the Federal Register.]
(i) North of 36 deg.00' N. lat. The daily trip limit for sablefish
taken and retained with nontrawl gear north of 36 deg.00' N. lat. is
300 lb (136 kg).
(ii) South of 36 deg.00' N. lat. The daily trip limit for sablefish
taken and retained with nontrawl gear south of 36 deg.00' N. lat. is
350 lb (159 kg).
(iii) During the ``regular'' or ``mop-up'' seasons, the only trip
limit in effect applies to sablefish smaller than 22 inches (56 cm)
total length, which may comprise no more than 1,500 lb (680 kg) or 3
percent of all legal sablefish 22 inches (56 cm) (total length) or
larger, whichever is greater. (See paragraph IV.A.(6) regarding length
measurement.)
(d) For headed and gutted sablefish:
(i) The minimum size limit for headed sablefish, which corresponds
to 22 inches (56 cm) total length for whole fish, is 15.5 inches (39
cm).
(ii) The conversion factor established by the state where the fish
is or will be landed will be used to convert the processed weight to
round weight for purposes of applying the trip limit. (The conversion
factor currently is 1.6 in Washington, Oregon, and California. However,
the state conversion factors may differ; fishermen should contact
fishery enforcement officials in the state where the fish will be
landed to determine that state's official conversion factor.)
(4) Open access fishery. Within the limits in paragraph IV.I.
below, a vessel using exempt trawl gear in the open access fishery is
subject to the 50-
[[Page 289]]
percent monthly limits, which are as follows: For the DTS complex,
35,000 lb (15,876 kg) north of Cape Mendocino, and 50,000 lb (22,680
kg) south of Cape Mendocino; for trawl-caught sablefish, 6,000 lb
(2,722 kg); for both species of thornyheads combined, 10,000 lb (4,536
kg); and for shortspine thornyheads, 2,000 lb (907 kg).
F. Whiting
(1) Limited entry fishery. Additional regulations that apply to the
whiting fishery are found at 50 CFR 663.7 and 663.23(b)(3) and (4).
(a) No more than 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) of whiting may be taken and
retained, possessed, or landed, per vessel per fishing trip before the
regular season for whiting begins, as specified at 50 CFR 663.23(b)(3).
This includes any whiting caught shoreward of 100 fathoms (183 m) in
the Eureka subarea (see paragraph IV.F.(1)(b)).
(b) No more than 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) of whiting may be taken and
retained, possessed, or landed by a vessel that, at any time during a
fishing trip, fished in the fishery management area shoreward of the
100-fathom (183-m) contour (as shown on NOAA Charts 18580, 18600, and
18620) in the Eureka subarea.
(2) Open access fishery. See paragraph IV.I. below.
G. Lingcod
(1) Limited entry fishery. The cumulative trip limit for lingcod is
40,000 lb (18,144 kg) per vessel per 2-month period. The 60-percent
monthly limit is 24,000 lb (10,886 kg). No lingcod may be smaller than
22 inches (56 cm) total length, except for a 100-lb (45-kg) trip limit
for trawl-caught lingcod smaller than 22 inches (56 cm). Length
measurement is explained at paragraph IV.A.(6)
(2) Open access fishery. Within the limits in paragraph IV.I.
below, the 50-percent monthly limit for lingcod is 20,000 lb (9,072
kg).
(3) Conversions
(a) Size conversion. For lingcod with the head removed, the minimum
size limit, which corresponds to 22 inches (56 cm) total length for
whole fish, is 18 inches (46 cm).
(b) Weight conversion. The conversion factor established by the
state where the fish is or will be landed will be used to convert the
processed weight to round weight for purposes of applying the trip
limit. (The states' conversion factors may differ and fishers should
contact fishery enforcement officials in the state where the fish will
be landed to determine that state's official conversion factor.) If a
state does not have a conversion factor for lingcod that is headed and
gutted, or only gutted, the following conversion factors will be used.
To determine the round weight, multiply the processed weight times the
conversion factor.
(i) Headed and gutted. The conversion factor for headed and gutted
lingcod is 1.5. (The State of Washington currently uses a conversion
factor of 1.5.)
(ii) Gutted, with the head on. The conversion factor for lingcod
that has only been eviscerated is 1.1.
H. Black Rockfish
The regulations currently at 50 CFR 663.23(b)(1)(iii) state: ``The
trip limit for black rockfish (Sebastes melanops) for commercial
fishing vessels using hook-and-line gear between the U.S.-Canada border
and Cape Alava (48 deg.09'30'' N. lat.), and between Destruction Island
(47 deg.40'00'' N. lat.) and Leadbetter Point (46 deg.38'10'' N. lat.),
is 100 lb or 30 percent by weight of all fish on board, whichever is
greater, per vessel per fishing trip. This trip limit does not apply to
coastal treaty Indian fishermen operating under harvest guidelines
established under paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section [Sec. 663.23].''
The provisions at paragraphs IV.A.(12) and IV.C.(2)(c) do not apply.
I. Trip Limits in the Open Access Fishery
A vessel operating in the open access fishery must not exceed any
trip limit, frequency limit, and/or size limit for the open access
fishery; or for the same gear and/or subarea in the limited entry
fishery; or, in any calendar month, 50 percent of any 2-month
cumulative trip limit for the same gear and/or subarea in the limited
entry fishery, called the ``50-percent monthly limit.'' For purposes of
this paragraph, exempted trawl gear (that is used to harvest shrimp,
prawns, California halibut or sea cucumbers as provided in this
paragraph I.) may not exceed any limit for the limited entry trawl
fishery, or 50 percent of any 2-month cumulative limit that applies to
limited entry trawl gear. No groundfish landing by shrimp or prawn pot
(trap) gear may be in excess of the limited entry trip limit for
nontrawl gear. The cross-over provisions at paragraph IV.A.(12) that
apply to the limited entry fishery apply to the open access fishery as
well.
(1) Rockfish. Rockfish means all rockfish as defined at 50 CFR
663.2, which includes the Sebastes complex (including yellowtail
rockfish, bocaccio, and canary rockfish), shortbelly rockfish, widow
rockfish, POP, and thornyheads.
(a) North of Cape Lookout. The cumulative monthly trip limit for
rockfish taken and retained north of Cape Lookout is 35,000 lb (15,876
kg) per vessel per month.
(b) South of Cape Lookout. The cumulative monthly trip limit for
rockfish taken and retained south of Cape Lookout is 40,000 lb (18,144
kg) per vessel per month.
(c) Coastwide. The following trip limits also apply and are counted
toward the cumulative monthly limit for rockfish:
(i) 10,000-lb (4,536-kg) of rockfish per vessel per fishing trip,
except for vessels using setnet or trammel net gear; and,
(ii) A daily trip limit of 50 lb (23 kg) of thornyheads.
(d) For operating in areas with different trip limits for the same
species, see paragraph IV.A.(12) above.
(2) Sablefish. [Note: Under current regulations, the closure prior
to the ``regular season'' for the limited entry fishery also applies to
the open access fishery.]
(a) North of 36 deg.00' N. lat. The daily trip limit for sablefish
taken and retained north of 36 deg.00' N. lat. is 300 lb (136 kg).
(b) South of 36 deg.00' N. lat. The daily trip limit for sablefish
taken and retained south of 36 deg.00' N. lat. is 350 lb (159 kg).
(3) Groundfish taken by shrimp or prawn trawl
(a) Pink shrimp. The trip limit for a vessel engaged in fishing for
pink shrimp is 1,500 lb (680 kg) (multiplied by the number of days of
the fishing trip) of groundfish.
(b) Spot and ridgeback prawns. The trip limit for a vessel engaged
in fishing for spot or ridgeback prawns is 1,000 lb (454 kg) of
groundfish species per fishing trip.
(c) This rule is not intended to supersede any more restrictive
state law relating to the retention of groundfish taken in shrimp or
prawn pots or traps.
(4) Groundfish taken by California halibut or sea cucumber trawl.
The trip limit for a vessel participating in the California halibut
fishery or in the sea cucumber fishery south of Point Arena, CA
(38 deg.57'30'' N. lat.) is 500 lb (227 kg) of groundfish per vessel
per fishing trip.
(a) A trawl vessel will be considered participating in the
California halibut fishery if:
(i) It is not fishing under a valid limited entry permit issued
under 50 CFR part 663 for trawl gear;
(ii) All fishing on the trip takes place south of Point Arena; and
(iii) The landing includes California halibut of a size required by
California Fish and Game Code section 8392(a),
[[Page 290]]
which states: ``No California halibut may be taken, possessed or sold
which measures less than 22 inches in total length, unless it weighs
four pounds or more in the round, three and one-half pounds or more
dressed with the head on, or three pounds or more dressed with the head
off. Total length means the shortest distance between the tip of the
jaw or snout, whichever extends farthest while the mouth is closed, and
the tip of the longest lobe of the tail, measured while the halibut is
lying flat in natural repose, without resort to any force other than
the swinging or fanning of the tail.''
(b) A trawl vessel will be considered participating in the sea
cucumber fishery if:
(i) It is not fishing under a valid limited entry permit issued
under 50 CFR part 663 for trawl gear;
(ii) All fishing on the trip takes place south of Point Arena; and
(iii) The landing includes sea cucumbers taken in accordance with
California Fish and Game Code section 8396, which requires a permit
issued by the State of California.
J. Recreational Fishery
(1) California. The bag limits for each person engaged in
recreational fishing seaward of the State of California are: five
lingcod per day, which may be no smaller than 22 inches (56 cm) total
length; and 15 rockfish per day. Multi-day limits are authorized by a
valid permit issued by the State of California and must not exceed the
daily limit multiplied by the number of days in the fishing trip.
(2) Oregon. The bag limits for each person engaged in recreational
fishing seaward of the State of Oregon are: Three lingcod per day,
which may be no smaller than 22 inches (56 cm) total length; and 15
rockfish per day, of which no more than 10 may be black rockfish
(Sebastes melanops).
(3) Washington. The bag limits for each person engaged in
recreational fishing seaward of the State of Washington are: three
lingcod per day no smaller than 22 inches (56 cm) total length, and
either 15 rockfish per day south of Leadbetter Point (46 deg.38'10'' N.
lat.) or 12 rockfish per day north of Leadbetter Point.
V. Issuance of Experimental Fishing Permits (EFPs) in 1995
In 1995, applications were received and approved for three
different types of experimental fishing permits (50 CFR 663.10).
(1) The first was from the State of Oregon (representing Washington
and California as well) for the purpose of renewing the EFP to monitor
the bycatch of salmon in the shore-based whiting fishery. Under this
permit, 35 vessels were issued EFPs that required all salmon caught
incidentally in the whiting fishery to be landed shoreside. Almost 15
percent of the shore-based landings were observed, higher than the 10
percent goal.
(2) The second application was a variation of the whiting EFP. The
State of California requested that, in addition to the terms and
conditions governing the whiting EFP, a small number of fishers be
allowed to fish for whiting inside of the 100-fathom (183-m) contour in
the Eureka subarea, which currently is prohibited. The purpose was to
see if the bycatch rate of salmon could be kept at acceptable levels by
this small, shore-based sector of the fleet delivering to Eureka and
Crescent City, CA. However, whiting did not appear in fishable
concentrations in 1995, so even though this experimental fishery was
approved, the EFPs were not issued.
(3) The third application was for a new, enhanced data collection
program that applied to other groundfish fisheries. This application
was submitted by the State of Oregon, but could include involvement by
the States of Washington and California as well. The purpose of the
experiment was to monitor trip-limit-induced discards and the bycatch
of salmon and non-target species in the groundfish trawl fishery. All
participating vessels will be required to land salmon caught
incidentally in groundfish trawl gear and to keep enhanced logbooks
required by the State of Oregon. Some vessels will carry at-sea
observers to monitor trip-limit induced discards, and some vessels will
be required to bring virtually their entire catch to shore for
additional monitoring. This is intended to be the first of a multi-year
cooperative data collection program with the industry and state and
Federal governments. This fishery started later than expected. Three
EFPs have been issued since early November 1995. The EFP program may
continue through 1996.
VI. Applications for Experimental Fishing Permits in 1996
Three applications also were received for experimental fishing
permits in 1996. Two, the whiting EFPs described in paragraphs (1) and
(2) of paragraph V. above, had been approved for 1995. The scope of the
experiment and level of participation would be the same as requested
for 1995. The third is for a new experiment to obtain biological
information on sablefish to confirm or improve data used in the stock
assessment for this species. This experiment would allow one vessel to
retain 500 lb (227 kg) in excess of the trawl trip limit for sablefish,
and is not expected to exceed 5 mt per year. A state or Federal
scientist would be aboard every trip to gather the biological data.
These applications were presented at the Council's October 1995
meeting. The Council recommended issuance of all three in 1996. (In
addition, the enhanced data collection program discussed as number (3)
in the previous paragraph continues in 1996.) Comments on the three
applications for 1996 are invited. If approved, the whiting EFPs would
be issued by March 1 for vessels delivering in the State of California,
and mid-April for vessels delivering in Washington and Oregon; and the
EFP for sablefish would be issued early in 1996. The decision on
whether to issue EFPs and determinations on appropriate permit
conditions will be based on a number of considerations, including the
Council's recommendation and comments received from the public.
Classification
The final specifications and management measures for 1996 are
issued under the authority of and are in accordance with 50 CFR parts
611 and 663, the regulations implementing the FMP.
Much of the data necessary for these specifications and management
measures came from the current fishing year. Because of the timing of
the receipt, development, review, and analysis of the fishery
information necessary for setting the initial specifications and
management measures, and the need to have these specifications and
management measures in effect at the beginning of the 1996 fishing
year, there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive prior
notice and opportunity for public comment for the specifications and
management measures. Amendment 4 to the FMP, implemented on January 1,
1991, recognized these timeliness considerations, and set up a system
by which the interested public is notified, through Federal Register
publication and Council mailings, of meetings and of the development of
these measures, and is provided the opportunity to comment during the
Council process. The public participated in GMT, Groundfish Advisory
Subpanel, Scientific and Statistical Committee, and Council meetings in
August and October 1995 where these recommendations were formulated.
Additional public comments will be accepted for 30 days after
publication of
[[Page 291]]
this document in the Federal Register. The Assistant Administrator will
consider all comments made during the public comment period and may
propose modifications as appropriate.
Because prior notice and opportunity for public comment is not
required under 5 U.S.C. 553, or under any other public law, preparation
of a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603(a) and 604(a)
is not required and none has been prepared.
The Administrative Procedure Act requires that publication of an
action be made not less than 30 days before its effective date unless
the Assistant Administrator finds and publishes with the rule good
cause for an earlier effective date (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). These
specifications announce the harvest goals and the management measures
designed to achieve those harvest goals in 1996. A delay in
implementation could compromise the management strategies that are
based on the projected landings from these trip limits. Therefore, a
delay in effectiveness is contrary to the public interest and these
actions are effective on January 1, 1996.
Dated: December 28, 1995.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31580 Filed 12-29-95; 11:57 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 95-31579 Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Transfer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 292-293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31579]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 625
[I.D. 122895A]
Summer Flounder Fishery; Commercial Quota Transfer
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notification of commercial quota transfer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the State of New Jersey is transferring
138,000 lb (62,596 kg) of commercial summer flounder quota to the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. NMFS adjusted the quotas and announces
the revised commercial quota for each state involved.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 31, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regina L. Spallone, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (508) 281-9221.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations implementing Amendment 2 to the
Fishery Management Plan for the Summer Flounder Fishery are found at 50
CFR part 625. The regulations require annual specification of a
commercial quota that is apportioned among the coastal states from
North Carolina through Maine. The process to set the annual commercial
quota and the percent allocated to each state is described in
Sec. 625.20.
The commercial quota for summer flounder for the 1995 calendar year
was set equal to 14,690,407 lb (6,663,569 kg), and the allocations to
each state were published February 16, 1995 (60 FR 8958). At that time,
New Jersey was
[[Page 293]]
allocated a quota of 2,456,969 lb (1,114,462 kg), and Massachusetts was
allocated a quota of 1,001,953 lb (454,478 kg). The 1995 quotas for
several states were adjusted for overages occurring in 1994, as
required under Sec. 625.20(d)(2), on May 26, 1994 (60 FR 27906). The
Commonwealth of Massachusetts' quota after the adjustment for overages
was 984,246 lb (446,446 kg). Since New Jersey's quota was not exceeded
in 1994, its 1995 quota was unaffected by this adjustment.
On August 30, 1995, the State of North Carolina transferred 7,229
lb (3,279 kg) of commercial quota to the State of New Jersey (60 FR
45107). As a result of that transfer, the revised quota for New Jersey
was 2,464,198 lb (1,117,741 kg). On December 26, 1995, New Jersey
transferred 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) of its commercial quota to the State
of New York. As a result of that transfer, the revised quota for New
Jersey was 2,444,198 lb (1,108,670 kg).
The final rule implementing Amendment 5 to the FMP was published
December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65936), and allows two or more states, under
mutual agreement and with the concurrence of the Director, Northeast
Region, NMFS (Regional Director) to transfer or combine summer flounder
commercial quota. The Regional Director is required to consider the
criteria set forth in Sec. 625.20(f)(1), in the evaluation of requests
for quota transfers or combinations.
New Jersey has agreed to transfer 138,000 lb (62,596 kg) of its
commercial quota to Massachusetts. The Regional Director has determined
that the criteria set forth in Sec. 625.20(f)(1) have been met, and
publishes this notification of quota transfer. The revised quotas for
the calendar year 1995 are: New Jersey, 2,306,198 lb (1,046,074 kg);
and Massachusetts, 1,122,246 lb (509,042 kg).
This action does not alter any of the conclusions reached in the
environmental impact statement prepared for Amendment 2 to the FMP
regarding the effects of summer flounder fishing activity on the human
environment. Amendment 2 established procedures for setting an annual
coastwide commercial quota for summer flounder and a formula for
determining commercial quotas for each state. The quota transfer
provision was established by Amendment 5 to the FMP and the
environmental assessment prepared for Amendment 5 found that the action
had no significant impact on the environment. Under section
6.02b.3(b)(i)(aa) of NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, this action is
categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare additional
environmental analyses. This is a routine administrative action that
reallocates commercial quota within the scope of previously published
environmental analyses.
Classification
This action is taken under 50 CFR part 625 and is exempt from
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: December 28, 1995.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31579 Filed 12-29-95; 11:10 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 95-31578 Atlantic Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog Fisheries; 1996 Fishing Quotas
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 3 (Thursday, January 4, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 293-294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31578]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 652
[Docket No. 951017252-5307-02; I.D. 101695C]
Atlantic Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog Fisheries; 1996 Fishing
Quotas
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final 1996 fishing quotas for surf clams and ocean quahogs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues final quotas for the Atlantic surf clam and ocean
quahog fisheries for 1996. These quotas are selected from a range
defined as optimum yield (OY) for each fishery. The intent of this
action is to establish allowable harvests of surf clams and ocean
quahogs from the exclusive economic zone in 1996.
EFFECTIVE DATES: Effective January 1, 1996, through December 31, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's
analysis and recommendations and environmental assessment are available
from David R. Keifer, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New Street,
Dover, DE 19901-6790.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myles Raizin (Resource Policy Analyst)
508-281-9104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Fishery Management Plan for the Atlantic
Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog Fisheries (FMP) directs NMFS, acting on
behalf of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) and in consultation
with the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council), to specify
quotas for surf clams and ocean quahogs on an annual basis from a range
defined by the FMP as the OY for each fishery. Further, the Council
follows the policy that the quotas selected should allow fishing to
continue at that level for at least 10 years for surf clams and 30
years for ocean quahogs. While staying within these constraints, the
quotas are also to be set at a level that would meet the estimated
annual demand.
For surf clams, the quota must fall within the OY range of 1.85
million bushels (mil. bu.) (652 thousand hectoliters (hL)) to 3.40 mil.
bu. (1.2 mil. hL). For ocean quahogs, the quota must fall within the OY
range of 4.00 mil. bu. (1.4 mil. hL) to 6.00 mil. bu. (2.1 mil. hL).
These ranges are specified in 50 CFR 652.21 (a) and (b).
During its discussions of the 1996 quota recommendations, the
Council began developing new overfishing definitions for both species
managed under the FMP. Overfishing is presently defined for both
species in terms of actual yield levels in excess of the specified
quota levels. These definitions do not incorporate biological
considerations to protect against overfishing. Although preferred
alternatives for overfishing definitions have not yet been chosen for
each species, NMFS believes that none of the alternatives being
considered by the Council for each species, if adopted, would
necessitate any revision of the 1996 quotas contained in this action.
This action establishes a surf clam quota of 2.565 mil. bu. (1.36
mil. hL) and an ocean quahog quota of 4.45 mil. bu. (2.36 mil. hL) for
the 1996 fisheries. The 1996 surf clam quota is identical to the 1995
quota, and the 1996 ocean quahog quota represents a 9 percent reduction
from the 1995 quota. These quotas established by NMFS on behalf of the
Secretary are unchanged from the proposed quotas published in the
Federal Register on October 23, 1995 (60 FR 54330).
Final 1996 Surf Clam/Ocean Quahog Quotas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fishery mil. bu. mil. hL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surf clam....................................... 2,565,000 1,362,000
Ocean quahog.................................... 4,450,000 2,363,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments and Responses
Three comments were received during the public comment period. A
consulting firm involved in the industry commented in support of the
proposed quotas. The National Fisheries Institute and an attorney
involved in the industry opposed the proposed quotas.
Comment: The consulting firm commented that the proposed 1996 surf
[[Page 294]]
clam quota is very liberal and should be set 8 percent below the
proposed quota of 2.565 mil. bu. (1.36 mil. hL) because of declining
landings per unit of effort.
Response: This level of surf clam quota was recommended by the
Scientific and Statistical Committee of the Council and meets the
Council policy of leaving 10 years of supply available. NMFS believes a
reduction of 8 percent would be overly conservative and is not
justified based on the most recent stock assessment.
Comment: The opponents of the proposed quotas commented that NMFS
should reevaluate the assumptions, conclusions, and recommendations of
the 19th Stock Assessment Workshop (19th SAW), upon which these quotas
are based, to incorporate what they believe is new information that was
revealed during testimony in their lawsuit against the agency
concerning the 1995 quota levels. Both accuse NMFS scientists of
withholding critical information from the Council and industry.
Response: The Council and NMFS have accepted the advice of the 19th
SAW and consider it to be the best scientific information available. No
new information that would require NMFS to reevaluate the conclusions
of the 19th SAW was presented at the hearing held in the lawsuit
referred to by the commenters. The only additional information was
speculation that the dredge may have traveled farther than believed
during the 1994 survey. However, the dredging distance could not
account for the three-fold increase in the catch experienced during the
1994 survey.
The quota setting process, including the Stock Assessment Workshop
that occurred in January 1995, is a very open and participatory
process. The scientists provided the Council with all of the
information relative to the surf clam and ocean quahog resource that
was available at that time. The scientists still have not been able to
determine the reason for the statistical anomalies contained in the
1994 survey and did not speculate as to their cause. However, even if
the scientists had speculated on the reasons for the anomalies, the
Council is still required to base its quota recommendation on the best
scientific information available, especially any recommendations of the
SAW. The scientists still have not been able to determine the reason
for the statistical anomalies contained in the 1994 survey. When a
reasonable explanation is determined, the Council will be informed.
Comment: At a minimum, NMFS should maintain the 1995 quota levels
for both species until affected industry participants have an
opportunity to evaluate the assumptions and conclusions of the 19th SAW
with the assistance of scientific advisers from outside NMFS.
Response: NMFS sees no scientific basis for maintaining the 1995
quota levels for other than surf clams. The best scientific information
available supports a reduction in the ocean quahog quota by 9 percent.
NMFS further points out that independent scientific advisers were
involved in the 19th SAW and that industry advisers were actively
encouraged to participate in that process.
Classification
This action is authorized by 50 CFR part 652 and is exempt from
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: December 28, 1995.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31578 Filed 12-29-95; 11:01 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.